Friday, November 20, 2009

LTPs speech, in English, with my favorites...

Up until now, the only translation in English of LTPs recent speech that I had seen was the partial translation on Lragir, which was much appreciated but missing some key things. I've put a link to the speech in English and in Armenian below, but before that, some bits and pieces that are among my favorites...

"If we are fair-minded however, we have to point out that Serge Sargsyan did not implement the plan of signing the Armenian–Turkish protocols alone. In that endeavor he received unconditional support from the Republican, Country of Laws and Prosperous Armenia parties, the Supreme Spiritual Council of the Armenian church headed by the catholicos Garegin II, the Public Council adjunct to the president of RA headed by Vazgen Manoukyan, the Armenian Assembly of America headed by Hrayr Hovnanyan, the Armenian General Benevolent Union under the honorary presidency of Luise-Simone Manougyan, the presidency of the Academy of Sciences of the RA lead by Radik Martirosyan, Armenia’s criminal-oligarchic economic elite represented by all the well-known individuals with nicknames, the presidents of state universities such as Aram Simonyan, Suren Zolyan and others, and finally the entire court intelligentsia with the silent agreement of Zori Balayan, Sos Sargsyan, Perch Zeytuntsyan, Ruben Gevorgyants and others. It is indicative, however, that none of the representatives of the listed organizations and groups, with possible exceptions of a few republicans, had the courage to personally defend the policy adopted by Serge Sargsyan, making instead the cowardly choice of hiding behind the collective statements and expressions of support, which did not require taking personal responsibility. In essence, everybody abandoned their president and left him to fend for himself. No minister, no academician, no president of a university, no oligarch, and no intellectual stood by him personally."

"It is completely incomprehensible, for example, that the ARF is protesting against the current Armenian–Turkish boarder when it is that party that has drawn those boarders by signing the Treaty of Alexandrapol. Or how is it demanding that Turkey recognize the historic rights of Armenian people when by signing the aforementioned treaty it has renounced the Treaty of Sevres. It is equally true in Vardan Oskanyan’s case. Why has he suddenly remembered Western Armenia and his native Marash, when during the period of holding high office he did not in any way react to Robert Kocharyan’s statement about not having any territorial demands from Turkey, why he did not say that it was treason or that it trampled on the historic rights of the Armenian people, etc? And if all of this is so, who is going to believe the ARF and Oskanyan that their current posture is sincere and that it is not aimed at scoring cheap political points? "

"It is not just to add sins that he has not committed to the many sins that he has. It was not Sargsyan who first recognized the existing Armenian–Turkish boarder - the ARF and the Bolsheviks did that before him with the treaties of Alexandrapol and Kars. He was not the one who renounced territorial claims against Turkey - Robert Kocharyan did that. He was not the one who demanded that Turkey recognized the Armenian Genocide, receiving in response the proposal to create a commission of historians - Kocharyan and Vardan Oskanyan did that. He was not the one who excluded Karabakh from the negotiating process – it was Kocharyan’s, Oskanyan’s and Arkadi Ghukasyan’s wrongdoing. And finally it is not Sargsyan, who can call the Madrid principles his “achievement”- he has inherited them from Kocharyan and Oskanyan. Sargsyan is responsible for all of this only to the extent that he was a member of Kocharyan’s regime, and he is no more responsible than the forces who were supporters or parts of that regime, some of which are pretending to be in the opposition now in order to evade their share of responsibility."

"this will also be a moral and psychological blow for the Diaspora, whose identity, irrespective of our subjective desire, because of the tragic circumstances, rests upon the Genocide, although I would have personally preferred it to be based upon the idea of the strengthening of the Armenian statehood and on universal values."

"Thus, even if we consider the establishment of the commission of historians to be a matter of commercial trade-off, it will appear to be a failed undertaking, or, at least, not the one that envisages the establishment of the commission in exchange for the open border, but, at best, a trade-off that presupposes the establishment of the commission in exchange for the recognition of Serge Sargsyan’s legitimacy."

The full texts:



No comments: