David of Sasun and George Bush...
I had never actually read the story David of Sasun, the epic Armenian poem over 1,000 years old, but yesterday as I edited a translation of the abbreviated Hovhanness Tumanian version of it for Armeniapedia.org (see translation, or see original Armenian), I realized it said a lot about Armenians. Our epic hero refused to decimate the armies of his enemies, instead insisting only on fighting their evil leader... I really liked that. It's the same thing I've always said about Saddam and Bush. If you really must remove him from power, kill HIM, don't punish his entire country and kill tens, possibly hundreds of thousands of people, who have already suffered enough under his rule. It's simply insane. Of course at the same time the US supports governments like those in Israel, Turkey, Pakistan, etc, just as it supported Saddam when it was convenient, so it never was about freeing anybody. But then we already knew that. It's just sad that Armenia sent any support to the "coalition", no matter how token.
Along these lines, I just noticed an interesting article in RFE/RL last week about the US urging the return of Azeri refugees from the Karabakh conflict. It didn't say anything about any other preconditions, etc, just that they should be allowed back. Some of you will say I am crazy, but I have thought for a long time that IF Armenians are not going to keep the lands south of Karabakh (in other words, I am NOT talking about Lachin/Kachatagh or Kelbajar/Karvajar here), which they do not appear to be trying to do in any negotiations, then there is no reason not to announce to the refugees from there that they can return to their lands - unarmed. The logistics would be messy, it would be a bit of a headache, but I think well worth it in the end. Simply because it's the decent, human thing to do, as long as a way could be worked out to allow it without any security concessions, etc. In the end, we have to be neighbors with these folks, and they have been short ended by their government and leaders. Again, I don't think this idea is a popular one, but I think it should be seriously considered...
Along these lines, I just noticed an interesting article in RFE/RL last week about the US urging the return of Azeri refugees from the Karabakh conflict. It didn't say anything about any other preconditions, etc, just that they should be allowed back. Some of you will say I am crazy, but I have thought for a long time that IF Armenians are not going to keep the lands south of Karabakh (in other words, I am NOT talking about Lachin/Kachatagh or Kelbajar/Karvajar here), which they do not appear to be trying to do in any negotiations, then there is no reason not to announce to the refugees from there that they can return to their lands - unarmed. The logistics would be messy, it would be a bit of a headache, but I think well worth it in the end. Simply because it's the decent, human thing to do, as long as a way could be worked out to allow it without any security concessions, etc. In the end, we have to be neighbors with these folks, and they have been short ended by their government and leaders. Again, I don't think this idea is a popular one, but I think it should be seriously considered...
posted by Raffi K. at 11:19 PM
8 Comments:
Raffi,
Good idea from the humanitarian point of view. I side with your idea, in plinciples. There is other side of the coin though there. Those areas are free from guarilla war mostly becasue there is no 'civil' population. Should the 'civil polulation be allowed to return then there will be guarilla war for sure.
Arsen
Raffi, Kelbajar is being discussed. In fact, apart from the most obvious disagreement about the referendum to determine Karabakh's status, the other issue was the failure to agree on when Armenian forces shoudl be withdrawn from Kelbajar.
Of course, Armenia might be holding off on this matter simply because in 10-15 years it hopes that Kelbajar will remain under Armenin control. Certainly it seems strange tothink of Dadi Vank NOT being part of Karabakh or Armenia.
Incidently, I've heard no mention of what will happen to the Shahumian region that is under Azeri control and about the right to return for Armenian refugees from there although many now have new homes in Silikyan.
Anonymous #1 - agreed, it could only happen if it logistically can work. Obviously they should be unarmed and the borders guarded by Armenian troops as now...
Anonymous #2 - good points. I too worry about the lack of mention of Shahumyan. I realise Kelbajar is being discussed, but I think it is in a different category than the southern lands, since it directly seperates Armenia from Karabakh. I'm not too worried about Dadivank though. Even if Kelbajar goes back to Azerb, I think they'll make some small adjustments to some of the enclaves, exclaves and historic sites between Armenia/Karabakh/Azerbaijan. At least I hope so!
The Azeri civilians will not return to territories controlled by the Armenian army just the same way as the Armenian civilians will not return to territories controlled by the Azeri army (Shahumian district of NKR).
Michael said,
Why consider returning any of the liberated lands of Armenia?
Have any turcic nations ever returned any of our lands once they have been invaded in the past?
Have they ever considered allowing any Armenians to return to their rightfull lands?
Enough of thinking in terms of a high sounding pacifist nation.
This train of thought has brought only genocides to our nation.
It's our turn to defend what's been ours historically.
No more turn the other cheek.
1700 years of indoctrination has created this "anything for peace mentality as well as survival, even if it's been a state of slavery".
This behaviour has brought nothing but loss of pride and lack of respect to our nation by the so called mighty of this world!
By the way the mighty have always wielded the sword first then resorted to high ethics of morality, after imposing the power of the sword.
The so called tolerance of various religions under the Ottomans, ended up becoming the 1st ethnic cleansing of the 20th century.
Not only our nation was decimated, the Greeks, Assyrians and Kurds were subjected to the same treatment.
The Kurds are still under the hegemony of the turk and subjected to turcification.
Recent history of Cyprus is evidence of the never changing mentality of our eternal ennemy.
When is enough IS ENOUGH?
For me Azeris and Turks are the same.
The blockage of Armenia is a concerted effort by both these nations.
You know guys all are excellent points.
Giving out the “occupied” lands back will give us political leverage and show that we do compromise, this is very important, as the world powers want the two sides to show some sort of compromise. Giving NKR and Lachin back is out of the question, so this is a very good opportunity to show the world that we are trying our best.
But this action also KIND OF nullifies the deaths of the brave fedayis who fought for these lands. Besides don’t these territories give us a strategic advantage? I don’t think Armenian Armed Forces commented on the significance of those lands yet.
And yes, we did win the war and that should give us the upper hand in deciding what to return and what to keep. Besides as already mentioned above Turks never returned any of our territory (heck both Azeris and Turks live on historic Armenian lands, any kid who took history knows that).
As I said excellent points, but politics remains politics, and sooner or later the self righteous fat cats from OSCE are going to pressure us for a compromise and the best way to go in my opinion is to return those lands.
I've not said I think lands should or shouldn't be given back - I've said IF they are planning to give them back. They certainly seem to be intending to do such a thing. I am certain however that without returning the southern lands there will never be a peace deal - though whether they can get any concessions for Shahumian, what the finaly status of Lachin/Kelbajar would be, I don't know...
We should be asking ourselves, what are the advantages of a peace accord with Azer/Turk? what should we expect in return to our compromises? peace for the sake of peace will put us in a bad negotiating position. We do have a leverage at this point, we won the war! azeris need to accept this fact.
1. we give the lands back and we have the open borders and 'friendly' neighbors. I feel stupid even writing this. or
2. we don't compromise and we force the other side to cave. This will take some time. The result will be in the worst case scenerio, a war, initiated by the other side (I just moved from the states with my family and I am ready to contribute to the war effore if necessary, so please don't call me a hypocrite). This would be extremely unfortunate, but it will unite armenia and the diaspora against a common enemy, and we will no longer tolerate the incompetance of our leadership.
This is a risky stance, but one worth taking to change the course of armenian history from history of abuse to histroy of survival without abuse.
Post a Comment
<< Home