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 until2015. Inthis 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 – Today’s Zaman

http://www.todayszaman.com/news-270139-turkey-needs-to-devise-a-2015-strategyby-mehmet-fatih-oztarsu*.html

The Russian media published a number of comments on this move, which was entirely unexpected for many, including the Armenians, because the French’s eagerness to play an ambitious role in the problem between Turkey and Armenia meant they ignored Russia. Advancing France’s investments in Armenia, contributing to the construction of a nuclear plant and attracting the support of the Armenians in France for the upcoming presidential election were the reasons for this bold move.

Unlike American presidents, Sarkozy has been successful at giving the impression that he is a leader who has honored his promises, and despite possible tension with Turkey, he made the move to make the genocide legislation that is seeking to criminalize denying that the forceful deportation of Armenians by Ottoman rulers in 1915 was genocide. Even though Turkey’s reaction was directed at France, this reaction also concerns the normalization process of Turkish-Armenian relations.

Armenian President Serzh Sargsyan noted during a visit to Marseille that Turkey considered itself a European state, and argued that just as Germany bowed to Poland, Turkey, as a European state, could also kneel before the genocide memorial in Yerevan and that this depended on the willingness of the Turkish people, adding that France was a country that best understood their sufferings and that they were grateful to this nation.

The attitudes of the parties during this process give some hints as to the content of the probable solution to this problem and for this reason, they should be carefully analyzed. Sargsyan’s remarks, during his Marseille visit, unlike regular discourse about the genocide, are more inspired by the ongoing change in Armenian foreign policy and the increased role and influence of European states in the region. As the US appears to be more influential in the Caucasus, we have also witnessed that the EU is playing a more aggressive role in the region through intergovernmental negotiations and concrete projects. This means closer contact for Armenia with the EU member states and improvement of bilateral relations. The steps taken towards this end confirm the rapprochement between Armenia and the EU. In November, Armenia opened embassies in the Netherlands, the Czech Republic, Denmark and Latvia and made contact with countries that it was to establish bilateral relations with for the first time. In visits by Armenian diplomats to European states, the need to improve relations has been stressed. Sargsyan has also paid a visit to the Pope, underlining that relations between the Vatican and Echmiadzin should be established.

Turkey’s Attitude

Armenia’s economic cooperation in different fields with European countries aims to address the concerns held by Armenia with respect to Turkey and Iran. Armenia, which has declared it will remain neutral in case of an operation against Iran, has also made additional moves in light of the possibility that its southern border as well may be closed. Former Foreign Minister Vardan Oskanyan has also underlined that measures should be taken against this danger and that the relevant actors should be called upon. In addition, relations with Georgia are being improved through joint initiatives to make progress in economic cooperation. Recent developments have made Europe focus on the region; and now many experts frequently note that despite it being a former Soviet Union state, Armenia is being influenced by Western lobbyism. Turkey was a popular matter of discussion on the eve of the Armenian parliamentary elections, and the discussions visibly influenced the preference of the voters. Reflections of the criticisms in Armenia and France directed at Turkey are entirely different in the Turkish media because the current Armenian administration is viewed in Armenia as a responsible actor that has done everything it can to make peace with Turkey. However, Turkey’s reactions are presented as Turkish stubbornness and that it does not want peace, which gives the impression that Turkey is the aggressive side. The reaction by Minister for EU Affairs and Chief Negotiator Egemen Bağış to Sargsyan’s speech in Marseille was portrayed as aggressive in the Armenian media, and Parliament Speaker Cemil Çiçek’s criticisms were condemned by the Republican Party of Armenia, which stated that this was the cliché Turkish discourse that has remained unchanged.

Turkey now needs to change its attitude and produce alternative arguments that will confirm it is not the aggressive party. The first thing to do is to understand and know Armenia better. For Turkey, Armenia should not be a country that is associated with April 24 and the French political moves anymore. The internal and external dynamics of this country should be carefully assessed and a new style should be developed. It is also essential to be aware of the domestic balance of this country as well. Mutual unconstructive statements should also be abandoned for the establishment of a process of dialogue between the parties. Following this, Turkey should also take bold steps to ensure that it is not perceived as the aggressive state. This is the only way to make sure that other states are not involved in the process.

MEHMET FATİH ÖZTARSU – Today’s Zaman

http://www.todayszaman.com/news-266468-the-french-impasse-in-turkish-armenian-relationsby-mehmet-fatih-oztarsu*.html

An early October visit paid to the Armenian capital Yerevan by French President Nicolas Sarkozy has triggered not only a new predicament in terms of Turkey’s relations with Armenia, but also marked an important turning point regarding France’s regional influence.

