2794) Interviews: Present-Day Problems of the Armenian-Turkish Conflict

The Ararat Center for Strategic Research is running a series of interviews about the latest interstate developments between Armenia and Turkey. The list of participants includes representatives of the general public, as well as state officials, politicians, public figures and experts.

The survey covers three themes, each based on a specific example:

1. Turkey's policies on the Armenian Genocide issue.
2. Turkey's stance on the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.
3. The invitation by the Government of the Republic of Armenia to Turkey to participate in the construction of the new nuclear power plant in Armenia. .

Anyone willing to participate in the survey can answer the questions at the following address: info at ararat-center.org. In your response, please indicate your name, age (optional), profession and place of residence.

Theme 1: Turkey's policies on the Armenian Genocide issue Since December 2007, the Ministry of Education of Turkey has been showing a film in Turkish schools, which conveys that historically, Armenians killed the Turkish people. The film has already been seen by about 12 million Turkish students, in cluding students in elementary grades. 600,000 copies of the film's DVD were distributed to Schools.

1.1. How do you assess this move by the government of Turkey?

I have seen the DVD. It is extremely anti-Armenian. I believe the move was a Turkish ultra-nationalist reaction to "overtures" being planned by the AKA party towards Armenia.

1.2. What objectives does Turkey pursue by this action?

To reinforce the false ethos laying at base of the Turkish socialization process.

1.3. What are the likely consequences of this action?

Continued fascist indoctrination of Turkish school children.

1.4. Why is the government of Armenia staying silent about this Turkish initiative?

Either the Armenian government feels it is not worth expending any effort in reacting to the continued anti-Armenian currents running through Turkish society, or, they haven't thought about it well enough to architect a response, or most likely both.

1.5. How should the Armenian authorities respond to this action?

The Armenian government should have intelligence studies on the Turkish socialization process. Based on those studies and knowing the interests of the Armenian people, the government should have generated a response exposing this false, anti-Armenian indoctrination of young people. This response should have been made to international bodies with the intelligent use of international press and human right groups. This is a short answer to an endemic issue.=0 D

Theme 2: Turkey's stance on the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict

Officials in Armenia and Turkey talk about the development of Armenian-Turkish relations. At the same time, on February 19, 2009, Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan stated that: a) With regard to the Karabakh conflict, the positions and policies of Turkey and Azerbaijan are completely identical; b) Turkey and Azerbaijan have worked out this policy and are implementing it jointly.

At the same time, Azerbaijan does not hide its goal to capture Karabagh.

2.1. What conclusions can be drawn from this statement by Erdogan?

Clearly, Turkish policies have not changed regarding Karabakh in 15 plus years. Actually, they have not changed since WWI.

2.2. Why have the authorities and the political parties of Armenia not officially responded to this statement?

They either do not feel it is worth the time and effort or are not capable of articulating what should have been a clear foreign policy principle, or again, both.

2.3. How should the government of Armenia have responded to Erdogan's statement?

End "talks" with the Turkish government coordinated with proper diplomatic public relations. "Talks" can resume when Turkey changes its policy.

2.4. After this statement by Erdogan, should the authorities of Armenia continue the policy of rapprochement with Turkey?

No, see 2.3.

Theme 3: The invitation by the Government of the Republic of Armenia to Turkey to participate in the construction of the new nuclear power plant in Armenia

3.1. In the context of the questions discussed above, how do you assess the February 21, 2009 statement by the Armenian Prime Minister, effectively inviting Turkey to participate in the construction of the new nuclear power plant in Armenia?

Foolish and void of principles that are in the best interest of the Armenian people. Even if the statement is actually political posturing, it is ill conceived.

3.2. What will Armenia gain from Turkey's participation in the Armenian nuclear power plant construction?

Armenia would gain Turkish control over parts of its strategic infrastructure. In making such a statement, the Armenian government could have been sending signals to Russia that it has [perceived] options other than a strict strategic relationship with Russia.

3.3. What national security problems are likely to arise if Turkey does participate in the construction of the nuclear power plant in Armenia?

Clearly, Armenia would be at risk of Turkish blackmail. Further, both Turkey and Russia would battle over influence in Armenia, with Armenia not in control of a strategic element of its national survival.

3.4. Why did the Armenian Prime Minister, on the 12th of March (20 days after his first statement), change his position, stating that Turkey is expected to participate only financially, through=2 0the sale of some shares of the new nuclear power plant to Turkish companies?

The Armenian government was most likely embarrassed when the original position was exposed by thinking people.

3.5. Do you support the idea of selling shares of the new Armenian nuclear power plant to Turkish companies?

No, never.

Respondent: Technical Analyst MA, USA

Theme 1: Turkey's policies on the Armenian Genocide issue Since December 2007, the Ministry of Education of Turkey has been showing a film in Turkish schools, which conveys that historically, Armenians killed the Turkish people.20The film has already been seen by about 12 million Turkish students, including students in elementary grades. 600,000 copies of the film's DVD were distributed to Schools.

1.1. How do you assess this move by the government of Turkey?

This move indicates to me that the Turkish government has: (i) conceded that Genocide recognition will dominate its international political horizon for a sustained period and (ii) is concerned about what effect this might have internally, on the domestic population. It has identified the battle to come and is preparing to fight it, in this case by mobilising anti-Armenia/n sentiment.

The distribution of this propaganda strikes me as an attempt by Turkey to consolidate support for the denialist movement from within. The targeting of the younger generation is not coincidental: typically, this is the demographic that would be most likely to question the denial, and to join international calls for the recognition of the Genocide. If the younger generation is taught (or reminded) to hate Armenians, it will be less willing (or able) to make such a move.

I also believe that this move puts the lie to the so called "process of rapprochement" that is taking place between Turkey and Armenia at the moment. If Turkey was being genuine in this endeavor, one would not expect it to be inserting a DVD of this nature, encouraging animosity towards Armenia, into its school curriculum. The two positions are entirely inconsistent.

1.2. What objectives does Turkey pursue by this action?

In the short term, I believe Turkey is pursuing consolidation of Turkish public opinion on the Genocide. This is an important part of its overall denialist strategy. Turkey will spend a lot of time in the months to come denying the Genocide abroad, and it will be crucial to these efforts that the Turkish people speak with one voice, denying the Genocide at home.

In the long term, I believe Turkey still holds its historical view towards Armenia: as an inconvenience that must be destroyed. If this objective is to be pursued in the future, Turkey will need popular support from its own people. This sort of propaganda will help to ensure that, when the time comes, people will either support (or feel compelled to support) such an action.

1.3. What are the likely consequences of this action?

Turkey will be successful in both the aims I have identified above. Turks all over the worlds will become more aware of Armenia and Armenians in a negative light. Moderate Turks will feel less able to speak out in support of recognition or in support of Armenia at all.

If the British government can persuade the British public that a tin-pot dictator in Iraq is capable of killing us all within 45 minutes of deciding to do so, then the Turkish government will be able to mould Turkish public opinion as it sees fit: first t o continue believing that the Genocide is a fiction, and second to view Armenians with hatred and a vengeance.

1.4. Why is the government of Armenia staying silent about this Turkish initiative?

Perhaps it has missed what a strong point this would be if it were made to the international community! It is a very simple question: "If Turkey is being genuine in this 'process' you are pushing us to participate in, why is it encouraging its young generation to feel hatred and animosity towards us?"

It appears that the government of Armenia is not confident enough to assert itself on the world stage: even with a very strong point on this key issue, where Armenia is one of two main stakeholders involved. Imagine the fuss that the Israeli government would have made had this been an Iranian DVD about Israelis/Jews.

1.5. How should the Armenian authorities respond to this action?

Negotiations within the 'process' should be put on hold until the inconsistency is explained and rectified.

Theme 2: Turkey's stance on the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict

Officials in Armenia and Turkey talk about the development of Armenian-Turkish relations. At the same time, on February 19, 2009, Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan stated that: a) With regard to the Karabakh conflict, the positions and policies of Turkey and Azerbaijan are completely identical; b) Turkey and Azerbaijan have worked out this policy and are implementing it jointly.

At the same time, Azerbaijan does not hide its goal to capture Karabagh.

2.1. What conclusions can be drawn from this statement by Erdogan?

This can only be interpreted as a thinly veiled, obvious threat.

Azerbaijan's ultimate goal is to capture Karabagh. Erdogan's statement strongly suggests that Turkey agrees with this goal completely, has played a part in forming it, and will assist in achieving it.

2.2. Why have the authorities and the political parties of Armenia not officially responded to this statement?

For the same reasons as stated at 1.4, above: a lack of confidence on the world stage.

Also, fear of the consequences might play a part here. Armenia feels it might jeopardise the current process by 'making a fuss' (i.e. Turkey might be offended and pull out). This telegraphs just how weak the Government of Armenia considers its position to be.

By stark contrast, Turkey makes this sort of statement without fear of consequences. It is confident that Armenia will not react in any meaningful way. This telegraphs just how relatively strong Turkey considers its position to be.

Continued failure by Armenia to react will only encourage more of this sort of behaviour. Turkey has consistently demonstrated that when given an inch it will gladly take a mile.

2.3. How should the government of Armenia have responded to Erdogan's statement?

Armenia should have put negotiations on hold in response to this thinly veiled threat. Protest should have been lodged to the international community.

2.4. After this statement by Erdogan, should the authorities of Armenia continue the policy of rapprochement with Turkey?

Threats are not consistent with genuine rapprochement.

The Government of Armenia must consider this statement a threat to the security of Armenia: unless it sees the futures of Armenia and Karabagh as mutually exclusive. This is precisely the thinking that Turkey will aim to encourage.

Armenia should not continue with the policy in the face of threats aimed at Karabagh. Continuing regardless gives the impression that Armenia is willing to sacrifice the interests of Karabagh in order to appease Turkey. This sets a dangerous precedent for the future. Turkey might make any manner of demands over Karabagh in the future, threatening a break in relations should Armenian fail to comply. The government of Armenia must not allow a trend of appeasement to develop, particularly on the Karabagh issue.

Theme 3: The invitation by the Government of the Republic of Armenia to Turkey to participate in the construction of the new nuclear power plant in Armenia

3.1. In the context of the questions discussed above, how do you assess the February 21, 2009 statement by the Armenian Prime Minister, effectively inviting T urkey to participate in the construction of the new nuclear power plant in Armenia?

This was an incredibly foolish idea. If there was a book titled "100 things not to do with a neighbour that is programmed to destroy you" surely nuclear cooperation would feature prominently in the first chapter.

Given the real status of relations between the two countries, which is demonstrated not by the current "process" but by Turkey's real actions (both historical and recent as discussed above), it defies belief that Armenia would even consider a joint nuclear enterprise with Turkey on Armenian territory.

3.2. What will Armenia gain from Turkey's participation in the Armenian nuclear power plant construction?

The cost of the project will be shared and therefore the financial burden on Armenia will be reduced.

But above and beyond this Armenia will gain a new sword over its head.

3.3. What national security problems are likely to arise if Turkey does participate in the construction of the nuclear power plant in Armenia?

Fewer than 100 years ago Turkey attempted to wipe Armenians from the face of the earth. Since then it has showed no discernible shift in attitude towards Armenia. It has not taken any steps (such as those taken by Germany following the Holocaust) to build confidence in its motives towards Armenia.

It has not recognised what happened nor apologised for it. Instead, it

alleges fabrication and denies that the events ever took place. It continues to bully and demand concessions rom Armenia. So, in the absence of any indication to the contrary, one must assume that Turkey's attitude towards Armenia remains unchanged.

In the context of this unchanged attitude, inviting Turkey to take part in the construction of a nuclear reactor in Armenia is ludicrous. A nuclear reactor is analogous to a timebomb at the best of times. Allowing your enemy to take part in its construction and operation poses a massive added national security risk. Can we imagine Israel inviting Iran to participate in such a project?

3.4. Why did the Armenian Prime Minister, on the 12th of March (20 days after his first statement), change his position, stating that Turkey is expected to participate only financially, through the sale of some shares of the new nuclear power plant to Turkish companies?

I had understood that this change of position was due to objections from the Turkish side. Voices in Turkey had strongly opposed the idea of Turkey assisting in the development of Armenia. If this is correct, it only serves to illustrate the attitude of Turkey as a state towards Armenia.

3.5. Do you support the idea of selling shares of the new Armenian nuclear power plant to Turkish companies?

I do not think that Turkey or Turkish companies should have any say in how the reactor is constructed or operated .. Turkish companies holding shares would mean Turkish companies having access to sensitive information. This information would then be available to the Turkish government. This would mean Turkey acquiring knowledge, information and influence without even having to assist in construction.

