The subject of “Aravot” online “Face to Face” talk show is discussed by Armen Marukyan, Head of the Department of Armenian Issue and History of the Armenian Genocide at the Institute of History of the National Academy of Sciences, and turkologist Hakob Chakryan.
Aram Abrahamyan – Pan-Armenian Declaration on Centennial of the Armenian Genocide is a document, which all Armenians should follow. Isn’t it?
Hakob Chakryan – I do not think that all Armenians should be guided by it, but it is the most significant step ahead to the centennial, otherwise the Turks would not promptly respond to it in such an anger and obstinately. The next day following the publication of the Declaration, the Turkish president’s press secretary gave a speech and said that it is an obvious manifestation of hostility towards Turkey, and the Foreign Ministry issued a statement that it violates all the norms of diplomatic courtesy and called it an act not decent top the leader of the state, emphasizing that this act was allowed by the President of Armenia.
A. A. – But we do not have diplomatic relations with Turkey.
Read also
Armen Marukyan – Indeed. First, I would like to develop the idea that this is really an unprecedented event, when a nationwide document is adopted. We have a single document, which is declared for all to hear not only on behalf of the Republic of Armenia, but it is also a Declaration of Armenians. The significance of the document lies in the fact that, firstly, we clarify at least for ourselves what is meant by demanding, and what are our actions starting from the centennial, and this is also a message addressed to the world, as well as the Republic of Turkey. I would like just to add also Erdogan’s words, who is always balanced in his statements, but, this time, some kind of emotional outburst was felt when he said that Turkey is ready to pay if the historians determine that if it was a genocide. Let’s leave the words said after “if” aside, because these are already known words regarding this sinister commission of historians, but the fact that he says that he is ready to pay, it speaks of the fact that even Turkey realizes of the availability of the issue of compensation.
A. A. – Doesn’t this declaration enter into a contradiction with the Zurich protocols?
H. Ch. – We nedd to distinguish from one another. Genocide recognition process is a separate phenomenon that had nothing to do with the Armenian-Turkish protocols, in other words, when these protocols were examined, the two ministers of the foreign affairs have not touched upon the issue of the Armenian Genocide there. Later on, with regard to developing Armenian-Turkish normalization process, the states concerned know by these protocols that there is an international process for recognition of the Armenian Genocide, and along with it, simultaneously, they did everything to contribute to signing of the protocols, consequently, if we compare one to the other, we will not cope with it.
A. A. – However, can we say that this declaration makes us to eventually put an end to the Zurich protocols, which says that we recognize borders, agreements and so on?
A. M. – If we take into account the fact that there was an indirect reference in the protocol to reaffirm the agreements related to existing border, and if you see what is written in the Declaration, where reference is made to another legal instrument – the Woodrow Wilson’s arbitral award in 1920, and the Sevres agreement, obviously, we know the existing limit here, in this sense, there is a certain contradiction. In my opinion, the Declaration must also be followed by some other steps, in particular, the final withdrawal of the signature, because otherwise this declaration would not be adequately perceived by the international community. I think, at least from logical viewpoint, there should be a subsequent step, because legally our signature continues remaining in the form of protocols.
Complete discussion below.
Prepared by ARAM ABRAHAMYAN
