In a recent column, I reported that Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu had indicated an interest in meeting with “Diasporan leaders” to discuss Armenian demands emanating from the genocide of 1915.
In response, I suggested that before Armenians consider meeting Davutoglu, he must prove his sincerity by making eight preliminary concessions, one of which is providing the Republic of Armenia special commercial access to the Turkish port of Trabzon.
Last week, the Turkish website Gunebakis and other media outlets reported the positive reaction of Muzaffer Ermish, general manager of the Trabzon Port: “In a recent article, Harut Sassounian, editor-in-chief of the California Courier newspaper, pointed out that Turkish authorities were actively pursuing the start of a dialog with the Armenian Diaspora, and further contended that they were engaged in a series of meetings ahead of 2015, the 100th Anniversary of the Deportation. Sassounian, who advised the Diaspora not to make conflicting demands from Turkish authorities, listed the demands that a united Armenian delegation could make, including the demand that ‘Armenia be given special commercial access to the Port of Trabzon.’” Gunebakis confirmed that “Trabzon has given a green light to that request.”
However, the general manager observed that “should the Turkish government provide us with the necessary permission, we are ready. Armenia can easily import and export through this location. The $7.5 billion trade volume of Armenia would be an amazing event for Trabzon.” The Gunebakis article, headlined “Armenia’s Eyes Are on the Port of Trabzon,” indicated that most of Armenia’s imports and exports currently pass through the Georgian Port of Poti.
Ermish indicated the benefits of using Trabzon instead of Poti, pointing out that the distance from Trabzon to Yerevan is 430 kilometers (270 miles). “While the Port of Poti provides the advantage of a railroad link, there is a significant delay in shipments. On the other hand, there is a convenient highway between Trabzon and Yerevan, which is available at all hours of the day. From the Port of Trabzon to Alican [Armenia’s Margara border crossing point] is 400 kilometers, and from there to Yerevan the distance is only 30 kilometers. … Any vehicle that departs from our location will be in Armenia within six to seven hours, which is an unbelievable advantage for that country,” Ermish stated.
The general manager stressed that “Trabzon’s Port capacity is capable of accommodating new projects,” and that “we have increased the capacity of the Port from 3.9 to 10 million tons. We are only utilizing 25 percent of the port’s capacity. We are prepared for any commercial opportunity that might present itself regarding Armenia.”
One can draw several conclusions from Port Manager Ermish’s swift and positive reaction:
— This deal is in the mutual interest of both Armenia and Turkey. Trabzon would utilize its port capacity more fully, while Armenia would save on cargo handling fees, pay lower freight rates, and gain an alternate land access to the outside world.
— The general manager would not have made a public announcement on the sensitive topic of cooperation with Armenia unless he had advance clearance from Ankara. It is possible that the Turkish government is using Ermish’s positive statements as a trial balloon to gauge the degree of support or opposition to such a move. There has been no negative reaction from anti-Armenian nationalist circles in Turkey and Azerbaijan, and Armenian merchants have welcomed the Turkish gesture.
— Since Ermish has announced that Armenian cargo can directly cross the currently closed Armenian-Turkish border rather than be rerouted through Georgia, even a limited opening of the border for cargo shipments would eliminate the need for the highly controversial Armenian-Turkish protocols once and for all.
A truly sincere gesture of reconciliation by Turkey would be acknowledging that Trabzon was a major center of extermination during the Armenian Genocide. A monument should be erected in Trabzon Port in memory of the thousands of Armenian women and children who were placed in boats and cruelly dumped to drown in the Black Sea.
It should be clear that neither giving Armenia special access to the Trabzon Port nor the erection of a monument could be considered restitution for the genocide. These are simply steps Turkish officials must take to prove their good faith before Armenians can sit with them at the negotiating table.
Harut Sassounian
Return our lands, pay restitution, tell your girlfriend Alliyev of Azerbaijan to back off or we’ll bomb them just like we did in 94.