Armenia-Turkey relations are nowhere near the stage where such information sharing might be considered safe. In fact, for all the reasons discussed in this survey, relations are the opposite of what they would need to be. There is no logical reason why Armenia should have any trust at all in Turkey's intentions.

Respondent: Lawyer London, UK 07 /04/2009

1.1. How do you assess this move by the government of Turkey?

Prepare his nation for any kind of fighting against the genocide recognition.

1.2. What objectives does Turkey pursue by this action?

Never accept genocide recognition not only on governmental level, but also on national.

1.3. What are the likely consequences of this action?

To prepare the Turkish nation for any type of war (informational or even real) with Armenia(ns).

1.4. Why is the government of Armenia staying silent about this Turkish initiative?

As usually...... They need more professionals in the government and people who really love Armenia, but not for the benefits of being governmental employee.

1.5. How should the Armenian authorities respond to this action?

Start aggressive Information Information war.

Theme 2: Turkey' s stance on the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict

Officials in Armenia and Turkey talk about the development of Armenian-Turkish relations. At the same time, on February 19, 2009, Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan stated that: a) With regard to the Karabakh conflict, the positions and policies of Turkey and Azerbaijan are completely identical; b) Turkey and Azerbaijan have worked out this policy and are implementing it jointly.

At the same time, Azerbaijan does not hide its goal to capture Karabagh.

2.1. What conclusions can be drawn from this statement by Erdogan?

We should finally recognize that Turkey and Azerbaijan can never have peacfull policy, or be "friendly" nation for Armenia.

2.2. Why have the authorities and the political parties of Armenia not officially responded to this statement?

I do not see any segregation between Political Parties and Government of Armenia.

2.3. How should the government of Armenia have responded to Erdogan's statement?

That the Armenian government has one strict position that Karabakh was and will be part of Armenia.

2.4. After this statement by Erdogan, should the authorities of Armenia continue the policy of rapprochement with Turkey?

No and should obviously show that Armenia can never trade the Karabakh and genocide issues.

Theme 3: The invitation by the Government of the Republic of Armenia to Turkey to participate in the construction of the new nuclear power plant in Armenia

3.1. In the context of the questions discussed above, how do you assess the February 21, 2009 statement by the Armenian Prime Minister, effectively inviting Turkey to participate in the construction of the new nuclear power plant in Armenia?

Non professional, not patriotic offer. Shame!

3.2. What will Armenia gain from Turkey's participation in the Armenian nuclear power plant construction?

Nothing! It's questionable yet, how "well" they might build it.

3.3. What national security problems are likely to arise if Turkey does participate in the construction of the nuclear power plant in Armenia?

Big negative issues. Nuclear Power station is "weapon" itself and it's same as give your gun to the person who is trying to kill you.

3.4. Why did the Armenian Prime Minister, on the 12th of March (20 days after his first statement), change his position, stating that Turkey is expected to participate only financially, through the sale of some shares of the new nuclear power plant to Turkish companies?

He should take some master classes "Basics of foreign policy".

3.5. Do you support the idea of selling shares of the new Armenian nuclear power plant to Turkish companies?

NEVER.

Respondent: Accountant California, USA 31/ 03/ 2009

Theme 1: Turkey's policies on the Armenian Genocide issue Since December 2007, the Ministry of Education of Turkey has been showing a film in Turkish schools, which conveys that historically, Armenians killed the Turkish people. The film has already been seen by about 12 million Turkish students, including students in elementary grades. 600,000 copies of the film's DVD were distributed to Schools.

1.1. How do you assess this move by the government of Turkey?

A sad, but typical and consistent, measure by the Turkish state to perpetuate the Genocide of the Armenians of 1915. First, ethnically cleanse the population, kill as many as possible, then Turkify the orphans and built a modern state on the bones of the dead, and then d eny. The last phase is to blame the victims.

1.2. What objectives does Turkey pursue by this ac tion?

Prepare the next generation to continue internal hatred of Armenians, possibly to justify continued aggression against Armenia (blockade, acts of war etc).

1.3. What are the likely consequences of this action?

Makes it more difficult to come to terms with the past and engender any trust in Armenians. Adds insult to injury. Increases conflict between the majority racist society and the minority (in danger of becoming insignificant) of those who wish to face the facts and deal truthfully with Turkish identity and past ghosts.

1.4. Why is the government of Armenia staying silent about this Turkish initiative?

Armenia's government is weak and under pressure from the West. As such it often caves in to Turkish pressure, overt or inferred.

1.5. How should the Armenian authorities respond to this action?

Armenia's government probably risks less than perceived by taking a more disciplined and vigilant stance. Turkey shouldn't be given carte blanche to rewrite history, and this is not only Armenia's responsibility to bring Turkey into the spotlight.

Theme 2: Turkey's stance on the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict

Officials in Armenia and Turkey talk about the development of Armenian-Turkish relations. At the same time, on February 19, 2009, Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan stated that: a) With regard to the Karabakh conflict, the positions and policies of Turkey and Azerbaijan are completely identical; b) Turkey and A zerbaijan have worked out this policy and are implementing it jointly.

At the same time, Azerbaijan does not hide its goal to capture Karabagh.

2.1. What conclusions can be drawn from this statement by Erdogan?

Turkey is a party to the conflict, and has no business posturing as a third party.

2.2. Why have the authorities and the political parties of Armenia not officially responded to this statement?

Unclear, and probably for different reasons. Additionally, see answer to 1.4 above.

2.3. How should the government of Armenia have responded to Erdogan's statement?

See answer to 1.5 above. Call a spade a spade, and reject all efforts by Turkey to "broker peace" in this conflict.

2.4. After this statement by Erdogan, should the authorities of Armenia continue the policy of rapprochement with Turkey?

No.

Theme 3: The invitation by the Government of the Republic of Armenia to Turkey to partiÂ¬ciÂ¬pate in the construction of the new nuclear power plant in Armenia

3.1. In the context of the questions discussed above, how do you assess the February 21, 2009 statement by the Armenian Prime Minister, effectively inviting Turkey to participate in the construction of the new nuclear power plant in Armenia?

Incomprehensible. Some Armenians seem to h ave learned little from their history.

3.2. What will Armenia gain from Turkey's participation in the Armenian nuclear power plant construction?

A growing Turkish headache.

3.3. What national security problems are likely to arise if Turkey does participate in the construction of the nuclear power plant in Armenia?

Too many to enumerate. I cannot understand any upside to this position.

3.4. Why did the Armenian Prime Minister, on the 12th of March (20 days after his first statement), change his position, stating that Turkey is expected to participate only financially, through the sale of some shares of the new nuclear power plant to Turkish companies?

The change in position indicates confusion on the issue by the PM.

3.5. Do you support the idea of selling shares of the new Armenian nuclear power plant to Turkish companies?

I am unfamiliar with the share-purchase terms, but despite any degree of "open-to-the-public" parameters, I think that the Armenian government should not be actively soliciting Turkish ownership of national security institutions on Armenian soil.

Respondent: Professor Yerevan
==================================================

Theme 1: Turkey's policies on the Armenian Genocide issue Since December 2007, the Ministry of Education of Turkey has been showing a film in Turkish schools, which conveys that historically, Armenians killed the Turkish people. The film has already been seen by about 12 million Turkish stud ents, including students in elementary grades. 600,000 copies of the film's DVD were distributed to Schools.

1.1. How do you assess this move by the government of Turkey?

Turkey's policies regarding Armenia or the Armenian nation ha s not changed and will not change in the future, anyone who thinks that it will change is living in Alice's wonderland, sadly our present government is one of those who are living in that wonderland.

1.2. What objectives does Turkey pursue by this action?

It's so obvious that Turkey has no intention what so ever to recognize the Armenian Genocide. It is brainwashing its population and thus making near impossible for anyone in Turkey to acknowledge their dark pages of history.

1.3. What are the likely consequences of this action?

More hate towards the Armenians and other ethnic minorities in Turkey like Jews, Assyrians, Kurds, Greeks and others.

1.4. Why is the government of Armenia staying silent about this Turkish initiative?

Sadly, we have a government who have NO national strategy in any field, they govern ad hoc and also the fact that this government is trying to please US and EU in order to stay in power after the famous election fiasco, having said this, it doesn't mean that a government under the opposition with LTP as its leader will be any better, in fact it will be worse, so sadly this is the lesser of the two evils.

1.5. How should the Armenian author ities respond to this action?

Any Armenian government which has Armenian national interest at heart should alter course and be more robust in its approaches on all fronts, they should be more active on all international forums wi th their ambassadors being proactive rather than be paid up tourists at the expense of the Armenian tax payer in the countries they are residing as ambassadors..

Theme 2: Turkey's stance on the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict

Officials in Armenia and Turkey talk about the development of Armenian-Turkish relations. At the same time, on February 19, 2009, Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan stated that: a) With regard to the Karabakh conflict, the positions and policies of Turkey and Azerbaijan is completely identical; b) Turkey and Azerbaijan have worked out this policy and are implementing it jointly.

At the same time, Azerbaijan does not hide its goal to capture Karabagh.

2.1. What conclusions can be drawn from this statement by Erdogan?

Let our government learn from its mistakes from Erdogan's statement. If they have any sense they should allow only NKR government to negotiate with Azerbaijan, as they are the only body which has the right to do so. As far as giving any districts back to the Azeri's the answer is NO and NEVER, any government which agrees to do so will be viewed as TRAITORS and should be dealt with accordingly.

2.2. Why have the authoritie s and the political parties of Armenia not officially responded to this statement?

It seems they are all afraid of their own shadows, or have no policies to deal with such harmful statements.

2.3. How should the government of Armenia have responded to Erdogan's statement?

Robustly, the government should have made known to the Erdogans of this world where we stand.

2.4. After this statement by Erdogan, should the authorities of Armenia continue the policy of rapprochement with Turkey?

Is there anything left for rapprochement?

Theme 3: The invitation by the Government of the Republic of Armenia to Turkey to participate in the construction of the new nuclear power plant in Armenia

3.1. In the context of the questions discussed above, how do you assess the February 21, 2009 statement by the Armenian Prime Minister, effectively inviting Turkey to participate in the construction of the new nuclear power plant in Armenia?

The most stupid and irresponsible statement I have ever heard.

3.2. What will Armenia gain from Turkey's participation in the Armenian nuclear power plant construction?

Armenia will only loose, as there is nothing to gain from this irresponsible action.

3.3. What national security problems are likely to arise if Turkey does participate in the construction of the nuclear power plant in Armenia?

It will be a nightmare for Armenia if Turkey ever was allowed to have any say or allowed to participate in the project.

3.4. Why did the Armenian Prime Minister, on the 12th of March (20 days after his first statement), change his position, s tating that Turkey is expected to participate only financially, through the sale of some shares of the new nuclear power plant to Turkish companies?

Pressure from the Armenian public, however even his second statement is nothing but stupid.

3.5. Do you support the idea of selling shares of the new Armenian nuclear power plant to Turkish companies?

Never.

Respondent: UK 28/03/2009

Theme 1: Turkey's policies on the Armenian Genocide issue Since December 2007, the Ministry of Education of Turkey has been showing a film in Turkish schools, which conveys that historically, Armenians killed the Turkish people. The film has already been seen by about 12 million Turkish students, including students in elementary grades. 600,000 copies of the film's DVD were distributed to Schools.

1.1. How do you assess this move by the government of Turkey?

I see NO inconsistencies, or tangible difference in what has now been almost two centuries old policy of removing one last barrier, to reunification of Turkic people, from Japan to Europe pan Turkism is nothing new for various flavoured Turkish governments. This move is to refresh and=2 0fortify the propaganda that Armenians are the enemy and should be eliminated as soon as possible. Every one knows if you want a dirty job done you must either pay well or make it sound20for the good of nation. It is easier to call upon someone to remain quiet or participate in a war if the war is seen as removing an enemy of Turkey. Unlike what our government is doing in every possible opportunity of presenting our two hundred years old sworn enemy as neighbours to our east who we should let bygones be bygones for the sake of cheap goods and services.

1.2. What objectives does Turkey pursue by this action?

Teaching the propaganda "Blood thirsty Armenians" to the new internet aware generation of Turks who may have inadvertently fallen into trap, intended for the gullible Armenians "apology for the genocide website" probably orchestrated or at least funded by the Turkish security services, I believe.

