Ahead of the centenary of the Armenian Genocide, what do Armenians expect from Turkey? Who will take up the leadership to define the demands of the Armenian people? Former president and executive director of the Armenian National Committee of Australia, Varant Meguerditchian spoke to CivilNet and said that an outcome of any negotiated solution to the Armenian Genocide must not endanger Armenia’s security. Here is the transcript of that interview.
Maria Titizian: Welcome to CivilNet, my guest from Australia is Varant Meguerditchian, he is the former president and executive director of the Armenian National Committee of Australia. Welcome to CivilNet Varant.
Varant Meguerditchian: Thank you for having me.
MT: We’ve asked you to join us today in our studio, because you are not only a regular contributor, a columnist for some Diaspora newspapers: the Armenian Weekly and Asbarez, but you have also been very much involved in the international recognition of the Armenian Genocide. You have deep connections to Armenia, you come often, you follow the processes of what takes place in Armenia and in the Diaspora. You recently wrote an article that was published in the Weekly, it was called “Nothing Should be off the Negotiation Table”, and it had to do with the recognition of the Armenian Genocide and reparations. As we approach 2015, the centennial of the Armenian Genocide, many feel that it could be a watershed, that something can happen– something should happen– and it has always been tied into the actual recognition, but you’re saying is recognition necessary for the next step which is reparation?
VM: Yeah, I think that the purpose for me writing this article was two-fold. I wanted to discuss what goes on beyond recognition and I also wanted to put in context that the Armenian state is a small state, it’s vulnerable. Many of the current circumstances in which it find itself today, blockaded and also landlocked can be traced back, in part at least, to the Genocide and the state is vulnerable, it shouldn’t be placed in a position where it has to reach a negotiated position on the Armenian Genocide that is not satisfactory either to itself, to the people of Armenia, or to the Diasporan community.
MT: So why did you feel it important to write about this? We’ve been talking a lot about this in Armenia and in the Diaspora, what is it that we want from Turkey? If you ask a hundred Armenians, you’ll get a hundred different answers from the very basic that recognition is enough for me, to somebody wanting– you know, as we say in Armenian– from sea-to-sea, that that’s what we want; others will say that I want a global fund set up combating genocide around the world and recognition; somebody will say I want a sovereign road to the Black Sea and symbolically Mount Ararat, Kars, Ardahan. What is it that we Armenians want and is it important to define that today for us?
VM: Look, absolutely Maria. You’re speaking right from the heart. I think that many Armenians have, in themselves, given some thought to what they would like as part of compensation or as a just resolution of the Armenian Genocide. Some of the things that we may consider are return of lands, other things that we may consider are return of churches, the right of Armenians living as hidden Armenians in Turkey to live freely and openly and to convert back to Christianity if they so choose, some compensation to the state, possibly some funds set up for the Diaspora, but the reality is that we need to have some type of consultation process, a stakeholder consultation process, whereby every Armenian, every stakeholder, on the issue of the Armenian Genocide is consulted, is represented through that consultation process.
MT: Is that possible?
VM: It is a very large task, I don’t know whether at this time there has been any leadership on the issue. I’d like to see the Armenian state take up that responsibility, and I feel that where leadership is absent, you may find that other groups can take up that responsibility; quite possibly ANC or other advocacy organizations may wish to invite churches, different denominations, business groups, legal groups, even representatives of the Armenian state. What would make Armenia a sustainable country as an outcome of a negotiated resolution of the Armenian Genocide.
MT: Some in the Diaspora might argue that they are the legal heirs or they should be the beneficiaries of any compensation, some might say why should the Armenian state receive the compensation? I mean we’re talking in theoretical terms obviously, but let’s, this is important I think for us to then start defining– having this national discourse that seems to be missing, that we’re not having these honest discussions to be honest about what it is that we want, and who should be the recipient of any reparation should that come about. How do you reconcile Diaspora who sees itself as the–it is the Diaspora because of the Armenian Genocide–and then the state who actually is the legal representative of Armenians living in Armenia and perhaps, I would hope, of those living abroad as well?
Varant: I mean, at the moment the only answer that I can give you is my own personal view.
MT: Absolutely.
VM: I’ve shared that with others as well, but I can tell you that the 2009 Protocols that were set up, the Armenia-Turkey Protocols; they were probably not acceptable to the people of Armenia or the Diaspora and then may in part have been acceptable to the Armenian state, or at least there may have been a negotiative position. Now the reality is that, whether we like to admit it or not, and other people may have different views, the Diaspora in its own right, the people of Armenia, and the Armenian state are all stakeholders. The proportion to which they are stakeholders shall be determined in their own part. You’ve got to also remember that Armenia is a nation state, it has a responsibility to the people of Armenia and it has a responsibility to those who identify as Armenian outside of Armenia. Now if we were to see the Armenian state as the primary beneficiary of any resolution or compensation, then the burden of responsibility for caring for the needs of the Diasporans and the people in Armenia would be that of the Armenian state.
MT: Let’s talk some nuts and bolts. We have less than a year before the centennial, many progressive– let’s call them progressive– Turks in Turkey who are the champions of their government recognizing the Armenian Genocide, I don’t think necessarily for us, but because they feel that it’s very important for the future development of their country to admit the crimes of the past and many of those Turks will often times also admit that the modern Republic of Turkey was established based on the ruins of the Armenian nation living in Western Armenia, during the Ottoman Empire. How do we move forward? I know you said we should have some kind of stakeholder conferences, meetings, papers being written, but how do we actually move forward? What is it that we need to also tell those progressive Turks in Turkey that this is what we want?