Finally last but not least, admit guilt to the world.
Dream on. These are ploys by Turkey to get to 2015 by dangeling toys for Armenians to waste their time and effort and talk about issues without any solutions. Even if Turkey agrees today to do everything that you wish for Mr. Sassonian, the day before they sit at the table as you are fantasizing, the demand will be to get out of Artsakh and do away with the Genocide issue before they dit down. The aim is to get passed 2015 while Armenians fantasize and try to get their thoughts together as to what they want from Turkey as a nation.
Our struggle for justice has been evolving for decades… it passed through the hands of several generations. I suspect that our quest will continue for many more years. It frustrates us yet it sustains us.
We know that justice is not tied to 2015. It is an anniversary and therefore has public value. We must not let the Turks win the public relations award for 2015. I agree with Harut that we must know what we want and be excellent negotiators. That day is arriving, but the Turks will work to dilute our strength by creating new pseudo-paradigms (reaching out to the descendants of former Ottoman subjects). What is this? A genocide victim alumni association?
Still we must engage because true justice can only be realized by direct Armenian and Turkish negotiations. They will do everything except admit outright guilt because that will open the door wide open for reparations and restitution. Debate internally, negotiate with unity.
A ploy! Turks are preparing for 2015’s tsunami…
Should that port be accessible to Armenia who’s going to benefit from “The $7.5 billion trade volume”????? We all know the answer to this question! Don’t we??
Be sure to see Taner Akcam’s excellent and timely Op-Ed in the July 20 NY Times, “Turkey’s Human Rights Hypocrisy.”
John
I will read it.
The Genocide and Trabzon Port are two absolutely different themes. One has nothing to do with the other.
The opening of this Port for Armenian cargo and of the Turkish Armenian Border to deliver the cargo there, brings a lot of money and additional new jobs to Turkey. That should let Turkey not hesitate to start with it at once !
But it has nothing to do with the Genocide. Serious negotiations have to start on this old problem as soon as possible. I am always astonished about the huge number of young Turks that know about the Genocide, though it never was mentioned at any Turkish school. Big parts of the Turkish people want these negotiations – the problem is that only the Turkish government never heard anything about the Genocide.
Of course AKP party team leader, snake Oghloo planning next ” road map” for Armenia, with the help of Hussein Obama!!
I believe on can safely predict that there will be no movement on the genocide recognition issue until after 2015. Turkey wil not change its stance and both Armenia and the Diaspora will continue to work for recognition. But a reasonable inference is that Turkey will try to exploit an opening to the Trabzon port for Armenia politically. After all this is how geopolitics works. But after 2015, when nothing has changed, we may maybe expect some movement.
Ragnar,
Your predictions are worthless. But RVDV’s post about your elusive, evasive and mysterious positions, all in aid of the Turks you aim to please, is quite worthwhile. I told you we will post it every time your moldy. squishy yet high handed pseudo-authoritative posts spring up:
“To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason is like administering medicine to the dead.” —- Thomas Paine.
This quotes applies perfectly to you Ragnar (and well just about everyone at Fox News- but any who..)
Dialogue: “an exchange of ideas or opinions on a particular issue, especially a political or religious issue, with a view to reaching an amicable agreement or settlement.”
Essentially, you have an idea or opinion, and I have an idea or opinion and we talk/argue/debate the topic until we have a amicable resolution. Here’s the two sides you can take: It was genocide, or, it was not genocide. So let me ask this is clearer terms.
1. Are you capable of answering a question? If your answer is “yes”, proceed. If you answer is “no”- have a good day sir.
2. Do you know what genocide means? If your answer is “yes” proceed. If your answer is “no”– here it is and I will break it down for you..
“…any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole OR IN PART, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:
(a) Killing members of the group;
(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.
— Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, Article I”
Part A: Check
Part B: Check
Part C: Double Check
Part D: I’d say killing women and pregnant women is a way of preventing births in the immediate and longer term future. CHECK.