1.3. What are the likely consequences of this action?

Keeping up the good work, of a good government, attempting to reach the goal set for them nearly two hundred years ago, no expenses spared, in the midst of world wide financial crises they can always find good few million, from somewhere, it is money well spent. (By the way question gives the impression that only Turkish students have seen the material; the truth is despite objections from minority community leaders, non Turk, amongst the m Armenian students were forced to see the material too).

1.4. Why is the government of Armenia staying silent about this Turkish initiative?

Because they do not know how to react, they are not thinking of the state of Armenia, but think of their bank balance and that of their pay masters and friends, that are helping them stay in power. They are overcome by the sense of greed and indifference. A government mostly made up from novo reach ill, if not at all educated individuals who have gained power through corruption and bribe. Like the rabbit stuck in the headlight they have been surprised yet again. Because they do not have a strategic plan in place of how to deal with an enemy who at first opportune moment will destroy you to reach its strategic long term survival plan. Our government has forgotten to read "non Soviet" version of our history, and believes in its childish idea of "open borders without preconditions".

1.5. How should the Armenian authorities respond to this action?

Try to read some of our recent and not too irrelevant history, to see Turkey as what it is - a state hell bent on destruction of this peaceful ancient people, one-way or another.

They need to start thinking as government for the people of Armenia, not like the manager of uncle Bernie's little corner shop or Hotel, that will do any thing, provide any service to appease the neighbours stay fr om the east or west most comfortable. They need to wake up and see these neighbours do not want the bygones be bygones; they are not intended to be gests they want to become the=2 0landlords!

Finally they should at least respond like with like, immediately remove, questionable people in charge of our mass media, and start using them as tools to educate our people that it is time again to get of our knees and forget about our hunger and sense of injustice at the hands of our own, and be ready to face the future that awaits all people who unite for the sake of all, a bright and prosperous future awaits for all of those Armenians who will participate in reaching the goal of secure, peaceful, and just state of Armenia, Home for over ten million of us scattered round the world.

Theme 2: Turkey's stance on the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict

Officials in Armenia and Turkey talk about the development of Armenian-Turkish relations. At the same time, on February 19, 2009, Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan stated that: a) With regard to the Karabakh conflict, the positions and policies of Turkey and Azerbaijan are completely identical; b) Turkey and Azerbaijan have worked out this policy and are implementing it jointly.

At the same time, Azerbaijan does not hide its goal to capture Karabagh.

2.1. What conclusions can be drawn from this statement by Erdogan?

That as far as pan Turkism is concerned all is well and relationship building exercise is only a front for the rest of the world, and what Turkey does can not and will not endanger the interests of Azerbaijan,=2 0 as they are one and the same as Turkey's interest and long term goal. In fact I would hazard a guess that Azerbaijan and Turkey have already decided how they would divide Armenia between them! Not just "capture Karabagh".

2.2. Why have the authorities and the political parties of Armenia not officially responded to this statement?

Because they do not have anything to say, they are like the rabbit caught in the headlights, how can a band of uneducated greed driven village corner-shop keepers and their family from back home, be capable of concentrating on that and watching his back or the fear of loosing his undeserved but well bribed for position in government! He probably does not even care or understand what is being said or done.

2.3. How should the government of Armenia have responded to Erdogan's statement?

The Government should have broken off all talks until such time as Erdogan clarified his position, and announced it loud and clear to the rest of the world. Instead of remaining silent like the rabbit in the headlight, fixed to the spot ready for the kill.

2.4. After this statement by Erdogan, should the authorities of Armenia continue the policy of rapprochement with Turkey?

NO, rapprochemen t, there should not have been any until such time that Turkey stops acting like and talking like an enemy. Simply you do not make friends with an Enemy while he is hell bent on destroying you and does not mind telling the world that he has been planning for this goal, with your other neighbour!

Theme 3: The invitation by the Government of the Republic of Armenia to Turkey to participate in the construction of the new nuclear power plant in Armenia

3.1. In the context of the questions discussed above, how do you assess the February 21, 2009 statement by the Armenian Prime Minister, effectively inviting Turkey to participate in the construction of the new nuclear power plant in Armenia?

Flabbergasted, dumbfounded, stupefied at the stupidity of such feeble attempt to get Turkey to agree with the plans for building the plant in the first place, they have done this amongst themselves for so long and it has worked, poor man thought if might work if he offers to spread the loot a bit thinly to will make all the thefts happy, after all that approach works very well in everyday government negotiations!

3.2. What will Armenia gain from Turkey's participation in the Armenian nuclear power plant construction?

Armenia will gain Nothing, Absolutely NOTHING.

3.3. What national security problems are likely to arise if Turkey does participate in the construction of the nuclear power plant in Armenia?

It is an incredible question! How on earth can you have any thing but Nation security problems, when you invite an enemy and he accepts to take part in constructing, managing even part owning your nuclear power plant!? Simply WOW

3.4. Why did the Armenian Prime Minister, on the 12th of March (20 days after his first statement), change his position, stating that Turkey is expected to participate only financially, through the sale of some shares of the new nuclear power plant to Turkish companies?

Because someone reminded him of that age old problem, you can not hope to share the loot with the enemy; He is after having all of it for himself sooner or later. In any case those sorts of offers only work to appease members of the government his coalition members!

3.5. Do you support the idea of selling shares of the new Armenian nuclear power plant to Turkish companies?

NO. Otherwise it would have been like selling bullets to the guy holding a gun to your head!

Respondent: IT Systems Engineer Republic of Armenia 23/03/2009

Theme 1: Turkey's policies on the Armenian Genocide issue Since December 2007, the Ministry of Education of Turkey has been showing a film in Turkish schools, which conveys that historically, Armenians killed the Turkish people. The film has already been seen by about 12 million Turkish students, including students in elementary grades. 600,000 copies of the film's DVD were distributed to Schools.

1.1. How do you assess this move by the government of Turkey?

Falsifying history and preparing a future generation of Turks ignorant of the truth and full of hatred and anger against Armenia and Armenians.

1.2. What objectives does Turkey pursue by this action?

To continue its denial of its c rimes committed during the beginning of the last century 1.3. What are the likely consequences of this action?=0 D In the very near future, the whole Turkish population (the future adults who are school aged children now) will believe that the Armenians massacered them instead of the other way around and then it will be even more difficult to get Turkey to accept its crimes.

1.4. Why is the government of Armenia staying silent about this Turkish initiative?

Due to the lack of preparedness of the Armenian government to deal with such matters. The Armenian government does not have an established policy to deal with such issues and is simply overwhelmed.

1.5. How should the Armenian authorities respond to this action?

By doing the following: 1. A counter propaganda refuting all the denialist propaganda of the Turkish government and address it to the Turkish people.

2. Initiating a similar campaign in Armenian schools to teach the Armenian children the TRUTH.

3. Protesting to foreign governments to put pressure on Turkey to stop this false propaganda and history falsification.

Theme 2: Turkey's stance on the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict

Officials in Armenia and Turkey talk about the development of Armenian-Turkish relations. At the same time, on February 19, 2009, Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan stated that: a) With regard to the Karabakh conflict, the positions and policies of Turkey and Azerbaijan are completely=2 0identical; b) Turkey and Azerbaijan have worked out this policy and are implementing it jointly.

=2 0 At the same time, Azerbaijan does not hide its goal to capture Karabagh.

2.1. What conclusions can be drawn from this statement by Erdogan?

That Turkey is 100% on Azerbaijan's side and should not be trusted at all. This implies that Turkey should not play any role in mediation efforts around the NK conflict or any other crucial issue to Armenia.

2.2. Why have the authorities and the political parties of Armenia not officially responded to this statement?

Again because of a lack of an organised effort on the part of the government. This shows that the present government has no long term plan or established policy to deal with such matters. The government is simply overwhelmed by events.

2.3. How should the government of Armenia have responded to Erdogan's statement?

By being firm and going on an international media campaign protesting the bias of Turkey in this conflict and demanding Turkey's neutrality in this conflict.

2.4. After this statement by Erdogan, should the authorities of Armenia continue the policy of rapprochement with Turkey?

NO NEVER, unless publicly Turkey reverses its position.

Theme 3: The invitation by the Government of the Republic of Armenia to Turkey to participate in the construction of the new nuclear power plant in Armenia

3.1. In the context o f the questions discussed above, how do you assess the February 21, 2009 statement by the Armenian Prime Minister, effectively inviting Turkey to participate in the construction of the new nuclear power plant in Armenia?

I was not aware of this. But if this is the case, then it is pure stupidity on the part of the Armenian government.

3.2. What will Armenia gain from Turkey's participation in the Armenian nuclear power plant construction?

Nothing to gain and everything to lose.

3.3. What national security problems are likely to arise if Turkey does participate in the construction of the nuclear power plant in Armenia?

The operation and maintenance and the reliability of an extremely important national resource will be in the hands of Turkey who can literally pull the plug on Armenia and chock Armenia to death any time they want.

3.4. Why did the Armenian Prime Minister, on the 12th of March (20 days after his first statement), change his position, stating that Turkey is expected to participate only financially, through the sale of some shares of the new nuclear power plant to Turkish companies?

I assume due to the outcry of the Armenian public and media pressure over the issue.

3.5. Do you support the idea of selling shares of the new Armenian nuclear power plant to Turkish companies?

Of course NOT.
=========================================================
Theme 1: Turkey's policies on the Armenian Genocide issue Since December 2007, the Ministry of Education of Turkey has been showing a film in Turkish schools, which conveys that historically, Armenians killed the Turkish people. The film has already been seen by about 12 million Turkish stud ents, including students in elementary grades. 600,000 copies of the film's DVD were distributed to Schools.

1.1. How do you assess this move by the government of Turkey?

Nothing new here- my parents are from Turkey so I know how they've had this consistent pattern for decades.

1.2. What objectives does Turkey pursue by this action?

Continued hostilities towards Armenian people and its own history.

1.3. What are the likely consequences of this action?

None.

1.4. Why is the government of Armenia staying silent about this Turkish initiative?

Russia hasn't given them permission to speak.

1.5. How should the Armenian authorities respond to this action?

Condemn and ridicule it to third parties, since Turkey has no interest in direct dialogue.

Theme 2: Turkey's stance on the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict

Officials in Armenia and Turkey talk about the development of Armenian-Turkish relations. At the same time, on February 19, 2009, Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan stated that: a) With regard to the Karabakh conflict, the positions and policies of Turkey and Azerbaijan are completely identical; b) Turkey and Azerbaijan have worked out this policy and are implementing it jointly.

At the same time, Azerbaijan does not hide its goal to capture Karabagh.

2.1. What conclusions can be drawn from this statement by Erdogan?

Turkey is at war with Armenia over Artsakh.

2.2. Why have t he authorities and the political parties of Armenia not officially responded to this statement?

They have no permission from Russia.

2.3. How should the government of Armenia have responded to Erdogan's statement?

Yes, they should respond to declarations of war and hostilities.

2.4. After this statement by Erdogan, should the authorities of Armenia continue the policy of rapprochement with Turkey?

No.

Theme 3: The invitation by the Government of the Republic of Armenia to Turkey to participate in the construction of the new nuclear power plant in Armenia

3.1. In the context of the questions discussed above, how do you assess the February 21, 2009 statement by the Armenian Prime Minister, effectively inviting Turkey to participate in the construction of the new nuclear power plant in Armenia?

They are idiots. Turkey is hostile to Armenia on many levels yet they pander to Turkish interests like the lapdogs the Turks wish them to be.

3.2. What will Armenia gain from Turkey's participation in the Armenian nuclear power plant construction?

It will gain a headache- The Turks will only joint-venture if they will gain more than Armenia/Armenians.

3.3. What national security problems are likely to arise if Turkey does participate in the construction of the nuclear power plant in Armenia?

Political leverage given to Turkey and military information given to Azerbaijan.

=0 D

3.4. Why did the Armenian Prime Minister, on the 12th of March (20 days after his first statement), change his position, stating that Turkey is expected to participate only financially, through the sale of some shares of the new nuclear power plant to Turkish companies?

Russia changed its mind.

3.5. Do you support the idea of selling shares of the new Armenian nuclear power plant to Turkish companies?

NO. We do not need to. There're many other things we need to do first.