In order for Turkey to better understand this current predicament, it would do well to examine the reciprocal good will visits that have taken place between France and Armenia in recent months, as well as the direction taken by French investments in the Caucuses these days. Sarkozy’s two-day visit to Yerevan (not to mention his hours-long stops in Azerbaijan and Georgia) actually includes messages that relate to the status of France within the Minsk Group. This attempt to “grab a role” for France in the region fits in line with efforts that began first in Africa and have now moved on to the Caucasus.

While statements made in Yerevan by Nicolas Sarkozy regarding 1915 and Nagorno-Karabakh could be perceived as election-time fodder, they were also aimed at strengthening the position of French stock in Armenia. The ongoing reciprocal visits between France and Armenia shed some light on the most recent heights reached in the attempt to create stronger economic relations between these two countries.

First of all, a few people from the French parliament visited the Karabakh leadership, which is not officially recognized by any international organization or state, last August, calling on this leadership to create a new legal model for itself. In fact, this visit was labeled by these people as “the now-traditional French-Karabakh inter-parliamentary visit.” In this visit, which took place two months in advance of Sarkozy’s visit to Yerevan, when he made the statement, “No one other than the French can understand just what Karabakh means for Armenia,” the French parliamentarians stressed that a Kosovo model needed to be implemented in Karabakh and that Karabakh possessed a unique character of its own. This turn of events, which elicited negative reactions from Azerbaijan, was characterized by the French Foreign Ministry as connected with “a visit made of the own free will of the French parliamentarians.” Still, this move by the French remained in people’s minds.

A visit paid a few weeks later to Yerevan by French Transportation Minister Thierry Mariani was based around a variety of different meetings aimed at developing dual relations. According to news that emerged shortly in the wake of Mariani’s visit, there was now talk in Armenia of turning over 20 percent of the shares in the Electric Network of Armenia, nearly 100 percent of which has up until now been held by Russia, to the French. But concrete results on this front were to emerge with Sarkozy’s visit. It is well known that France is interested not only in the electrical network and distribution in Armenia, but also in the rebuilding and caretaking of a nuclear power plant. Armenian President Serzh Sarksyan, who visited France after his speech to the United Nations General Assembly in September, spoke publicly about his pride in the fact that France is the second-largest country to invest in Armenia. Noting that since the month of July, French investment in Armenia has reached the level of $750 million, President Sarksyan praised a French wine factory in Armenia, as well as investments made by French companies such as Orange, Alcatel and Pernod Ricard, all of which are active in Armenia. Yerevan Mayor Karen Karapetian, who was in France for meetings at the same time that President Sarksyan was there, also stated that the Armenians were indebted to the French for the good will they have shown on the genocide issue. During this time period, when reciprocal meetings were more frequent, the French Embassy in Yerevan in concert with the Armenian-French Business Club, created by the Armenian Foreign Ministry, decided to shoulder the mission of helping guide French investors in Armenia. The efforts made by French investors in the North-South Highway project are also significant.

A “TURNING POINT” IN RELATIONS

And thus the most recent visit by Sarkozy to Armenia represents the latest stage in the preparations that have been under way for a long time now. The visit dealt with many topics that promise profit in the long term for both Armenia and France and was — to use Sarksyan’s description — a “turning point.”

Sarkozy, who rounded out his time in Yerevan by meeting with figures such as Charles Aznavour and Patrick Devejian, asserted in comparing the issue of Karabakh to clashes between the French and Germans that the two countries in question could make advances by learning from the experiences of Europe. Sarkozy, who used the Armenian word for “genocide” during a speech given at the official introduction of the statue of Jules Bastien-Lepage in Yerevan’s French Square, was taking the first step that would trigger a series of reciprocal jests. As a response to France’s friendly enterprises, President Sarksyan presented many French government ministers and bureaucrats with the Saint Mesrop Mashtot (founder of the Armenian alphabet) and Honor medals. As for the French, they awarded President Sarksyan with the “Légion d’honneur” and Armenian Foreign Minister Eduard Nalbandian with the “Légion d’honneur Grand Officier.”

There is little question that these steps taken are the sort that call for a close watch to be kept on regional balances from here onwards. But alongside it now being clear that France does not count Turkey as being from the region, it is also striking just how hesitant its stance towards Russia is. Because alongside the moves that seem to ignore the weighty economic presence of Russia in the Armenian economy, France, in trying to shoulder a leader role in the Karabakh issue, is also taking on a topic that directly concerns Russia. And no matter how much Sarkozy may try to disguise the hesitant nature of France’s approach to Russia — by doing things like urging the Georgian leadership to foster better relations with Moscow — the truth is that the sort of steps that Turkey can take that will bring about diplomatic success on the Armenian front are the sort that will receive support from both Russia and the US. It must not be forgotten that the greatest success that will come of Ankara’s zero problem policy with its neighbors — a policy that the West has begun to criticize — will be that problems with Armenia will be ironed out, and Turkey’s regional position will be strengthened. And after this happens, no matter which administration comes to the helm of Armenia, when the agenda turns to cooperation with the West, Yerevan will create policies that speak more to its relations with Turkey than with France.

