Yesterday’s meeting of Serzh Sargsyan with the members of the Public Council showed that this body without exception and including Vazgen Manukyan, don’t miss any chance to glorify the President and the policy conducted by him. The purpose of yesterday’s event was to express the opinion of the Public Council about the policy conducted by the President regarding the Turkish-Armenian relations. At the beginning President Serzh Sargsyan made an opening speech, which preceded the presentation of the chair of the Public Council Vazgen Manukyan, who didn’t forget to deny all the concerns, which exist within the society regarding the provisions of the protocols. Vazgen Manukyan, said it overwhelmingly voted for a resolution that recommended the protocols’ ratification by the Armenian parliament. “We discussed all the pluses and minuses, drew a line, added up things, and got a plus,” Manukyan told the meeting. Only actor Sos Sargsyan and professor from the YSU Babken Harutyunyan were against the protocols. Still, several members of the council voiced reservations about some provisions of the deal which is expected to be signed on October 10. Among them were Hayk Demoyan, director of the Museum-Institute of the Armenian Genocide, and Ruben Safrastyan, director of the Institute of Oriental Studies at the Armenian National Academy of Sciences. "The Public Council thinks that the Protocols carry no preconditions and should be signed by the two parliaments" said Manukyan. The latter thinks the ratification of the Protocols in their present form derives from the interests of Armenia. "I think that patriotism doesn’t lie in the hatred towards Turks but in the love towards your own people." After the opening speech of Serzh Sargsyan the audience for over an hour had to listen to the speeches of expert of Turkish studies Ruben Safrastyan, main author of the Public Council of this document Armen Ter-Tachatyan, director of Synopsis –Armenia Hovik Musaelyan, director of the young leaders’ school Artak Shakaryan and Khosrov Harutyunyan. “Tell us your concerns dear Karine,” friendly convinced Manukyan before Danielyan’s speech. “I accept the positive sides but also see very big risks – economic and demographic expansion. I’m sorry but in our country we have an oligarchic and monopolistic economy and mostly the oligarchs are importers. In these conditions the importation will be even more stimulated, which will kill the small and medium businesses and it will majorly hit our agriculture. My request is that the media doesn’t always conduct a positive propaganda of the protocols. Yesterday, they were calling me from our committees and telling me that they were mostly against and blaming me of voting for the protocols,” said Karine Danielyan, director for the “For the sake of Sustainable Development” NGO. Afterwards Sargsyan thoroughly adverted to the remarks of Manukyan, Danielyan and all the others. We are presenting the speech of Serzh Sargsyan with slight cuts.
This is not the treaty of Turkey’s capitulation
There is nothing strange that people have questions and concerns because this is neither the treaty of capitulation of Turkey nor an agreement on strategic cooperation. If someone thinks that those documents have to contain only our wishes, to tell the truth we have to be realists it cannot be so because we are nor trying to normalize our relations and go to become friends with Turkey but only we are trying to shape a more or less stable atmosphere where the dialogue maybe started. And there are people who say that this word is not written well in the protocols and the Turks may comment on it otherwise I am saying that we may comment on many points otherwise. Let someone show me an international document composed of 4-5 point which cannot be commented otherwise. We do not have the same thinking we have to understand this. They are trying to say with the help of this step that we cannot continue having such relations with Turkey and we have to establish normal relations with it. In order to establish normal relations we have to start speaking. That is what I am saying. If someone is against speaking, I will only respect that person if they were against it 5, 10 or 15 years ago. But when you see that the aim of those speaking is to collect point, this is already to be judged.
About the expansion
I don’t share the view of some people which think that Turkey is a big state and we should be scared of establishing relations with this state. I had a talk with many businessmen, who say that our market is 3 million but the market of Turkey is 70 million, that is to say, we get at least by 23 times more opportunities than the Turks. If problems arise on the matter in future, they will be resolved with the help of law. Turkey is a member of the European Customs Union. What new rules may it invent? Finally, we are always ready to protect our rights. As for demographic expansion such a phenomenon may happen today as well. We have to fight such expansion not via isolating ourselves, but building a modern country. This is the only way out. It is impossible to build a modern state having just two ways out to the external world. I don’t understand the question on economy and demographic issues. The fight against monopolies and corruption shouldn’t be done through isolation. This is the only way. Instead of having a demographic boom in the country we should build a legal state. And when they say monopolies or oligarchic economy I don’t understand it quite well as if only there is one way to import gasoline, sugar then the monopoly starts at the top of the pipe. But when alternative ways are enabled that’d when the economy is fully liberated.