RESPONDENT: Engineer California 02/ 04/ 2009

Armen Ayvazyan, PhD
Director, "Ararat" Center for Strategic Research
Yerevan, Armenia
www.ararat-center.org

Download formatted pdf version of the following contents HERE

Unformatted Version:
The Ararat Center for Strategic Research is running a series of interviews about the latest interstate developments between Armenia and Turkey. The list of participants includes representatives of the general public, as well as state officials, politicians, public figures and experts.
Anyone willing to participate in the survey can answer the questions at the following address: info@ararat-center.org . In your response, please
indicate your name, age (optional), profession and place of residence.
The survey covers three themes, each based on a specific example: 1. Turkey’s policies on the Armenian Genocide issue. 2. Turkey’s stance on the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. 3. The invitation by the Government of the Republic of Armenia to Turkey to participate in the construction of the new nuclear power plant in Armenia.
Theme 1: Turkey’s policies on the Armenian Genocide issue
Since December 2007, the Ministry of Education of Turkey has been showing a film in Turkish schools, which conveys that historically, Armenians killed the Turkish people. The film has already been seen by about 12 million Turkish students, including students in elementary grades. 600,000 copies of the film’s DVD were distributed to Schools.
1.1. How do you assess this move by the government of Turkey? The Turkish government historically to present day has been engaged in defrauding its Turkish population of the truth about its past, who they are, where they come from and how they got where they got. The massive fraud is evident everywhere in Turkey, in their museums, historical cites and of course educational establishments. They have defrauded their own people, let alone the world. Of course, the world knows better, but the Turkish population does not, simply put, could care less....It is up to the new generation of Turkish people to demand and discover and correct the fraud that has been perpetrated on them by their own government and punish all those that are simply put intellectual criminals.
1.2. What objectives does Turkey pursue by this action? The objective is to continue the fascist policies within Turkey and in the immediate area of Anatolia and Caucuses and beyond. The Turkish government has no respect for international norms of human decency in providing quality of life which includes honest and truthful and free educational system for the Turkish masses and beyond. Clearly, they wish to swallow the illegally and fraudulently stolen lands and wealth of the Armenians and others who have historically lived in the area.
1.3. What are the likely consequences of this action? The time will come that the truth will be revealed, the Turkish masses will understand and demand answers and they will correct themselves, after all they are humans, albeit, their hands and minds are tied and eyes blindfolded.
1.4. Why is the government of Armenia staying silent about this Turkish initiative?
The Government of Armenia is responsible for repressing its own populace; denying freedom of speach, freedom of association, freedom to chose a government of its choice. They are criminals as well.
1.5. How should the Armenian authorities respond to this action? The Armenian Government should first resign, and allow the truthful and honest elected representatives take action, and that action should be to pursue a policy of truthful representation of history to the world at large. The truth will prevail over fraud albeit in due time...

Theme 2: Turkey’s stance on the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict
Officials in Armenia and Turkey talk about the development of Armenian-Turkish relations. At the same time, on February 19, 2009, Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan stated that:
a) With regard to the Karabakh conflict, the positions and policies of Turkey and Azerbaijan are completely identical; b) Turkey and Azerbaijan have worked out this policy and are implementing it jointly. At the same time, Azerbaijan does not hide its goal to capture Karabagh.
22.1. What conclusions can be drawn from this statement by Erdogan? Erdogan and Aliev are theives, liers and they use fraud to mobilize masses against Armenians. They know very well that Kharabagh is and at all times was an Armenian habitat and they deserve self governmenance in accordance to International Law, just like all other countries and nations.
2.2. Why have the authorities and the political parties of Armenia not officially responded to this statement?
Because the Armenian authorities are frauds themselves and they are afraid they will lose their power, money. The Authorities are not intellectually and politically equipped to handle international issues such as freedoms of masses to self determination, self rule, free elections, freedom to associate, etc.
2.3. How should the government of Armenia have responded to Erdogan’s statement?
The Armenian government should have offered/challenged Erdogan, Aliev to step down as they would step down, and allow the people to elect representatives who speak for the masses in terms of peace, cooperation, integrity in education, integrity in human relations...
2.4. After this statement by Erdogan, should the authorities of Armenia continue the policy of rapprochement with Turkey?
Erdogan, Aliev and Sarkissian deserve each other, I fear for the people who will lose their lives in fraudulent wars instigated by these criminals.
Theme 3: The invitation by the Government of the Republic of Armenia to Turkey to participate in the construction of the new nuclear power plant in Armenia
3.1. In the context of the questions discussed above, how do you assess the February 21, 2009 statement by the Armenian Prime Minister, effectively inviting Turkey to participate in the construction of the new nuclear power plant in Armenia?
Again, the prime minister should resign from his post.I am not sure the people of Armenia or the people of the region would want to see nuclear power plants on their lands, they would prefer trading natural resources and get their energy through trade and natural resources. No free nation wants to poison their lands with neuks...
33.2. What will Armenia gain from Turkey’s participation in the Armenian nuclear power plant construction?
Facist cooperation in oppressing the people more.
3.3. What national security problems are likely to arise if Turkey does participate in the construction of the nuclear power plant in Armenia?
Armenians will lose more of their “freedoms”.
th3.4. Why did the Armenian Prime Minister, on the 12 of March (20 days after his first statement), change his position, stating that Turkey is expected to participate only financially, through the sale of some shares of the new nuclear power plant to Turkish companies?
Again, the Armenian Prime minister is interested in the Turkish money, not realizing that he is selling the Armenian people’s freedoms... and rights to clean air and land.
3.5. Do you support the idea of selling shares of the new Armenian nuclear power plant to Turkish companies?
Never.

Respondent: Lawyer Los Angeles, California, USA 31/ 03/ 2009

Theme 1: Turkey’s policies on the Armenian Genocide issue
Since December 2007, the Ministry of Education of Turkey has been showing a film in Turkish schools, which conveys that historically, Armenians killed the Turkish people. The film has already been seen by about 12 million Turkish students, including students in elementary grades. 600,000 copies of the film’s DVD were distributed to Schools.
1.1. How do you assess this move by the government of Turkey? I have a negative attitude

1.2. What objectives does Turkey pursue by this action? To achieve wrong perception among Turkish students about genocide.
11.3. What are the likely consequences of this action? Hatred towards Armenians and non-recognition of genocide by future Turkish generations as well.
1.4. Why is the government of Armenia staying silent about this Turkish initiative?
Economic reasons.
1.5. How should the Armenian authorities respond to this action? No idea.

Theme 2: Turkey’s stance on the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict
Officials in Armenia and Turkey talk about the development of Armenian-Turkish relations. At the same time, on February 19, 2009, Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan stated that:
a) With regard to the Karabakh conflict, the positions and policies of Turkey and Azerbaijan are completely identical; b) Turkey and Azerbaijan have worked out this policy and are implementing it jointly. At the same time, Azerbaijan does not hide its goal to capture Karabagh.
2.1. What conclusions can be drawn from this statement by Erdogan? They do not want to lose Azerbaijan as an ally, and they want to please both
sides.
2.2. Why have the authorities and the political parties of Armenia not officially responded to this statement?
Not taking the statement seriously, as usual.
2.3. How should the government of Armenia have responded to Erdogan’s statement?
No idea.
2.4. After this statement by Erdogan, should the authorities of Armenia continue the policy of rapprochement with Turkey?
No.
2 Theme 3: The invitation by the Government of the Republic of Armenia to Turkey to participate in the construction of the new nuclear power plant in Armenia
3.1. In the context of the questions discussed above, how do you assess the February 21, 2009 statement by the Armenian Prime Minister, effectively inviting Turkey to participate in the construction of the new nuclear power plant in Armenia?
Negative.
3.2. What will Armenia gain from Turkey’s participation in the Armenian nuclear power plant construction?
“New investments”.
3.3. What national security problems are likely to arise if Turkey does participate in the construction of the nuclear power plant in Armenia?
DK.
th3.4. Why did the Armenian Prime Minister, on the 12 of March (20 days after his first statement), change his position, stating that Turkey is expected to participate only financially, through the sale of some shares of the new nuclear power plant to Turkish companies?
Have not heard.
3.5. Do you support the idea of selling shares of the new Armenian nuclear power plant to Turkish companies?
Negative.

Respondent: Researcher Yerevan, Armenia 23/03/2009

Theme 1: Turkey’s policies on the Armenian Genocide issue
Since December 2007, the Ministry of Education of Turkey has been showing a film in Turkish schools, which conveys that historically, Armenians killed the Turkish people. The film has already been seen by about 12 million Turkish students, including students in elementary grades. 600,000 copies of the film’s DVD were distributed to Schools.
1.1. How do you assess this move by the government of Turkey? I find this policy unacceptable on so many fronts, historically, ethically and morally, to name a few.

11.2. What objectives does Turkey pursue by this action? Clearly they are looking to falsely educate an entire generation of minds and by
so doing undermine the historic realities of the Armenian Genocide perpetuated by Turkish authorities.
1.3. What are the likely consequences of this action? How can any false truth bear any positive consequences? Rewriting history to serve one’s own purposes? Why stop at one historic event? Let us set a precident and rewrite all events as we so desire. Absolutes do exist.
1.4. Why is the government of Armenia staying silent about this Turkish initiative?
Because she is afraid she will be bullied politically if she becomes too vocal on such matters. Perhaps funding, securities, etc. will be withheld if opposition is articulated.
1.5. How should the Armenian authorities respond to this action? Demand accountability for historic accuracy by allies, historians, and political
giants.

Theme 2: Turkey’s stance on the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict
Officials in Armenia and Turkey talk about the development of Armenian-Turkish relations. At the same time, on February 19, 2009, Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan stated that:
a) With regard to the Karabakh conflict, the positions and policies of Turkey and Azerbaijan are completely identical; b) Turkey and Azerbaijan have worked out this policy and are implementing it jointly. At the same time, Azerbaijan does not hide its goal to capture Karabagh.
2.1. What conclusions can be drawn from this statement by Erdogan? He has no intentions of peacefully resolving conflict between Armenia & Azerbajian.
2.2. Why have the authorities and the political parties of Armenia not officially responded to this statement?
2Fear
2.3. How should the government of Armenia have responded to Erdogan’s statement?
Identified Erdogan’s statement as a direct intent to engage war on Armenian peace efforts.
2.4. After this statement by Erdogan, should the authorities of Armenia continue the policy of rapprochement with Turkey?
Theme 3: The invitation by the Government of the Republic of Armenia to Turkey to participate in the construction of the new nuclear power plant in Armenia
3.1. In the context of the questions discussed above, how do you assess the February 21, 2009 statement by the Armenian Prime Minister, effectively inviting Turkey to participate in the construction of the new nuclear power plant in Armenia?
I see this as a foolish way to help your “enemy” to gain a stronghold over you.
3.2. What will Armenia gain from Turkey’s participation in the Armenian nuclear power plant construction?
The appearance of collaboration.
3.3. What national security problems are likely to arise if Turkey does participate in the construction of the nuclear power plant in Armenia?
Armenia’s national security of course would be compromised if Turkey or any other country, for that matter, gained access to internal fuctions of the country. Turkey simply has more incentive, given the above listed issues, to extract classified Armenian information.
3th3.4. Why did the Armenian Prime Minister, on the 12 of March (20 days after his first statement), change his position, stating that Turkey is expected to participate only financially, through the sale of some shares of the new nuclear power plant to Turkish companies?
Pressure from Armenians who will not tolerate this type of compromise to Armenian national security.
3.5. Do you support the idea of selling shares of the new Armenian nuclear power plant to Turkish companies?
No, again, any foothold by a country who clearly is trying to undermine the historical and political significance of Armenia should be viewed as a threat, not be allowed to gain access, limited, financial or otherwise, to Armenian affairs.

Respondent: Homemaker Brookfield, CT, USA 02/ 04/ 2009

Theme 1: Turkey’s policies on the Armenian Genocide issue
Since December 2007, the Ministry of Education of Turkey has been showing a film in Turkish schools, which conveys that historically, Armenians killed the Turkish people. The film has already been seen by about 12 million Turkish students, including students in elementary grades. 600,000 copies of the film’s DVD were distributed to Schools.
1.1. How do you assess this move by the government of Turkey? I have seen the DVD. It is extremely anti-Armenian. I believe the move was a Turkish ultra-nationalist reaction to “overtures” being planned by the AKA party towards Armenia.

11.2. What objectives does Turkey pursue by this action? To reinforce the false ethos laying at base of the Turkish socialization process.
1.3. What are the likely consequences of this action? Continued fascist indoctrination of Turkish school children.
1.4. Why is the government of Armenia staying silent about this Turkish initiative?
Either the Armenian government feels it is not worth expending any effort in reacting to the continued anti-Armenian currents running through Turkish society, or, they haven’t thought about it well enough to architect a response, or most likely both.
1.5. How should the Armenian authorities respond to this action? The Armenian government should have intelligence studies on the Turkish socialization process. Based on those studies and knowing the interests of the Armenian people, the government should have generated a response exposing this false, anti-Armenian indoctrination of young people. This response should have been made to international bodies with the intelligent use of international press and human right groups. This is a short answer to an endemic issue.