MEHMET FATİH ÖZTARSU – EXPERT OF STRATEGIC OUTLOOK

http://www.todayszaman.com/news-261745-frances-scramble-to-grab-a-role-for-itself-in-armeniaby-mehmet-fatih-oztarsu*.html 

Back then, the Azerbaijani and Armenian media adopted differing approaches vis-à-vis the fate of the Mavi Marmara volunteers. Armenia has made statements over Turkey’s position by leaving the door open for possible cooperation with Armenia.

Human rights organizations have held anti-Israel protests, the largest and biggest in the history of the nation in Azerbaijan, because of the Mavi Marmara incident. The protesters urged Israel to abandon its stance and chanted slogans in favor of Turkey in an attempt to express solidarity. The Azerbaijani media has extensively covered the incident to inform the public and support Turkey’s position and, for the first time, the people held extensive protests against Israel in the country. The stakeholders have displayed different attitudes in Armenia, which seeks to normalize ties with Turkey. While the statements referring to the interests of Armenia involved a number of contradictions, the relevant actors discuss how Armenia would make gains out of the Turkish-Israeli crisis. An expert, Ruben Mehrabyan, speaking to an Armenian news portal during the Turkish-Israeli crisis, noted that the primary reason for the Israeli raid was to maintain Israel’s national security. In respect to the political outcomes of the matter, Mehrabyan made the following comment: “We should remember that Turkish-Israeli relations have visibly deteriorated. This is not Israel’s problem; it is a problem caused by Turkey’s attempt to expand its sphere of influence in the Middle East.”

An analysis published in the Armenianow news portal argued that this issue is an outcome of the escalating row in 2009 – when Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan walked off the stage at the World Economic Forum in Davos following a debate over Israel’s incursion into Gaza – that the Turkish foreign policy is harming its prospects for normalizing ties with Armenia with such reckless moves and that the Western world is not pleased with Turkey’s policies. Turkey’s recent attempts to improve ties with Iran create some sort of dilemma. According to experts, the tension that started in Davos is giving birth to consequences. Ruben Melkonyan from Yerevan State University argues that the Armenian genocide may be recognized in the Knesset, Israel’s legislature, in the new legislative term and that Jewish lobbies may extend the necessary support on this matter.

AZERBAIJAN’S REALITY AND NEW TACTICS

Israel has been improving its military ties with Azerbaijan, which meets 30 percent of Israel’s demands for oil and natural gas. To this end, Israel provides extensive services, including the modernization of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), satellite systems and automatic weapons. Media reports note that subsequent to Israeli President Shimon Peres’ visit to Azerbaijan in 2009, a deal was brokered to build a facility for manufacturing UAVs, purchase large amounts of weapons and arms and sell TAR-21 automatic weapons. Regardless of the political developments, the Armenian lobby, aware that it should not ignore the ongoing reality of regional cooperation moves, is uncomfortable with this cooperation; however, it also believes that Israel will take constructive steps to improve relations with Armenia.

The predictions held by the Armenian side on the emergent process include the following: The Israeli parliament will recognize the 1915 events as genocide in the aftermath of the tense relations with Turkey. Israeli lobbies around the world will adopt a new stance with respect to the genocide issue and work to make sure that Armenia is supported on that matter. During the process, minorities in Turkey may face extra assaults. The Jewish and Armenian minorities in particular may be harassed by Turks. The minorities that experienced 1955 should be ready for new incidents. If it remains committed to its attempts to become an influential power in the region, Turkey will have crises with other neighbors in the long run. A Yerevan-Athens-Tel Aviv axis may emerge and replace the changing Ankara-Baku-Tel Aviv defense cooperation. To this end, the main theme in Armenian President Serzh Sarksyan’s visits to Greek Cyprus and Greece was opposition to Turkey. Developments that raise hopes for the materialization of these predictions include visits by Israeli authorities to Yerevan, positive approaches in the Israeli media vis-à-vis the Armenian issue, the statements of some Israeli authorities on the 1915 events and the ongoing crisis with Turkey. However, considering that it would not be eager to undermine the argument that the Jews are the only nation that suffered from genocide, Israel may not be so generous to take steps to recognize the 1915 events as genocide.

The enhanced cooperation between Israel and Azerbaijan in the military and energy fields determines Israeli policy towards Nagorno-Karabakh. The projected cooperation between Israel, Greece and Greek Cyprus focusing on opposition to Turkey alone will not prevent the isolation and alienation of Armenia in the region, and realpolitik will not be able to save this country from its dependence on Russia, which has declared it would recognize Palestine as an independent state.