About pre-conditions
There are many pre-conditions in any treaty, including the Kars treaty. They are in the shape of obligations. Those are obligations. Where did you see preconditions in the published documents? If that was the case, it would be written in the Protocols that we are signing with preconditions. Yes, there are clauses in these documents which are a result of compromise. Isn’t there anything positive for us in those documents? I don’t see a single precondition in those documents. If somebody feels that only our wishes and the fulfillment of our dreams should be included in the document, then he/she is led into error, since it is necessary to be more realistic and understand that it cannot be true. Because this way we do not settle our relations in a normal manner and try to become friends with Turkey, but we rather try to create a more or less stable atmosphere, where it would be possible to start the work, by which it would be possible to start the dialogue. “Where have you seen pre-conditions in the published documents? If it were true, it would be mentioned in the document that the document is to be signed with pre-conditions. Yes, there are some terms in the document that are achieved as a result of a compromise. It is not a treaty on capitulation or an agreement on strategic partnership so that not to cause anxiety. The initial protocols cannot reflect only our wishes. We are not striving to establish friendly relations with Turkey, we are just trying to create the relevant atmosphere for work where a dialogue may be started. At the beginning of the liberation war in Karabakh many people also felt anxiety. We have to establish natural relations with Turkey. For this reason we have to start a dialogue. If somebody is against this dialogue, I can accept his position only if he has always been principally against this idea. But when the people, the purpose of which is to collect scores, that is bad. There are the political forces which are sure they are right and we are obliged to respect their viewpoint. I cannot promise our people that we have studied all the issues and taken all nuances into consideration. I only say that we cannot continue in this way. Here I’d also like to add that when people start to criticize a concrete policy they simply forget that they used to have such an opportunity 1.5-2.5 years ago. We have had parliamentary elections, presidential elections and the ones, who are criticizing me now, should have stood up and declared that they’re against my policy on normalizing relations with Turkey. Why wouldn’t they speak about these issues back then? I am quite normal to criticism. We could have done this in a closed way but I found that this is the only right solution.
About the Genocide and the Kars Treaty
Regarding the formation of historic committee and the concerns related to it, I’d like to make it clear that the committee cannot define anti-Armenian decisions. It is said that Turkey will give priority to Genocide issue just at the very first day of the committee meeting. What does this mean? The committee is founded on parity principles where each side is authorized to say what they want to. Armenia will initiate activities to reach the recognition of Armenian Genocide. In the last year I have said for at least 200 times that establishing relations with Turks does not mean questioning Armenian Genocide. What else can I do? To set ties with Turkish people, does not necessarily mean to put Genocide under suspect, even more, to forget about it. It’s simply impossible. I don’t understand who they mean by saying "Armenia." No sensible Armenian can forget the Armenian Genocide and nothing can force them to act otherwise. If the process of international recognition of the Armenian Genocide slows down, the cause will be not our initiative but the people using it as pretext for doing nothing on this matter. If the stability of Armenia depends on the Armenian Diaspora, the latter must be more persistent. I perfectly understand that any political process has a price. I am ready to pay. Time will show if we gain or lose. It’s obvious that if that process of genocide recognition slows or, in which I don’t believe, is suspended, it will be the fault of not our initiative but those people who want to use the initiative as an excuse for not dealing with that matter. He also argued that both sides will be equally represented in the controversial panel and that the Turks will not be able to determine its agenda single-handedly. Armenia is not going to stop the process on the international recognition of the Armenian genocide. At the same time, I did not exclude that the Armenian and Turkish process will slow down the international recognition. But Armenia will not be guilty but only those who being humanitarians accepting that the genocide happened nevertheless will make the Armenian and Turkish process an opportunity to justify the non-recognition of genocide. By arousing this issue they enhanced the attention of the Turkish people towards the genocide. What is important for us? That other countries recognize the genocide or serious processes take place in Turkey? I acknowledge very well that the normalization of the Armenian and Turkish relations needs a price and he is ready to pay that price, and after we will see what is more what Armenia got or lost. The Soviet Union recognized the Treaty of Kars for five times, and when we joined the Commonwealth of Independent States we pledged to comply with all agreements signed by the Soviet Union. At the same time I’d like to say that neither protocol obligates Yerevan to recognize the Kars document. The Armenian leader further dismissed as “ludicrous” his detractors’ claims that Turkey agreed to make peace with Armenia only in return for additional concessions to Azerbaijan allegedly promised by him. Of course there are still many things left done in terms of studying the agreement. That is the work of experts. Sometimes when I am alone I burst into laughter at certain things. People who have never been in Karabakh, who have never been there when they should have to, they have not been in Armenia either, blame me for making some compromises in Karabakh issue. It seems to be absurd, as whom do they want to protect Karabakh from? It’s ridiculous for me to hear that NKR conflict is to be normalized by the Armenian-Turkish signed protocols. It’s obvious that the issue would be finally set up. But we should solve it as we have been declaring for decades – when we reach the comprehensive development and peace for Karabakh. But if we don’t reach that sort of resolution nothing makes us do it. After all the statements of the Turks the US, Russia, the EU and France made certain statements, according to which the NKR conflict and the normalization of the Turkey-Armenia relations are not linked. We expect the Minsk Group co-chairs to make a statement as well. And if after their statements we hear concerns in the society then we shouldn’t be too serious about them.