Theme 2: Turkey’s stance on the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict
Officials in Armenia and Turkey talk about the development of Armenian-Turkish relations. At the same time, on February 19, 2009, Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan stated that:
a) With regard to the Karabakh conflict, the positions and policies of Turkey and Azerbaijan are completely identical; b) Turkey and Azerbaijan have worked out this policy and are implementing it jointly. At the same time, Azerbaijan does not hide its goal to capture Karabagh.
2.1. What conclusions can be drawn from this statement by Erdogan? Clearly, Turkish policies have not changed regarding Karabakh in 15 plus years.
Actually, they have not changed since WWI.
22.2. Why have the authorities and the political parties of Armenia not officially responded to this statement?
They either do not feel it is worth the time and effort or are not capable of articulating what should have been a clear foreign policy principle, or again, both.
2.3. How should the government of Armenia have responded to Erdogan’s statement?
End “talks” with the Turkish government coordinated with proper diplomatic public relations. “Talks” can resume when Turkey changes its policy.
2.4. After this statement by Erdogan, should the authorities of Armenia continue the policy of rapprochement with Turkey?
No, see 2.3.
Theme 3: The invitation by the Government of the Republic of Armenia to Turkey to participate in the construction of the new nuclear power plant in Armenia
3.1. In the context of the questions discussed above, how do you assess the February 21, 2009 statement by the Armenian Prime Minister, effectively inviting Turkey to participate in the construction of the new nuclear power plant in Armenia?
Foolish and void of principles that are in the best interest of the Armenian people. Even if the statement is actually political posturing, it is ill conceived.
3.2. What will Armenia gain from Turkey’s participation in the Armenian nuclear power plant construction?
Armenia would gain Turkish control over parts of its strategic infrastructure. In making such a statement, the Armenian government could have been sending signals to Russia that it has [perceived] options other than a strict strategic relationship with Russia.
33.3. What national security problems are likely to arise if Turkey does participate in the construction of the nuclear power plant in Armenia?
Clearly, Armenia would be at risk of Turkish blackmail. Further, both Turkey and Russia would battle over influence in Armenia, with Armenia not in control of a strategic element of its national survival.
3.4. Why did the Armenian Prime Minister, on the 12th of March (20 days after his first statement), change his position, stating that Turkey is expected to participate only financially, through the sale of some shares of the new nuclear power plant to Turkish companies?
The Armenian government was most likely embarrassed when the original position was exposed by thinking people.
3.5. Do you support the idea of selling shares of the new Armenian nuclear power plant to Turkish companies?
No, never.

Respondent: System Architect / Technical Intelligence Analyst MA, USA

Theme 1: Turkey’s policies on the Armenian Genocide issue
Since December 2007, the Ministry of Education of Turkey has been showing a film in Turkish schools, which conveys that historically, Armenians killed the Turkish people. The film has already been seen by about 12 million Turkish students, including students in elementary grades. 600,000 copies of the film’s DVD were distributed to Schools.
1.1. How do you assess this move by the government of Turkey? It’s despicable, a sign of a nation that has not change from its barbaric past.

1.2. What objectives does Turkey pursue by this action? Further brainwashing of its people.
11.3. What are the likely consequences of this action? More brainwashed Turks.
1.4. Why is the government of Armenia staying silent about this Turkish initiative?
They are too weak to respond.
1.5. How should the Armenian authorities respond to this action? The foreign ministry must make an issue out of this publicly.

Theme 2: Turkey’s stance on the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict
Officials in Armenia and Turkey talk about the development of Armenian-Turkish relations. At the same time, on February 19, 2009, Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan stated that:
a) With regard to the Karabakh conflict, the positions and policies of Turkey and Azerbaijan are completely identical; b) Turkey and Azerbaijan have worked out this policy and are implementing it jointly. At the same time, Azerbaijan does not hide its goal to capture Karabagh.
2.1. What conclusions can be drawn from this statement by Erdogan? As long as Turkey is not in the Minks group and does not have a direct say over the resolution of the Karabagh conflict, i don’t care what Erdogan says.
2.2. Why have the authorities and the political parties of Armenia not officially responded to this statement?
Maybe they feel it makes no difference what Erdogan says, he’s known to be a blabbermouth.
2.3. How should the government of Armenia have responded to Erdogan’s statement?
If Turkey is going to use the Karabagh issue as a precondition for normalization of relations with Armenia, then Armenia should clearly make a loud public statement about this.
22.4. After this statement by Erdogan, should the authorities of Armenia continue the policy of rapprochement with Turkey?
If that statement is indeed a precondition for Turkey’s normalization of relations with Armenia, then yes indeed.
Theme 3: The invitation by the Government of the Republic of Armenia to Turkey to participate in the construction of the new nuclear power plant in Armenia
3.1. In the context of the questions discussed above, how do you assess the February 21, 2009 statement by the Armenian Prime Minister, effectively inviting Turkey to participate in the construction of the new nuclear power plant in Armenia?
Prime Minister Tigran Sargissian has confused or seems to have no sense of the difference between notions of liberal free markets and national security. Market Economy in every country has its restrictions due to national security issues and specially in a country like Armenia, protecting its security far outweights attempts to improve its economy with investments in energy by threatening countries.
3.2. What will Armenia gain from Turkey’s participation in the Armenian nuclear power plant construction?
Nothing, it will lose a part of its national security and be dependent on a nation that is a bully to Armenia.
3.3. What national security problems are likely to arise if Turkey does participate in the construction of the nuclear power plant in Armenia?
It will be another means for Turkey to hold Armenia hostage for demands of genocide recognition and just retribution of plundered Armenian land and property.
th3.4. Why did the Armenian Prime Minister, on the 12 of March (20 days after his first statement), change his position, stating that Turkey is expected to participate only financially, through the sale of some shares of the new nuclear power plant to Turkish companies?
I have no idea if Tigran Sargissian is thinking at all when he discusses Turkey along with investments in Armenia. Perhaps he could first explain why he was
3lying about manipulating to keep the Dram artificially strong for many years and now all of the sudden declaring that the “Dram is market based”. Just who was he benefiting by artificially keeping the dram strong?
3.5. Do you support the idea of selling shares of the new Armenian nuclear power plant to Turkish companies?
Have you lost your mind?

Respondent:Information Technologies, Manager Yerevan, Armenia 23/03/2009

Theme 1: Turkey’s policies on the Armenian Genocide issue
Since December 2007, the Ministry of Education of Turkey has been showing a film in Turkish schools, which conveys that historically, Armenians killed the Turkish people. The film has already been seen by about 12 million Turkish students, including students in elementary grades. 600,000 copies of the film’s DVD were distributed to Schools.
1.1. How do you assess this move by the government of Turkey? The government of Turkey eventually seems to have understood that the best defense
is offense.

1.2. What objectives does Turkey pursue by this action?
1- Radicalisation of its society; - Population control by teasing emotional areas; - Fabrication of a non-existing national identity; - Reinvent a synthetic common social and ethnic past for all Turkish citizens; - …
1.3. What are the likely consequences of this action? - People will become more likely to support future moves by the government of Turkey;
- Public cohesion (not only on the Armenian issue) and smoothing differences; - Fresh hatred towards Armenians and foreigners in general.
1.4. Why is the government of Armenia staying silent about this Turkish initiative?
The government of Armenia has adopted a very poor strategy which is perpetual defense. This will inevitably lead to defeat, if the government of Armenia does not rethink its strategy. Unfortunately, we don’t have the leading personality, that honest political leader who has enough credit from the people and who is independent from all kinds of foreign influences which would allow him to really advance Armenia’s national interests on the international political scene. This would be the main “macro” explanation. The “micro” explanation is that the government of Armenia wants to establish a diplomatic relations with Turkey and they are ready to stay silent on “minor” issues like that.
1.5. How should the Armenian authorities respond to this action? Armenia should tell the copresidents of the Minsk Group that Armenia is immediately quitting the negotiation table for an undetermined period of time and explain the reason why they are doing that. This would be a real strategic move and it would send a strong signal to Russia, the US, the UK, France, Turkey and Azerbaijan (it is not appropriate to call it «international community» since India, China, Japan, Brazil, and others are absent). Armenia, however, not only stays away of such clear moves, but our government is even afraid of using rethoric. It would be ridiculous to cry at the door of the United Nations in New York or in any other international organization. And in the context of Armenia, in general, the bilateral approach in talks should be preferred to the multilateral approach where we have nothing to win.

2Theme 2: Turkey’s stance on the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict
Officials in Armenia and Turkey talk about the development of Armenian-Turkish relations. At the same time, on February 19, 2009, Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan stated that:
a) With regard to the Karabakh conflict, the positions and policies of Turkey and Azerbaijan are completely identical; b) Turkey and Azerbaijan have worked out this policy and are implementing it jointly. At the same time, Azerbaijan does not hide its goal to capture Karabagh.
2.1. What conclusions can be drawn from this statement by Erdogan? Preliminary point : Why does the Armenian government refer to Artsakh using its Turkish name ? It is exactly the same thing as speaking of Armenia calling it «Ermenistan». The statement of Erdogan stays a statement. Turkey will always pursue its own interests first. Since Turkey wants to establish diplomatic relations with Armenia, they try to keep Azerbaijan quiet. It is also to show to the Armenians that even though Turkey wants to talk to Armenia, their positions have not changed. Again, they are trying to push Armenia into defense.
2.2. Why have the authorities and the political parties of Armenia not officially responded to this statement?
There are many many statements made by foreign heads of states Armenia fails to respond to. Our government clearly lacks political tradition. We also need highly qualified officials (not necessarily educated abroad) in the public system. 20 years after we regained our independence, we still do not have national institutes working for the government and funded by the government. Sailing on the ocean without a navigation system is a very bad idea. The “Ararat Center for Strategic Research” should not be funded by individuals or with foreign capital.
2.3. How should the government of Armenia have responded to Erdogan’s statement?
Armenia should have quit the talks with Turkey concerning the opening of the border and we should also have quit the negotiations with Azerbaijan.
2.4. After this statement by Erdogan, should the authorities of Armenia continue the policy of rapprochement with Turkey?
Armenia should freeze the talks for an undetermined period of time.
3Theme 3: The invitation by the Government of the Republic of Armenia to Turkey to participate in the construction of the new nuclear power plant in Armenia
3.1. In the context of the questions discussed above, how do you assess the February 21, 2009 statement by the Armenian Prime Minister, effectively inviting Turkey to participate in the construction of the new nuclear power plant in Armenia?
For now, I am not able to tell what are the real intentions hidden behind that invitation by the Armenian government. It could be just dust in the eyes of America, the Europeans and Russia. Or it could be a self-destructing process for Armenia.
3.2. What will Armenia gain from Turkey’s participation in the Armenian nuclear power plant construction?
Armenia would gain dependence from one of its worst enemies and a punch in the face of its national security.
3.3. What national security problems are likely to arise if Turkey does participate in the construction of the nuclear power plant in Armenia?
- Armenia’s energetic security would be in danger; - Our military security would also suffer; - It would send a wrong signal to the people of Armenia.
th3.4. Why did the Armenian Prime Minister, on the 12 of March (20 days after his first statement), change his position, stating that Turkey is expected to participate only financially, through the sale of some shares of the new nuclear power plant to Turkish companies?
This second statement is not any different from the original one. 3.5. Do you support the idea of selling shares of the new Armenian nuclear power plant to Turkish companies? No, I do not ! Nor do I support the idea of selling entire strategic sectors of the Armenian economy to Russia. But this is obviously the sign of weak government.
4 Theme 1: Turkey’s policies on the Armenian Genocide issue 1 Since December 2007, the Ministry of Education of Turkey has been showing a film in Turkish schools, which conveys that historically, Armenians killed the Turkish people. The film has already been seen by about 12 million Turkish students, including students in elementary grades. 600,000 copies of the film’s DVD were distributed to Schools.
1.1. How do you assess this move by the government of Turkey?
This was to be expected - the government of Turkey is very afraid of their lies being fully exposed and understood by their own people, so they are doing everything they can to prevent this.
1.2. What objectives does Turkey pursue by this action?
Brainwashing of their population to counter the growing awareness of the Armenian Genocide.
1.3. What are the likely consequences of this action?
Some people will be brainwashed, others will ask more questions and discover the truth - or parts of it. 1.4. Why is the government of Armenia staying silent about this Turkish initiative?
The government of Armenia is powerless and there is not much they can do about it practically. It can be argued that education in a country is an internal matter.
1.5. How should the Armenian authorities respond to this action?
Continuing struggle for the recognition of the Armenian Genocide around the world.
Theme 2: Turkey’s stance on the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict
Officials in Armenia and Turkey talk about the development of Armenian-Turkish relations. At the same time, on February 19, 2009, Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan stated that:a) With regard to the Karabakh conflict, the positions and policies of Turkey and Azerbaijan are completely identical; b) Turkey and Azerbaijan have worked out this policy and are implementing it jointly. At the same time, Azerbaijan does not hide its goal to capture Karabagh.
2.1. What conclusions can be drawn from this statement by Erdogan? He is saying the truth.
2.2. Why have the authorities and the political parties of Armenia not officially responded to this statement?
Because they are incompetent and impotent to do much about this. They try to engage in diplomacy with Babacan but have no power nor experience in diplomacy.
2.3. How should the government of Armenia have responded to Erdogan’s statement? By immediately stopping discussions with Turkey and calling for a public clarification by the Turkish foreign
minister.
2.4. After this statement by Erdogan, should the authorities of Armenia continue the policy of rapprochement with Turkey?
Not until a satisfactory clarification statement is published.
Theme 3: The invitation by the Government of the Republic of Armenia to Turkey to participate in the construction of the new nuclear power plant in Armenia
3.1. In the context of the questions discussed above, how do you assess the February 21, 2009 statement by the Armenian Prime Minister, effectively inviting Turkey to participate in the construction of the new nuclear power plant in Armenia?
As non-sensical or at best rhetorical.
13.2. What will Armenia gain from Turkey’s participation in the Armenian nuclear power plant construction?
Armenia will gain nothing, Turkey may gain more influence.
3.3. What national security problems are likely to arise if Turkey does participate in the construction of the nuclear power plant in Armenia?
The list is too long to describe here.
3.4. Why did the Armenian Prime Minister, on the 12th of March (20 days after his first statement), change his position, stating that Turkey is expected to participate only financially, through the sale of some shares of the new nuclear power plant to Turkish companies?
Do not know.
3.5. Do you support the idea of selling shares of the new Armenian nuclear power plant to Turkish companies?
No - there will be enough buyers in more friendly countries.