MEHMET FATİH ÖZTARSU / EXPERT OF STRATEGIC OUTLOOK

http://www.todayszaman.com/news-258284-reflections-of-israeli-crisis-in-caucasusby-mehmet-fatih-oztarsu*.html

In addition to developments in the region, the country’s relations with Israel have become part of the daily political agenda due to last year’s assault on the Mavi Marmara. On top of that, Turkey turned its attention to the independence of Southern Sudan to make sure it proceeded in compliance with international law. Lastly, Turkey looked to its east and the impact of the state of war between Russia and Georgia, analyzing the possible outcome thereof for Turkey.

Armenia dealt with all these issues from a different angle, but has kept a close eye on Turkey’s foreign policy. Experts in Armenia have warned politicians to make sure they draft policies addressing the most pressing and probable developments; whether Southern Sudan sets a precedent for the Nagorno-Karabakh region, for instance, or whether the Israeli Knesset recognizes the 1915 incident as genocide. Also, and Turkey may not be aware of this, but the Vatican has commenced a study in which it will document and compile the brutality of the deportation by forced marches and the massacres of the Armenians in the early 20th century, a project that should be completed by 2015. This poses serious challenges for Turkey. It was also announced that information gathered during this process will be publicized through exhibitions and media publications.

Armenian politicians who concretized attempts at rapprochement with the diaspora teamed up with the opposition to create an international commission responsible for the commemoration of the centennial of the Armenian genocide. The activities planned by this commission include political pressure on Turkey to ensure that it clarifies its stance towards the 1915 incidents by 2015. In the initial session of the commission, Giro Manoyan, a member of the Dashnak Party’s political affairs bureau, noted that the matter should be handled from different perspectives and that concrete policies should be drafted to this end. Armenian President Serzh Sarksyan, on the other hand, noted that as people victimized by genocide, they should not ignore the victimizations and pains of other nations and that Turkey’s policy of denial should be addressed effectively. Sarksyan went on to state that international politics should be cleared of such policies.

2015: a common ground for joint action

In addition to the 2015 goals being taken up pretty seriously by the Armenian administration, we also witnessed politicians with a more moderate stance towards Turkey. The 2015 goal merely serves as common ground for joint action. So far, Sarksyan has made frequent calls for the Armenians in the West to invest in his country, but these calls were in vain. In the end, Armenia has been alienated from its region and, as a consequence, it had to seek cooperation and alignment with Russia. From now on, it is imperative for Armenia to establish close relations with Turkey, which does not care for the diaspora at all, and cherish it.

However, the attitudes of nationalist groups that hanged Sèvres maps all around the streets of Yerevan on the 90th anniversary of the Treaty of Sèvres preserve a dual approach. Even Manoyan, with whom I spoke during my visit to his party, now holds moderate views. Noting that relations with Turkey should be improved without preconditions, Manoyan said Armenia has never demanded any Turkish territories so far. He is confident that sincere relations will be established between the two countries. Manoyan also recalled that his party, which traditionally focuses on Eastern Armenians, seeks to gather all Armenians in one single homeland and that his country will make significant progress once the power of elites in Yerevan diminishes. In addition, Manoyan believes that improved relations with Turkey will have a great impact on the growth of national welfare and revenues.

“[The recognition of] genocide is not our priority, but an important matter,” Manoyan concluded.

In an interview with the speaker of the Republican Party, Eduard Sharmazanov, I was told that, as a party, they pay great attention to relations with Turkey, adding that the genocide issue is not their priority but an important matter. He also added that they are ready to hold negotiations and discussions without any prior conditions. Noting that Turkey would do Armenia a great favor if it stays out of the Karabakh issue, Sharmazanov argues that a link between the Karabakh issue and relations with Turkey is not proper and that Karabakh should be liberated and freed.

Noting that there is a lot of work to be done in making progress in bilateral relations with Turkey and that this is indeed a difficult task, Sharmazanov finds Russia’s warm relations with both Azerbaijan and Armenia a reasonable attitude because it is eventually necessary to set a balance in the region. Sharmazanov further notes that preconditions would not help anyone, that the Turkish side has frozen the process [of rapprochement] and that Armenia has picked the easy way out [of rapprochement] by asking for dialogue without any conditions.

The Armenian administration, which has maintained close ties with the opposition and the diaspora, will secure support from a number of influential actors, including the Vatican and Israel, for its goals to be achieved by 2015. Turkey needs to talk directly to Armenia instead of the diaspora to create a common ground and take constructive steps to ensure rapprochement between the sides. In line with Turkey’s vision for 2023 that will ensure domestic development, relations with the neighboring countries should be improved and problems minimized.

Mehmet Fatih ÖZTARSU / Today’s Zaman

http://todayszaman.com/news-251131-armenia-ready-target-2015-by-mehmet-fatih-oztarsu*.html

For Turkish version : http://www.fatihoztarsu.com/?p=784

It’s reported that Armenian authorities have launched a special committee to plan and organize the events over 100th jubilee of Armenian Genocide. The Armenian Diaspora plays a great role in this respect.