Part E: N/A, we were to busy killing the kids to transfer them to another group. CHECK.
5 for 5, and you don’t even need all five to be found guilty of genocide. But not us Turks, no sir, we take our genocide pretty seriously, anything less then 5 out of five is not good enough.
3. Were you able to read and comprehend the above statements? If yes, proceed.
4. Have I managed to make you feel stupid yet? I don’t care about your answer to this one, just read on the last question is coming up.
5. In a one word, three or two letter answer, was it genocide?
BEFORE YOU ANSWER, let me make this as clear as possible: I, RVDV- do not care in the SLIGHTEST of your lengthy, pointless views of other threads. I do not care in the SLIGHTEST of any grey areas you think you can argue about. I do not care in the SLIGHTEST about your so called “dialogue”- you don’t know what that word means. Stop pretending you know what you’re talking about because I assure you, you don’t have a damn clue. You know what the worst part is? There’s a part of me that wants to agree with you, use your claims to dilute the reality of the situation. The worst part is wanting to say, “you know what, my ancestors overreacted to an inflated threat due to wartime fear-mongering and chaos, and given another chance with the benefit of hindsight, they would not have it again.” But the absolute worst part, the worst of the worst, is knowing that if my ancestors were given a second chance, they would only try to do it more efficiently. You know nothing.”
Do you really think it is worthwhile to pose these questions to me?
Dont you know that important genocide researchers like Charny have proposed other definitions of genocide than the legal one? there is no THE definition. How do you determine the meaning of a word anyhow? Are you sure your procedure for making me answer the question of genocide against Armenians is sound?
Ask Raphael Lemkin how he created the word of genocide!! If you can not get him out of his grave, then you have to accept the word of “genocide” created mainly base on Armenian Massacres of Ottoman Turkey, just like Holocaust for Jews!! Charny or Fein or ….and people like you are paid scholars by Turkish government, While Raphael Lemkin was independent scholar, who had no influence by the politicians or Turks or Jews or Russians or Scandinavians!! Only 6 people attended for his funeral, but for Charny will be 6 million Turks and one Scandinavian!!
GB:
Please do not lump Dr. Israel Charny with the likes of Fein, Naess, and their ilk.
Dr. Charny is one of the few Israelis actively pushing for AG recognition by Israel. Here:
http://armenianweekly.com/2011/10/04/sassounian-dr-charny-deserves-much-credit-should-israel-recognize-genocide/
Dr. Charny was also the keynote speaker this April 24, 2012 at Montebello.
and don’t believe everything Naess writes. He is an expert at obfuscation, distortion, and misdirection. He is a highly skilled denialist operator: he has previously attempted to pit Armenian posters @AW against each other.
It is not surprising that he is now attempting to plant doubt in the minds of Armenians about staunch AG recognition supporter Charny.
Amen, yeghpayr! Charny may have promoted a different definition but not a conflicting one!
I give less importance to what label Mr. Naess places on the events of 1915-1923. He remains a confusing commenter to me. I care more if he hinders the pursuit of justice. Let’s focus on challenging his and other muddlers’ misstatements when necessary and take every opportunity to promote a truthful narration of the events. And he gives us plenty of opportunities!
It is more important that Armenians find a way to tell our story and see Turkey pay for her crime against humanity. Upholding the truth, not tearing down this fellow, should be our goal. And there is enough brain power here to do this while taking the ‘Hai’ road.
jda,
(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.
This unfortunately did happen in addition to just killing the kids. See Robert Fisk’s brilliant article: Living Proof of the Armenian Genocide
http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/fisk/robert-fisk-living-proof-of-the-armenian-genocide-1918367.html
Avery,
I really sorry for using Dr. Charny’s name to answer Ragnar’s unjustified note, perhaps I should have used Bernard Lewis name here instead of Israel Charny!!Thank you for correcting my mistake, and your professionalism!!