RESPONDENT: Consultant London, UK 18/ 03 / 2009

Theme 1: Turkey’s policies on the Armenian Genocide issue
Since December 2007, the Ministry of Education of Turkey has been showing a film in Turkish schools, which conveys that historically, Armenians killed the Turkish people. The film has already been seen by about 12 million Turkish students, including students in elementary grades. 600,000 copies of the film’s DVD were distributed to Schools.
1.1. How do you assess this move by the government of Turkey? I think Turkey has made a decision, and this latest film goes to show that its policy is going to be outright denial of any responsibility for what happened to the Armenians.

11.2. What objectives does Turkey pursue by this action? In its attempt to make a historical fact a controversial issue, I believe they aim to push what is solid black into shades of gray, and try to prolong any conclusion, because I believe, and I think they believe, that the longer this issue gets pushed further into the future, the bigger the role Turkey will play geopolitically and the less likely it is that Nation States will put pressure on a regional player to appease a group of minority domestic citizens.
1.3. What are the likely consequences of this action? A new generation of Turks brainwashed to hate Armenians and actually believe
the lies that the older generation told, but didn’t whole-heartedly actually believe.
1.4. Why is the government of Armenia staying silent about this Turkish initiative?
I don’t think the Government of Armenia is in any position to do anything about it.
1.5. How should the Armenian authorities respond to this action? I don’t believe the Armenian Authorities should respond directly. I think they should discuss this with ANC and let them deal with it. I don’t see a point in trying to ruffle feathers when we have no cards to play, it will make us look even weaker in the end.
Theme 2: Turkey’s stance on the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict
Officials in Armenia and Turkey talk about the development of Armenian-Turkish relations. At the same time, on February 19, 2009, Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan stated that:
a) With regard to the Karabakh conflict, the positions and policies of Turkey and Azerbaijan are completely identical; b) Turkey and Azerbaijan have worked out this policy and are implementing it jointly. At the same time, Azerbaijan does not hide its goal to capture Karabagh.
2.1. What conclusions can be drawn from this statement by Erdogan? No matter what words Turkey uses in order to appear friendly toward the
Republic of Armenia, its fundamental policy towards its neighbor is anything but friendly.
22.2. Why have the authorities and the political parties of Armenia not officially responded to this statement?
Since the statement of Turkey is in itself a threat to Armenia, I can’t understand why there lacked an official response by Armenian Authorities.
2.3. How should the government of Armenia have responded to Erdogan’s statement?
An official statement with a request for follow up must have been made, because Azerbaijian has been full of threats and Erdogan claims Turkey’s views are identical.
2.4. After this statement by Erdogan, should the authorities of Armenia continue the policy of rapprochement with Turkey?
Unfortunately there is a lot of pressure from the United States toward the two countries to improve relations, and I don’t know how much room Armenia has to maneveur it’s own foreign policy, especially considering it’s relationships with organizations such as The IMF and World Bank. I don’t think they have a choice.
Theme 3: The invitation by the Government of the Republic of Armenia to Turkey to participate in the construction of the new nuclear power plant in Armenia
3.1. In the context of the questions discussed above, how do you assess the February 21, 2009 statement by the Armenian Prime Minister, effectively inviting Turkey to participate in the construction of the new nuclear power plant in Armenia?
Why would Armenia allow a country who commited genocide, and refuses to take responsibility for it, to help construct a highly sensitive project which can threaten the lives and health of probably the entire country?
3.2. What will Armenia gain from Turkey’s participation in the Armenian nuclear power plant construction?
I can’t think of what it will gain, but answering what it would lose would be a much easier question.
33.3. What national security problems are likely to arise if Turkey does participate in the construction of the nuclear power plant in Armenia?
Health.
th3.4. Why did the Armenian Prime Minister, on the 12 of March (20 days after his first statement), change his position, stating that Turkey is expected to participate only financially, through the sale of some shares of the new nuclear power plant to Turkish companies?
My guess would be an attempt to comfort those who would question the logic behind allowing them to participate in the construction.
3.5. Do you support the idea of selling shares of the new Armenian nuclear power plant to Turkish companies?
I don’t support it, I am sure there are many capable and willing countries who would be willing to take on that investment.

RESPONDENT: Insurance/Retirement Planning USA, Los Angeles/CA 31/ 03/ 2009

4Theme 1: Turkey’s policies on the Armenian Genocide issue
Since December 2007, the Ministry of Education of Turkey has been showing a film in Turkish schools, which conveys that historically, Armenians killed the Turkish people. The film has already been seen by about 12 million Turkish students, including students in elementary grades. 600,000 copies of the film’s DVD were distributed to Schools.
1.1. How do you assess this move by the government of Turkey? Turkey is doing a disservice to its youth and future generations. Until the truth
about the genocide is discussed in that country, it will not be able to move forward and join free and democratic nations as it pretends to do now.
11.2. What objectives does Turkey pursue by this action? Continuing to maintain its current stance that the 1915 genocide was triggered by the actions of the Armenian people and not the Turkish government.
1.3. What are the likely consequences of this action? Eventually it will back fire. There is no doubt. The educated classes in Turkey are
aware of the true facts as has been demonstrated by the increasing number of intellectuals who are willing to write about their nation’s past. As that number grows and as the realisation of what denial will continue to mean to Turkey’s future, the discussion will have to spill out into a more public forum in Turkey.
1.4. Why is the government of Armenia staying silent about this Turkish initiative?
For economic reasons.
1.5. How should the Armenian authorities respond to this action?

Theme 2: Turkey’s stance on the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict
Officials in Armenia and Turkey talk about the development of Armenian-Turkish relations. At the same time, on February 19, 2009, Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan stated that:
a) With regard to the Karabakh conflict, the positions and policies of Turkey and Azerbaijan are completely identical; b) Turkey and Azerbaijan have worked out this policy and are implementing it jointly. At the same time, Azerbaijan does not hide its goal to capture Karabagh.
2.1. What conclusions can be drawn from this statement by Erdogan? They would be willing to support, militarily, new attempts to conquer Nagorno-Karabakh..
22.2. Why have the authorities and the political parties of Armenia not officially responded to this statement?
Fearful of rocking the boat with Turkey and the tenuous nature of opening trade and other economic relationships with Turkey.
2.3. How should the government of Armenia have responded to Erdogan’s statement?
By stating their position as to their rightful claim to the territory.
2.4. After this statement by Erdogan, should the authorities of Armenia continue the policy of rapprochement with Turkey?
No.
Theme 3: The invitation by the Government of the Republic of Armenia to Turkey to participate in the construction of the new nuclear power plant in Armenia
3.1. In the context of the questions discussed above, how do you assess the February 21, 2009 statement by the Armenian Prime Minister, effectively inviting Turkey to participate in the construction of the new nuclear power plant in Armenia?
3.2. What will Armenia gain from Turkey’s participation in the Armenian nuclear power plant construction?
3.3. What national security problems are likely to arise if Turkey does participate in the construction of the nuclear power plant in Armenia?
3 3.4. Why did the Armenian Prime Minister, on the 12th of March (20 days after his first statement), change his position, stating that Turkey is expected to participate only financially, through the sale of some shares of the new nuclear power plant to Turkish companies?
3.5. Do you support the idea of selling shares of the new Armenian nuclear power
plant to Turkish companies? No.

Respondent: Attorney San Francisco, USA 1 /04/2009

Theme 1: Turkey’s policies on the Armenian Genocide issue
Since December 2007, the Ministry of Education of Turkey has been showing a film in Turkish schools, which conveys that historically, Armenians killed the Turkish people. The film has already been seen by about 12 million Turkish students, including students in elementary grades. 600,000 copies of the film’s DVD were distributed to Schools.
1.1. How do you assess this move by the government of Turkey?
This movie shows once again that Turkey has never been frank saying it is willing to ‘open a new page’ in relationship with Armenia. Turkey does not want to change its negation policy and keeps conducting its anti-Armenian propaganda.
1.2. What objectives does Turkey pursue by this action?
Turkey wants to prevent any attempts to view the Genocide in other way than the official one – ‘Armenians had killed thousands of Turks’. 1.3. What are the likely consequences of this action? One more splash of chauvinism, of anti-Armenian policy is likely to occur.
1.4. Why is the government of Armenia staying silent about this Turkish initiative? The Armenian Government has nothing to say and to do about this new anti-Armenian campaign
in Turkey; it has no strategy and even no tactics. Despite the fact that Armenia possesses plenty of documents that might help us prove the Genocide at the International Court, the Government is not involved in this crucial activity.
1.5. How should the Armenian authorities respond to this action? They should appeal international organisations, like the UN, OSCE, Council of Europe, European
Union, etc. regarding this chauvinist campaign. But first of all, Armenia should give up its coward and pseudo-pacific policy of ‘readiness to establish diplomatic relations with Turkey without any preconditions’. It’s impossible to have relations with a country that keeps denying the Genocide.

Theme 2: Turkey’s stance on the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict
Officials in Armenia and Turkey talk about the development of Armenian-Turkish relations. At the same time, on February 19, 2009, Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan stated that:
a) With regard to the Karabakh conflict, the positions and policies of Turkey and Azerbaijan are completely identical; b) Turkey and Azerbaijan have worked out this policy and are implementing it jointly. At the same time, Azerbaijan does not hide its goal to capture Karabagh.
2.1. What conclusions can be drawn from this statement by Erdogan? Turkey has always been lying and still lies. Turkey has always been a biased and aggressive
actor in terms of Nagorno-Karabakh resolution. Erdogan says nothing new, he just proves we should never let Turks become mediators.
2.2. Why have the authorities and the political parties of Armenia not officially responded to this statement?
See above – point 1.4 Just the same situation. The only difference is that sometimes Armenia says ‘Turkey may not be a mediator’.
22.3. How should the government of Armenia have responded to Erdogan’s statement? If the Armenian Government had not been full of cowards, they should have responded to
Erdogan very rigidly. First of all, such statements destroy all possibilities for establishing the Platform for Stability in Caucasus. So far, Armenia could have easily overruled this Turkish idea that does not correspond to Armenian interests (at least, because Iran is not involved, but Azerbaijan is).
2.4. After this statement by Erdogan, should the authorities of Armenia continue the policy of rapprochement with Turkey?
No way! Armenia should do nothing similar to ‘rapprochement’ with Turkey. It is Turkey that is to make respective steps towards Armenia. As long as Turks negate the Genocide, no rapprochement can ever happen.
Theme 3: The invitation by the Government of the Republic of Armenia to Turkey to participate in the construction of the new nuclear power plant in Armenia
3.1. In the context of the questions discussed above, how do you assess the February 21, 2009 statement by the Armenian Prime Minister, effectively inviting Turkey to participate in the construction of the new nuclear power plant in Armenia?
Total irresponsibility and a state crime!
3.2. What will Armenia gain from Turkey’s participation in the Armenian nuclear power plant construction?
Political blackmail and abuses like ‘Look, we are friends with Armenians, what Genocide are you talking about?’ Plus, I am not sure Turkish participation will be secure in terms of construction and/or mechanisms of functioning of the plant.
3.3. What national security problems are likely to arise if Turkey does participate in the construction of the nuclear power plant in Armenia?
Energy and economic security, political and diplomatic losses (regarding, first the Genocide recognition efforts).
3th3.4. Why did the Armenian Prime Minister, on the 12 of March (20 days after his first statement), change his position, stating that Turkey is expected to participate only financially, through the sale of some shares of the new nuclear power plant to Turkish companies?
Because the Armenian public, especially the Internet community, was very much annoyed with such an irresponsible statement. I totally dislike behaviour of the PM. It’s much ‘easier’ to blame media for ‘misunderstanding’ than to confess you were really wrong!
3.5. Do you support the idea of selling shares of the new Armenian nuclear power plant to Turkish companies?
No! In no shape and in no volume!