“It’s important for Turkey to prepare a ground for dialogue with Armenia until 2015.”

For German : http://www.fatihoztarsu.com/?p=807

For French : http://www.fatihoztarsu.com/?p=810

For Spanish : http://www.fatihoztarsu.com/?p=803

For Russian : http://www.fatihoztarsu.com/?p=797

For Armenian : http://www.fatihoztarsu.com/?p=794

For Georgian : http://www.fatihoztarsu.com/?p=814

For Arabic : http://www.fatihoztarsu.com/?p=820

For Turkish : http://www.fatihoztarsu.com/?p=822

For Farsi : http://www.fatihoztarsu.com/?p=828

For Azeri : http://www.fatihoztarsu.com/?p=831

For Ezid : http://www.fatihoztarsu.com/?p=833

For Assyrian : http://www.fatihoztarsu.com/?p=835

For Kurdish : http://www.fatihoztarsu.com/?p=837

International Center for Journalists continues to realize cross border projects all around the world. One of them is Turkish-Armenian-American journalists exchange program which combines 7 Turkish and 6 Armenian journalists to make them observers in different American media organs. Our author Mehmet Fatih Oztarsu is one of the participants of this project. Every journalists have gone to different regions of the US and they are visitors of American journalists. Oztarsu lives in Florida with his Armenian partner Ofelya Kamavosyan and observes American media mechanism`s differences. He compares business ethics, journalism style and effects of Tallahassee Democrat with the direction of International Center for Journalists. The author shares his observations with interesting points for us:

Golden Rules of Tallahassee Democrat “Faith and Courtesy”

by Mehmet Fatih ÖZTARSU – Observer of Tallahassee Democrat

“I believe the importance of comparison for all mechanisms in a state as a person who works in international politics for Turkish media. Because comparison creates development and revision. Turkish media has too many differences if we compare with media organs of the US and Europe. I have a chance to observe the US media with the support of International Center of Journalists. Also this chance creates new perspectives to compare media activities within the US media organs.

I work with our American colleagues in Tallahasse Democrat which has a great effect on media outlook in Florida. Florida is similar to Adana and Antalya with its business and vacation structures. But it has some differences with Turkish media activities.

First of all business system has no any hard discipline style not as Turkey. Hierarchy style creates big walls between workers and managers to prevent free dialogue in Turkey. Dialogue has only one meaning to share business issues. In addition there is a big problem to not pay normal salaries for workers. Tallahassee Democrat pays salaries and encourage journalists to make their job perfect. If we think that a young journalist earns 30.000 dolar for a year from media organs, it will be a great utopic dream in Turkey. There are no big differences for life style and conditions between Turkey and Florida. Only problem is that workers can not earn their normal salaries and authorities want to employ them free. This terrible reality is not only for media organs, also for think tanks, research centers and other institutions. All of them want to see all workers should sacrifice them for their institutions, no right regulation for salaries and promotions. But it is different in the US. All managers work to encourage workers with material and spiritual opportunities to make their job easy and perfect. From my first day in Tallahassee Democrat, every colleagues from legislative news editor to sport author wonder my job in Turkey. They care about it not like in Turkish system. I congratulate them because of their very polite approaches. Also it is not a ceremony for foreigners. It is same to new workers from outside. This is a good example for business ethics. As I said, it is clear to understand their ethical and strong position when we talk about annual salaries.

Daily meetings are twice in Tallahasse Democrat. Additionally other editors get together to analyse their periodic business. These meetings provide free atmosphere with free discussion and there is no hierarchic situation among managers and colleagues. They discuss their policies for previous and next days. It shares us they will achieve for best future with these working styles. Key sentence is like that : “You are an important person and you can be successful.” This is a symbol of Tallahassee Democrat’s policy. All colleagues are ready to share their experiences with you whoever you are.

About reporting subject, commonly all circumstances of federal region are important. Also people care about magazine news.  Especially, wedding ceremony in the UK followed by too many people and it took first step in most read news. Actually, we can say about Turkish public opinion care about magazine after popular political issues.

The most important reality is that everybody wants to know you and they invite you to their home as visitor. This is important to come together for a common ground in Tallahassee Democrat. Especially everyone asks whether have you seen alligators or not. If you saw any alligator here, you are not a foreigner but one of the experienced Tallahassean. Florida and Tallahassee Democrat continues to their job with golden rule of their life : Faith and courtesy.” 

Turkey, which was made aware of the sensitivity surrounding the Armenian issue throughout the world through attacks by the Armenian Secret Army for the Liberation of Armenia (ASALA), continues to be caught unprepared every year as to how to shape its approach towards the events of April 24.