VM: Look, I think we really that we need to work out what we want. I think that a lasting reconciliation or a lasting peace, and the reality is that that is what we want to achieve. We want to achieve a lasting peace and for a lasting peace to be achieved, there needs to be three things in my view. The first is that there has to be substantive justice; that is that there have been some crimes committed, and for those crimes there has be adequate compensation. The second thing that needs to happen is that both of the states need to accept that outcome, whatever the outcome of the negotiation, the substantive justice, and the like, both Turkey and Armenia must accept that outcome. The third thing, which is a key, is that the people of both nations, that includes for Armenia the Armenian Diaspora as well, accept the outcome. Now that can only happen through dialogue, that can only happen through negotiation and interaction, and that can only happen as a result of accepting that a crime has been committed and for that, compensation is required. What’s important is, for Armenia as a state who has been subjected to Genocide, that the outcome must not leave Armenia in a worse position, that it was…
MT: A weakened position.
VM: Absolutely. What is important is, if we look back at any, I guess, ideas of arbitration that were undertaken by U.S. President Woodrow Wilson; what his primary consideration was. His primary consideration when trying to determine the border between Armenia and Turkey, was not what was historic Armenian land because the reality is that Armenia at various stages throughout its history was much larger than the part that Woodrow Wilson had envisaged. What President Woodrow Wilson ultimately wanted to achieve was that Armenia be sustainable, and it be able to undertake its own security, defence security, and economic security based on the land that was appropriated and afforded to the Armenian state. Now, what the current circumstances for Armenia are, what our current expectations are, what the Diaspora’s expectations are, what the expectations of the Armenian state are, are all very different. What’s quite interesting is that I don’t think they’ve really been communicated to one another.
MT: No because that was going to be, you know, two-pronged final question, which is a very personal opinion and you’re free to give it or not. What I suspect, and I would like to hear your thoughts on this, is that whatever package, if there ever is a package that’s going to be presented, will never be good enough for the Diaspora. What the state might agree to, the Diaspora might not agree to, might most probably not agree to because its expectations are far greater, I suspect, than that of the state’s. Would you agree with that?
VM: Look, I think you’re probably right. I think the way that a consultation process would work is where you get everyone around the room, you have a balanced stakeholder representation, so it shouldn’t be stacked with representatives of the Diaspora, and it shouldn’t be stacked with representatives of the state, and it shouldn’t completely omit the people of Armenia because I’m not sure whether the state has a complete understanding of what the people of Armenia actually want. If we had balanced representation around the table, the first thing that we need to do is agree on the things that we agree upon. So what’s the least of the things that we expect as a bare minimum? I have my own views, but I represent one person out of ten million Armenians; so let’s work out what we absolutely can agree upon, let’s work out what are the maybes, let’s work out on the issues that may be impasses, and that we need to talk through and discuss along the time into the future. Unless the conversation starts, I don’t see how we can have, you know, I don’t see how we can put ourselves in a position whereby we move beyond the concept of recognition, we’ve achieved recognition on a number of occasions, ultimately I mean, at the last April 24 commemoration, the 99th anniversary, we had François Hollande suggest that the events can only be characterized as genocide and nothing else. You had the human rights commissioner in Australia, he spoke about and recognized the Armenian Genocide. You had a U.S centre for foreign relations committee pass a resolution, another resolution…
MT: Another resolution, right.
VM: On recognition. That’s right. You’ve had a couple states in Australia that have recognizes it. You’ve had even in Australia the recognition of Syrian and Greek Genocides, in part, and what’s important is that beyond that recognition, what do we actually want? Where do we want to go? And that conversation needs to start. Let’s start that conversation and see where we go from there.
MT: I think we’ve started the conversation so as a very very final question, let’s say you were the one who is going to put together a list of recommendations in front of Turkey for what it is you want, as a personal opinion, as Varant Meguerditchian, who lives in Australia currently, what is it that you want as a descendent– grandparents were survivors of the Armenian Genocide– what is it that Varant Meguerditchian wants from Turkey today?
VM: Without a doubt I want an apology. I want an absolute apology. I think that the apology places the Armenian state and the Armenian people in the position whereby our security increase automatically. Beyond that the reality is you’ve given me a question that places a very big burden on my shoulders. I think that when having the discussion and negotiations with Turkey, nothing should be off the negotiation table, that’s the reality. Everything that we’re personally entitled to, whether the state be entitled to it, whether the Diaspora be entitled to it, whether the people of Armenia be entitled to it, all of that should be placed on the negotiation table. That should be the context within which any reparation or recognition of the Armenian Genocide should from now on be discussed.
MT: Ok, you really didn’t answer my question, but I get it. You have this long wish list or the absolute of what it is that you think from return of land to the right of return for Armenians to return back…
VM: Absolutely.
MT: From financial compensation based on what the Armenians lost from churches, to businesses, to homes, to properties. So that would be on the table and then we would go– move forward from there.
VM: Absolutely, and the expectation be that the final outcome of that negotiation places Armenia in a position where it’s more economically secure, and more secure in terms of defence.
MT: Physically secure.
VM: Absolutely.
MT: Varant, thank you very much for your honesty and for helping us start this conversation which I think is really important and ahead of the centennial of the Armenian Genocide, which is important for both Armenians and for Turks; that we do give ourselves the platform to speak honestly and be forthright in what we want and what we expect from one another.
VM: Thank you Maria for having me and thank you CivilNet.
MT: I’d like to remind our viewers that our guest was Varant Meguerditchian, he is the former president and the executive director of the Armenian National Committee of Australia. Stay with CivilNet.