Turkey, which is on the verge of losing this particular battle, at least in the academic sense, has carried on with this struggle mostly through closing its borders and engaging in verbal clashes with the Armenian diaspora. And now it is quite clear that neither of these tactics have gained much for Turkey. As for Turkey’s efforts with its neighboring countries and with the Armenian diaspora, these have only resulted in the entrance of new genocide bills onto the agenda as well as more pressure from various countries interested in Turkey. In particular, the annual increase in curiosity and expectations concerning what approach the US will embrace on the issue is literally exhausting the Turkish Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

Another factor pushing Turkey into a dead end in the international arena is its lack of public diplomacy efforts aimed at Armenia, as well as the fact that it has not created alternative Turkish lobbying groups in countries where the Armenian lobby is already strong. The fact that April 24 fell on the same day as Easter this year gave Armenians a great opportunity to show their religious and national feelings even more strongly than usual. And in Turkey, the influential rallies that have taken place with regard to this matter show that it is now time to take up the issue with some prudence and level-headedness.

Can the healthy communication skills lacking between Turkey and Armenia instead be formed between Turkey and the latter’s diaspora population?

Mutual efforts

In countries where the Armenian lobby and diaspora are influential, there are frequent Turkish efforts to hold joint festivals, programs and other sorts of meetings with these Armenian groups. Even though it is not constant, Turkey quite regularly tries to create an atmosphere of dialogue with certain Armenian groups. And though political efforts can only go so far, it is the wide network of civil society organizations that can pick up the slack here, succeeding where states are unable. In the very near future, civil society organizations look set to show their influence in helping to find solutions to shared problems. We, too, with our initiatives in the civil society branch of things, are closely examining the Armenian community in the US and working to help create a joint dialogue.

The shared thoughts of most Armenians, regardless of when they arrived in the US, has to do with Turkish acceptance of its historic mistakes, and opening up the way forward for regional cooperation. Lawyer and writer Mark Mustian, whose forefathers came around 200 years ago from Ottoman soil to the US, also thinks this way. The fact that his ancestors, who came to the US to take advantage of the wealth of opportunity there, preserved, at least to some extent, their Armenian identities is what imbues Mustian today with a sense of responsibility towards his fellow Armenians. Mustian, who practiced law for many years in Florida, started writing a novel some years ago about the breaking asunder of the Turkish and Armenian communities. The novel, titled “The Gendarme,” was finished in seven years and then published in the US, France, Spain, Greece, Israel, Italy, Brazil and the UK. Mustian, who says the reason he wrote this book was his own personal sense of discomfort with how the Armenian community in the US lives in ignorance regarding its own history and identity, notes 70 percent of the Armenian diaspora constantly brings historical matters onto the agenda, while another 10 percent live completely ignorant of what the Armenian identity really is. He notes also that the other 20 percent or so maintain moderate approaches to historical matters and identity questions. Mustian, who says he has visited Turkey but has never had the chance to go to Armenia, asserts that he loves Turkey very much and when it comes to the question of relations with Armenia — both Ankara and Yerevan must act on their own accord. He also believes open borders between Turkey and Armenia will improve cultural interactions and that many problems would be solved faster than currently believed.

Vasken Hagopian and Zohrap Hovsapian are two Armenians who live in Florida and embrace moderate approaches to the topic of relations with Turkey. Hagopian, whose ancestors are from Adana, still works as a professor at the Florida State University in the department of physics and astronomy. During World War I, Hagopian’s family lost many of its members, and the family migrated from Turkey to Syria, Lebanon, France and Greece. His father had worked in churches on Ottoman soil and wrote many of his memories of this period in a book. Hagopian characterizes the relations between Armenia and its diaspora as being “ongoing based on assistance,” and also notes he finds it unlikely Turkey will be admitted to the European Union. Hagopian also says he finds it unthinkable that these two ancient civilizations and peoples could be living right next to one another but be unable to develop a dialogue. He also asserts that it is simply not possible that Armenia could politically make any demands for land from eastern Anatolia.

Not without dialogue

As for Hovsapian, his family comes from Silvan in the province of Diyarbakır. The five people from his family that survived the war era emigrated from Syria to France. The elders in his family not only published their own memories of this period, but also changed their surname from Keshishian, which they had used on Ottoman soil, to Hovsapian. As Hovsapian sees it, today’s world is impossible to live in for anyone unwilling to enter into dialogue. Hovsapian, who also asserts that the Soviet Union eliminated national consciousness, says that for him Woodrow Wilson’s Fourteen Points are very important. These principles stress that for nations of people to offer up their fates to states or to have their fates taken from their hands by these same states is very unfair. Hovsapian, who we learn has many friends in Turkey, believes that it is of vital importance that Turkey develop its relations with Armenia in the near future, and that both countries get involved in shared projects. He is quite sure that Turkey and Armenia, working together, can achieve great success. In the end, both of these men state that peace without dialogue is impossible and that everyone must do their part in bringing about progress on this front.

Over time, these two communities of Turks and the Armenians, who have been so closely linked — as neighbors, countrymen, classroom friends, in-laws and work colleagues — have experienced a distancing from one another as a result of a 100-year break, but this break has not managed to erase the traces of 1,000 years of togetherness. The preconceptions brought about by political approaches on both sides have invested both sides with much hesitation as to which steps to take. On one hand, you have nations of people unable to form dialogues, while on the other hand you have diaspora groups that cannot seem to meet in the middle; these factors are causing the whole matter to continue as a sort of an incurable syndrome. To rid itself of this syndrome, Turkey needs to increase its public diplomacy towards Armenia, as well as take steps that will work for Armenians in both the East and the West. Because what Armenia really needs these days are words on the topic of possible cooperative efforts, not on conflict or disagreement. In any case, it is quite clear to whom all this enmity is really causing damage and to whom it is advantageous.

Mehmet Fatih ÖZTARSU – Today`s Zaman

http://www.fatihoztarsu.com/?p=649

Turkish student Mehmet Fatih Öztarsu, who calls himself an idealist, set out directly for the Caucasus. His first stop was the Azerbaijani capital of Baku. Having characterized Azerbaijan as a “kindred country,” he studied international relations at Baku’s Caucasus University. After his education, while pursuing his research in Georgia, he decided to cross over to the other side of the border, passing into Armenia.

On of the events of 1915 and the Nagorno-Karabakh issue, Öztarsu’s opinions differ from the general consensus in Armenia; still, he thinks nobody will benefit from the closed Turkish-Armenia border. Turkey closed its border with Armenia in 1993 in support of its close ally Azerbaijan in a conflict over the Nagorno-Karabakh region. A flashpoint of Caucasus, Nagorno-Karabakh is a constituent part of Azerbaijan occupied by Armenia since the end of 1994, after a war between the two countries.

Learning East Armenian

Öztarsu recently commented on his experiences living abroad in Azerbaijan and Armenia in an e-mail exchange with the Hürriyet Daily News & Economic Review.Asked how a Turkish international relations student arrived at the decision to go to Armenia after studying in Baku, Öztarsu said it is important for Turks to learn about Armenia and its language.

“The Armenian language is an important issue for Turkey. Without diplomats, journalists or researchers who know this language, it is not possible for Turkey to understand Armenia or its political genesis,” Öztarsu told the Daily News. “With regards to my approach, I received support from both my acquaintances in Ankara and Baku. In addition, Armenian youths are also learning Turkish.”

When Öztarsu first went to Armenia he was worried that he might encounter problems as a Turk on his first visit to Armenia, but he said he was very well greeted.

Asked why he would learn the East Armenian dialect that is spoken in Armenia and Iran, rather than the West Armenian dialect spoken in Istanbul and among the diaspora, Öztarsu noted that, as a Caucasus scholar, it is important for him to connect directly with Armenians living in Armenia.

“If I had learned West Armenian in France or the U.S., I would have had trouble establishing a dialogue with Armenian people. Experts on diaspora Armenians who moved to Yerevan could only speak West Armenian and therefore they had to write in English. I, as a Caucasus expert, primarily want to understand Armenia,” said Öztarsu.

West Armenian is the name given to Modern Armenian spoken in Istanbul in the 20th century. Today, the language is taught at schools and spoken by all Turkish Armenians. East Armenian, on the other hand, is spoken in Armenia and by Iranian Armenians. Despite differences between the two Armenian dialects, many consider the two to be mutually intelligible. Provided that someone knows about the differences between these two dialects, one would not be impeded in establishing dialogue.

“Turkey cannot remain indifferent”

“Nationalists in Armenia believe that Turkey woke up one morning and destroyed all the Armenians. Actually there are few people who know what happened in 1915. There is no one who knows what happened prior and what happened after,” said Öztarsu.

“We are trying to overcome this; we say that this issue is not an every day issue. The fundamental reasons are Russia and Britain.”Asked who has so far benefited from Armenia’s foreign policy to pressure Turkey and build up the Karabakh issue, Öztarsu suggested that no country, with the exception of Iran, was benefiting from the status quo.

“Iran is benefiting from the borders remaining closed. They have set up a powerful trade network in the region. They have even laid claim to the Turkish mosque in Yerevan.”

Öztarsu also offered his opinions on the Karabakh issue.

“Karabakh was occupied by Armenia. We must not interpret the revolt of an autonomous region and Armenia’s maneuver to turn it to its advantage, as a simple ‘fight for territory.’ There are other regions occupied in Azerbaijan. Almost 1 million Azeris are in exile. While these people have to endure these heavy conditions, Turkey can’t remain indifferent.”

Criticism for OSCE

To solve the OSCE’s Minsk Group’s problem, Öztarsu suggested bringing the sides together.

“The Minsk Group, at a number of unknown gatherings are preventing Turkey’s affairs from being included,” Öztarsu said.

The Minsk Group was set up in 1992 to find a political solution to the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict involving Armenia and Azerbaijan. The group, co-chaired by France, the Russian Federation and the United States, has frequently come under attack as being overly biased regarding the dispute.

“Armenia must adopt a realistic approach on the Karabakh issue. However, solving the Karabakh problem is not only in Armenia’s hands.”

In 2008, Turkish President Abdullah Gül went to the Armenian capital of Yerevan to watch the Turkish and Armenian national football teams play each other. The move, nicknamed “football diplomacy,” intended to put the past to rest in bilateral relations and accelerate a dialogue process.

Following that, protocols aimed at normalization of relations were signed but could not be carried out.

“We have to solve our problems without anyone else intervening. Using the 1915 lobbying process as a tool is not useful; it is necessary to set up a dialogue between Ankara and Yerevan,” said Öztarsu.

.
http://www.fatihoztarsu.com/?p=560

What do you think what is the impact of the mass media (Armenian) on the Armenian-Turkish relationship?

I don’t think that mass media in Armenia has a great influence on it, because decisions made are hardly effected by the mass media, as I assume it is in Turkey. Mass media creates a common atmosphere, as much of it, I mean, the electronic TV Broadcasting and radio stations except Liberty Radio, is influenced by authorities, by the government. So their approaches concerning all the issues barely differ from that of state (governmental) ones. But as about the Yerkir Media TV Station it possesses a different approach since it is connected with Dashnakcutyun (Dashnak) party, which has a specific approach to this issue (Armenian-Turkish relationships). One can see a specific approach by the printed and the internet media. But here again, I don’t think that it influences the ones who make decisions, as well as the authorities, the politicians, the government. And what about the (political) atmosphere I would not say it was homogenous and fixed when that issue was under discussions. It has changed and has been changing still.

What about Armenian and Turkish people? What are the steps taken by them to normalize the relationship?

When the protocols were signed that was one of top issues to be discussed and I think the approach by them was fifty-fifty. Accordingly there was a separated society concerning this issue, because some of them said that without their preconditions, that is without recognizing the genocide it’s impossible to come to terms by their neighbor. The other party, however, was for normalization of relationships without any preconditions. This was the basic contradiction. As for me I was for the second point of view. But when it appeared that Turkey was not going to ratify the protocols at all, one thing was more than clear-that issue stopped to be actual within our society. So, the problem comes with Turkey, not with us.

So may we say that steps are taken by the both sides to develop relationships and particularly are the mental borders open already?

That’s a rather complex question. It’s difficult for me to say it about Turkish people, as I’m not that familiar with them though I have been to Turkey for many times. I’m not aware about Turkish peoples’ approaches. As far as I can see there are different approaches in Turkey as well: there is an elite of intellectuals with a wider mental borders, as you have mentioned and there are common people which is influenced by the state propaganda system the latter being not that kind towards Armenians.

What about Armenians? I would say that if the protocols were ratified lots of things would have changed in the minds of our people. But as far as they are not ratified and it is because of Turkey the ones who were against that process now have made their standpoint even harder and all the negative outcomes that people applied to our relationships have been justified. I think that is the reason why no revolutionary changes did occur in us.

What would you say about the recent events in Akhtamar? Was it a smart policy by Turkish government or just an attempt to normalize the relationships?

Yes and no. I think for a long time the problem was that each of us has the right to go to church and pray there. To encourage people to go or not it’s wrong I think. Secondly, having into consideration what people, who were present at the ceremony, talk about it one can hardly assume a tolerable approach by the Turkish side: because as soon as u start praying in Armenian or in any other language you can see a police coming up to you. Of course, I’m telling what I’ve heard, I haven’t been there myself…And they say, “Don’t pray”. That is they admit that it doesn’t function as a church.

On the other hand, of course it was a step to open the church, as step to be taken which is common to politics and especially the Turkish one when any step forward is declared a step to have been fulfilled. That is that could open the church and top it with a cross at the same time, couldn’t they? But firstly they opened it, and then a common idea developed and only after this the church was topped with a cross as another step to be considered a tolerable one. I think it’s something unique to a Turkish policy.

What would you add at last?

Taking from historical perspective I’ve got positive views on this issue as a whole, because I think that it’s impossible that two countries, two neighbor countries will not come to a compromise that they can live with each other with open borders and normal relationships like normal European countries do. But at this moment I can see that our neighbor country is hardly willing concerning this.

Interview : Mehmet Fatih ÖZTARSU – Karine BAGHDASARYAN

This interview was made for TRT TURK documentary “Dün, Bugün, Yarın”. Its parts had been telecasted in TRT TURK, Turkiye.

http://www.fatihoztarsu.com/?p=488