RESPONDENT: Political Scientist, Moldova 24/03/2009

Theme 1: Turkey’s policies on the Armenian Genocide issue
Since December 2007, the Ministry of Education of Turkey has been showing a film in Turkish schools, which conveys that historically, Armenians killed the Turkish people. The film has already been seen by about 12 million Turkish students, including students in elementary grades. 600,000 copies of the film’s DVD were distributed to Schools.
1.1. How do you assess this move by the government of Turkey? A very bad policy indeed and one that will alter any good faith towards Turkey and its government by Armenians everywhere.

11.2. What objectives does Turkey pursue by this action? Unfortunately, it will create more hatred where mutual understanding is more important, especially at this juncture of the history of the two nations.
1.3. What are the likely consequences of this action? I am not really sure. If Turkey wants good relations with Armenia and poses as a new entity in the region, what good can such a policy bring it…
1.4. Why is the government of Armenia staying silent about this Turkish initiative?
There are many reasons for this. They “Need” to estasblish relations with Turkey; economic hardship; Pressure from Russia to do something vis-à-vis Turkish-Armenian Relations…
1.5. How should the Armenian authorities respond to this action? Rethorically they should show the world how harmful such actions are.
Politically, they have to state their anger to their Turkish counterparts when they meet.

Theme 2: Turkey’s stance on the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict
Officials in Armenia and Turkey talk about the development of Armenian-Turkish relations. At the same time, on February 19, 2009, Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan stated that:
a) With regard to the Karabakh conflict, the positions and policies of Turkey and Azerbaijan are completely identical; b) Turkey and Azerbaijan have worked out this policy and are implementing it jointly. At the same time, Azerbaijan does not hide its goal to capture Karabagh.
2.1. What conclusions can be drawn from this statement by Erdogan? It’s a political one. The status quo is for the advantage of Armenians (look at the
case of N Cyprus or even at Abkhazia). However, Turkey must know that if it wants to be an honest broker, it has to be unbaiased…
22.2. Why have the authorities and the political parties of Armenia not officially responded to this statement?
Because our national security is not formulated to the greater advantage of our land and people. Because our national security is a very deep problem for us in the area we are located in.
2.3. How should the government of Armenia have responded to Erdogan’s statement?
Diplomatically, by being more active in international forums about the animosity that Turkey shows toward Armenia in this regard. Once again, if Turkey wants to be an “Honest Broker” it can play a double game.
2.4. After this statement by Erdogan, should the authorities of Armenia continue the policy of rapprochement with Turkey?
Yes, because statements are one thing and the real nature of negotiations is another. I think we have to show how civilized we are.
Theme 3: The invitation by the Government of the Republic of Armenia to Turkey to participate in the construction of the new nuclear power plant in Armenia
3.1. In the context of the questions discussed above, how do you assess the February 21, 2009 statement by the Armenian Prime Minister, effectively inviting Turkey to participate in the construction of the new nuclear power plant in Armenia?
In the globalization age, I have no problem with this issue, given, of course, that the National Security of Armenia has been taken into consideration…
3.2. What will Armenia gain from Turkey’s participation in the Armenian nuclear power plant construction?
As a business venture it will. More income for electricity exports to offset the balance of commerce inequity in case the boarders open.
33.3. What national security problems are likely to arise if Turkey does participate in the construction of the nuclear power plant in Armenia?
The first is dependence. Armenia can’t live in isolation, but it must not become dependent solely on Turkey.
3.4. Why did the Armenian Prime Minister, on the 12th of March (20 days after his first statement), change his position, stating that Turkey is expected to participate only financially, through the sale of some shares of the new nuclear power plant to Turkish companies?
Because most probably after studying the case in debth they found out that it has direct effects on the national security of the Armenian state.
3.5. Do you support the idea of selling shares of the new Armenian nuclear power plant to Turkish companies?
I see no problem until and when Armenia’s national security issues are dealt with effectively in the matter.

RESPONDENT: CONSULTING CALIFORNIA 31/ 03/ 2009

Theme 1: Turkey’s policies on the Armenian Genocide issue
Since December 2007, the Ministry of Education of Turkey has been showing a film in Turkish schools, which conveys that historically, Armenians killed the Turkish people. The film has already been seen by about 12 million Turkish students, including students in elementary grades. 600,000 copies of the film’s DVD were distributed to Schools.
1.1. How do you assess this move by the government of Turkey? As unwillingness to admit the historic truth and as a hostile act toward the contemporary Armenian state.

11.2. What objectives does Turkey pursue by this action? In the short run, to undermine the standing of young Armenian independent state vis-à-vis the international community and to pave the way to justify annihilation of Armenia in the long-run.
1.3. What are the likely consequences of this action? Procrastination of the process pursued by Armenia in recognition of the atrocities perpetrated by the Turks.
1.4. Why is the government of Armenia staying silent about this Turkish initiative?
Due to the wrong foreign policy chosen by the state based on the incorrect assessment of both regional and global geo-political situation.
1.5. How should the Armenian authorities respond to this action? Expeditiously mobilize all available resources in-country and in its Diaspora to counter-balance the effects of anti-Armenian propaganda.

Theme 2: Turkey’s stance on the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict
Officials in Armenia and Turkey talk about the development of Armenian-Turkish relations. At the same time, on February 19, 2009, Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan stated that:
a) With regard to the Karabakh conflict, the positions and policies of Turkey and Azerbaijan are completely identical; b) Turkey and Azerbaijan have worked out this policy and are implementing it jointly. At the same time, Azerbaijan does not hide its goal to capture Karabagh.
2.1. What conclusions can be drawn from this statement by Erdogan? That the military resumption of the conflict is unavoidable and Armenia has to be ready (politically, economically, militarily, if you wish spiritually) to defend itself and come out again as a victor from this conflict.
22.2. Why have the authorities and the political parties of Armenia not officially responded to this statement?
This is due to fear that stems from political ignorance, lack of devotion to national interests as well as unwillingness to sacrifice short-term parochial group interests to preserve national interests in the long-term.
2.3. How should the government of Armenia have responded to Erdogan’s statement?
Raising hell on all levels using all opportunities including international platforms Armenia has access to- Armenian communities, lobbying groups, and so on and so forth.
2.4. After this statement by Erdogan, should the authorities of Armenia continue the policy of rapprochement with Turkey?
Armenia has to dictate the conditions for such a papproachment with Turkey, not the other way around.
Theme 3: The invitation by the Government of the Republic of Armenia to Turkey to participate in the construction of the new nuclear power plant in Armenia
3.1. In the context of the questions discussed above, how do you assess the February 21, 2009 statement by the Armenian Prime Minister, effectively inviting Turkey to participate in the construction of the new nuclear power plant in Armenia?
Myopia.
3.2. What will Armenia gain from Turkey’s participation in the Armenian nuclear power plant construction?
Will become more dependent on the hostile neigbor.
3.3. What national security problems are likely to arise if Turkey does participate in the construction of the nuclear power plant in Armenia?
No comments.
3th3.4. Why did the Armenian Prime Minister, on the 12 of March (20 days after his first statement), change his position, stating that Turkey is expected to participate only financially, through the sale of some shares of the new nuclear power plant to Turkish companies?
May be he realized the dangers involved, or had been made by influencial international stakeholders that have regional interests in the Transcaucasus to back down.
Do you support the idea of selling shares of the new Armenian nuclear power plant to Turkish companies?
Why one will even consider such a thing?

Respondent: administration United States 20/ 03/ 2009

Theme 1: Turkey’s policies on the Armenian Genocide issue
Since December 2007, the Ministry of Education of Turkey has been showing a film in Turkish schools, which conveys that historically, Armenians killed the Turkish people. The film has already been seen by about 12 million Turkish students, including students in elementary grades. 600,000 copies of the film’s DVD were distributed to Schools.
1.1. How do you assess this move by the government of Turkey? This is the latest of a series of actions put into force in the Turkish educational system. The AK party government as well as the military-political elite of Turkey would like to counterbalance the effects of the recent liberalization processes and external influences on the upcoming generations of the populace.
11.2. What objectives does Turkey pursue by this action? It signals to all – Turks and external powers – that it will not stop fighting the
genocide issue and intends to deny any advantage to the Armenian side in any negotiation in the long run.
1.3. What are the likely consequences of this action? It strengthens Turkey’s hand internally and externally. It helps address the
somewhat muted defeatist mood in Turkey and among Turkey’s supporters in recent years. It also aims to make Armenian efforts in this area much difficult, making it easier for Armenians to capitulate in all areas.
1.4. Why is the government of Armenia staying silent about this Turkish initiative?
Historically, successive Armenian governments have not been vocal about Turkey’s anti-Armenian policies aimed at Armenia or at the Armenian individual. They all seem be more pre-occupied with “navigating” in the present than putting in efforts into future strategy.
1.5. How should the Armenian authorities respond to this action? They should raise the issue of Turkey’s policies and its consequences bilaterally
with Turks as well as with third party powers.

Theme 2: Turkey’s stance on the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict
Officials in Armenia and Turkey talk about the development of Armenian-Turkish relations. At the same time, on February 19, 2009, Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan stated that:
a) With regard to the Karabakh conflict, the positions and policies of Turkey and Azerbaijan are completely identical; b) Turkey and Azerbaijan have worked out this policy and are implementing it jointly. At the same time, Azerbaijan does not hide its goal to capture Karabagh.
2.1. What conclusions can be drawn from this statement by Erdogan? Turkey’s policies regarding the realization of Armenia’s existence only as an appandage of Turkey has stayed consistent for nine decades now.
22.2. Why have the authorities and the political parties of Armenia not officially responded to this statement?
See 1.4 above.
2.3. How should the government of Armenia have responded to Erdogan’s statement?
Armenia should tell Turkey that Armenia cannot accept Turkey as a dealmaker and a party to the conflict at the same time and raise the issue internationally.
2.4. After this statement by Erdogan, should the authorities of Armenia continue the policy of rapprochement with Turkey?
Armenia should reduce contacts with official Turkey until Turkey genuinely reevaluates its policies.
Theme 3: The invitation by the Government of the Republic of Armenia to Turkey to participate in the construction of the new nuclear power plant in Armenia
3.1. In the context of the questions discussed above, how do you assess the February 21, 2009 statement by the Armenian Prime Minister, effectively inviting Turkey to participate in the construction of the new nuclear power plant in Armenia?
This makes it difficult to bring forth the Turkish policies regarding Armenia when needed as neither that offer nor Armenian complaints will be taken seriously by anyone. On the other hand, imagine the free publicity we would get if the Armenian government made this offer with a necessary demand of complete reversal of Turkish policies about Armenia.
3.2. What will Armenia gain from Turkey’s participation in the Armenian nuclear power plant construction?
I cannot imagine anything to be gained by the Armenian public from a Turkish participation. There is only one thing that Turkey can offer to Armenia that other countries cannot offer: its re-evaluation of its anti-Armenian policies. And this is not forthcoming.
3.3. What national security problems are likely to arise if Turkey does participate in the construction of the nuclear power plant in Armenia?
3Strategic concerns about the power plant aside, Turkey will learn to expect deals without making any concessions to Armenia.
3.4. Why did the Armenian Prime Minister, on the 12th of March (20 days after his first statement), change his position, stating that Turkey is expected to participate only financially, through the sale of some shares of the new nuclear power plant to Turkish companies?
That is not an important change of position.
3.5. Do you support the idea of selling shares of the new Armenian nuclear power plant to Turkish companies?
Obviously, no.

RESPONDENT:information technology : MA, USA 3 /23/2009

Theme 1: Turkey’s policies on the Armenian Genocide issue
Since December 2007, the Ministry of Education of Turkey has been showing a film in Turkish schools, which conveys that historically, Armenians killed the Turkish people. The film has already been seen by about 12 million Turkish students, including students in elementary grades. 600,000 copies of the film’s DVD were distributed to Schools.
1.1. How do you assess this move by the government of Turkey? Obviously wrong-headed government misinformation.

1.2. What objectives does Turkey pursue by this action? Denial.
11.3. What are the likely consequences of this action? If publicized, ostracism by other nations.
1.4. Why is the government of Armenia staying silent about this Turkish initiative?
Uncertainty + pressure from Turkey’s allies.
1.5. How should the Armenian authorities respond to this action? Diaspora is in a better position to act in Europe + USA.

Theme 2: Turkey’s stance on the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict
Officials in Armenia and Turkey talk about the development of Armenian-Turkish relations. At the same time, on February 19, 2009, Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan stated that:
a) With regard to the Karabakh conflict, the positions and policies of Turkey and Azerbaijan are completely identical; b) Turkey and Azerbaijan have worked out this policy and are implementing it jointly. At the same time, Azerbaijan does not hide its goal to capture Karabagh.
2.1. What conclusions can be drawn from this statement by Erdogan? Turkey’s actions are expected here.
2.2. Why have the authorities and the political parties of Armenia not officially responded to this statement?
Same uncertainty + outside pressures.
2.3. How should the government of Armenia have responded to Erdogan’s statement?
Challenge it.
2.4. After this statement by Erdogan, should the authorities of Armenia continue the policy of rapprochement with Turkey?
Frankly, yes.
2Theme 3: The invitation by the Government of the Republic of Armenia to Turkey to participate in the construction of the new nuclear power plant in Armenia
3.1. In the context of the questions discussed above, how do you assess the February 21, 2009 statement by the Armenian Prime Minister, effectively inviting Turkey to participate in the construction of the new nuclear power plant in Armenia?
I did not know this.
3.2. What will Armenia gain from Turkey’s participation in the Armenian nuclear power plant construction?
?
3.3. What national security problems are likely to arise if Turkey does participate in the construction of the nuclear power plant in Armenia?
Obvious compromise of Armenian security.
th3.4. Why did the Armenian Prime Minister, on the 12 of March (20 days after his first statement), change his position, stating that Turkey is expected to participate only financially, through the sale of some shares of the new nuclear power plant to Turkish companies?
Embarrassed—just my guess.
3.5. Do you support the idea of selling shares of the new Armenian nuclear power plant to Turkish companies?
If after the fact, sounds fine.

RESPONDENT: Teacher, PhD USA 01/ 04/ 2009

Theme 1: Turkey’s policies on the Armenian Genocide issue
Since December 2007, the Ministry of Education of Turkey has been showing a film in Turkish schools, which conveys that historically, Armenians killed the Turkish people. The film has already been seen by about 12 million Turkish students, including students in elementary grades. 600,000 copies of the film’s DVD were distributed to Schools.
1.1. How do you assess this move by the government of Turkey? A typical behaviour that you can expect – using the modern tools of media the
young fresh minds of the new generation can easily be conqured by such acts of the Turkish government; manipulating the truth to serve the age old denial of the Armenain Genocide.
11.2. What objectives does Turkey pursue by this action? Exterminating any rational examination of the evidence through dogmatic feed of
the opposite of the truth to so many at so young at age.
1.3. What are the likely consequences of this action? Denial, denial....denial...
1.4. Why is the government of Armenia staying silent about this Turkish initiative?
Well, the government of Armenia like all governments of the world works on the basis scratch my back I’ll scratch your back.
1.5. How should the Armenian authorities respond to this action? The only valid response that the decades have taught us, propaganda and current world media can do wanders!

Theme 2: Turkey’s stance on the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict
Officials in Armenia and Turkey talk about the development of Armenian-Turkish relations. At the same time, on February 19, 2009, Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan stated that:
a) With regard to the Karabakh conflict, the positions and policies of Turkey and Azerbaijan are completely identical; b) Turkey and Azerbaijan have worked out this policy and are implementing it jointly. At the same time, Azerbaijan does not hide its goal to capture Karabagh.
2.1. What conclusions can be drawn from this statement by Erdogan? Armenians should never trust any statement or prenototion of peace or any politician representing a peace preceding put forth by Any Turk... The centuries should have at least taught the Armenians that Turks cannot be Trusted.
2.2. Why have the authorities and the political parties of Armenia not officially responded to this statement?
The authorities in Armenia are basically the politicians that will articulate any statement – and a politician might see his bank account inflating with the opening of the borders.
22.3. How should the government of Armenia have responded to Erdogan’s statement?
With proper state worthy denounciation of Erdogan’s statement and keep the debate open between the two countries only on the channel of accepting their responsibility as a nation of the notosities that they’ve caused.
2.4. After this statement by Erdogan, should the authorities of Armenia continue the policy of rapprochement with Turkey?
They should have never started it, to begin with!
Theme 3: The invitation by the Government of the Republic of Armenia to Turkey to participate in the construction of the new nuclear power plant in Armenia
3.1. In the context of the questions discussed above, how do you assess the February 21, 2009 statement by the Armenian Prime Minister, effectively inviting Turkey to participate in the construction of the new nuclear power plant in Armenia?
Outrageous it is! Just even the thought of it!... Aren’t there left any kind of respect to our forefathers that were slaughtered by the very same hand!!?
3.2. What will Armenia gain from Turkey’s participation in the Armenian nuclear power plant construction?
Will not be gaining...more as submitting.
3.3. What national security problems are likely to arise if Turkey does participate in the construction of the nuclear power plant in Armenia?
Sabotage..comes to mind.
3th3.4. Why did the Armenian Prime Minister, on the 12 of March (20 days after his first statement), change his position, stating that Turkey is expected to participate only financially, through the sale of some shares of the new nuclear power plant to Turkish companies?
Maybe because he felt that the other end of the knife might cut his throat...but that should be the case even with his last proposition.
3.5. Do you support the idea of selling shares of the new Armenian nuclear power plant to Turkish companies?
Hell no!

RESPONDENT: Researcher USA 01 /04/ 2009

Theme 1: Turkey’s policies on the Armenian Genocide issue
Since December 2007, the Ministry of Education of Turkey has been showing a film in Turkish schools, which conveys that historically, Armenians killed the Turkish people. The film has already been seen by about 12 million Turkish students, including students in elementary grades. 600,000 copies of the film’s DVD were distributed to Schools.
1.1. How do you assess this move by the government of Turkey? It is a defensive and reactionary move by Turkey. It is a means of abject propagandist indoctrination of its citizens that are largely not familiar with the truth. It also is a means to allay the conscience of those inhabitants of Eastern Anatolia that might otherwise feel bad for the genocide perpetrated by their grandparnets.

11.2. What objectives does Turkey pursue by this action? This is a calculated attempt by the fanatical nationalist Turkish circles (among others the military) to pre-empt the positive influence by some enlightened Turkish intellectuals to discuss the events of 1915 objectively - even some go as far as apologizing for the atrocities; characterizing it as “Great Catastrophe”.
1.3. What are the likely consequences of this action? One of the main consequences of this action is to harden the stance of fanatic Turks, inculcate the tender minds of Turkish children with hatred against the Armenians, and exhibit an antagonistic and irrational resistance to face the true nature of past Turkish history, and come to terms with it.
1.4. Why is the government of Armenia staying silent about this Turkish initiative?
This is one more aggressive stance of denial and obfuscation of the historic truth by the Turkish government. Unfortunately, given the geopolitical position of Turkey, and the Realpolitik of international relations, not much can be done by the Government of the Republic of Armenia.
1.5. How should the Armenian authorities respond to this action? Armenian authorities should encourage Armenian and international NGO’s and Human Rights Groups (including that in Turkey) to expose this action by highlighting the negative impact it has on liberty, reconciliation, and harmony.

Theme 2: Turkey’s stance on the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict
Officials in Armenia and Turkey talk about the development of Armenian-Turkish relations. At the same time, on February 19, 2009, Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan stated that:
a) With regard to the Karabakh conflict, the positions and policies of Turkey and Azerbaijan are completely identical; b) Turkey and Azerbaijan have worked out this policy and are implementing it jointly. At the same time, Azerbaijan does not hide its goal to capture Karabagh.
2.1. What conclusions can be drawn from this statement by Erdogan? At face value, and on principle, Turkey is on the same page with Azerbaijan with
regard to the Karabakh conflict – particularly with regards to items (a) and (b). But the last line – Azerbaijan does not hide its goal to capture Karabakh – might
2be outside the purview of complete agreement between Turkey and Azerbaijan. It might be a face saving formality the apparent convergence of views – not an expression of actual political stance.
2.2. Why have the authorities and the political parties of Armenia not officially responded to this statement?
I have a hunch – only a hunch – that both sides (Turkey and Armenia) have agreed to disagree on two issues simultaneously: Recognition of Genocide and issues of reparations, and Karabakh conflict and related issues of withdrawal.
2.3. How should the government of Armenia have responded to Erdogan’s statement?
Not being privy to the specifics of the secret negotiations between Armenia and Turkey, I will take Erdogan’s general statements with a “grain of salt”. Again, factors of face saving (vis-à-vis Azerbaijan), bargaining position (vis-à-vis Armenia), and political feelers (vis-à-vis USA and Russia).
2.4. After this statement by Erdogan, should the authorities of Armenia continue the policy of rapprochement with Turkey?
As long as nothing is signed conclusively regarding the issue of the recognition of the Armenian Genocide or Artsakh (Nagorno Karabakh), and we have Russia’s, EU’s, and USA’s commitment to safeguard Armenia’s safety and welfare; and if trade relations with Turkey will benefit Armenians, I am all for rapprochement – even if it is tentative and preliminary. Besides, am sure the Diaspora will continue in its political and legal battle regarding the recognition of the Armenian Genocide and concomitant issues of justice and restitution.
Theme 3: The invitation by the Government of the Republic of Armenia to Turkey to participate in the construction of the new nuclear power plant in Armenia
3.1. In the context of the questions discussed above, how do you assess the February 21, 2009 statement by the Armenian Prime Minister, effectively inviting Turkey to participate in the construction of the new nuclear power plant in Armenia?
If at all possible, or should I say at all cost, Turkey should be left out of Armenia’s nuclear enterprise. Nuclear power is Armenia’s last vanguard for economic and military strength.
33.2. What will Armenia gain from Turkey’s participation in the Armenian nuclear power plant construction?
Absolutely none! In fact it will be best – if practically feasible – if a consortium of companies is involved in the construction of the new plant. Presently, both Russia and the USA are positively inclined towards Armenia; but we cannot be sure what the future might bring. Let’s guard our freedom of action at all cost!
3.3. What national security problems are likely to arise if Turkey does participate in the construction of the nuclear power plant in Armenia?
It is not a wise situation to be accountable to the strongest neighbor country of ours; specially when we had enmity with them for so long. Azeris and Turks were not comfortable of running the Baku-Geyhan gas pipes through Armenia. To guarantee Armenia’s permanent involvement in the peace and prosperity of the southern Caucasus region, Armenians have to insist of having future pipelines and railroads running through Armenia. Even then, Armenians should have controlling interest in all investments by outside parties or countries.
3.4. Why did the Armenian Prime Minister, on the 12th of March (20 days after his first statement), change his position, stating that Turkey is expected to participate only financially, through the sale of some shares of the new nuclear power plant to Turkish companies?
Finally he saw the negative implications of his offer…
3.5. Do you support the idea of selling shares of the new Armenian nuclear power plant to Turkish companies?
Not if we can avoid it…

RESPONDENT: CPA (Accountant) California, USA 31/ 03/ 2009

Theme 1: Turkey’s policies on the Armenian Genocide issue
Since December 2007, the Ministry of Education of Turkey has been showing a film in Turkish schools, which conveys that historically, Armenians killed the Turkish people. The film has already been seen by about 12 million Turkish students, including students in elementary grades. 600,000 copies of the film’s DVD were distributed to Schools.
1.1. How do you assess this move by the government of Turkey? Despicable, deceiving, immoral

11.2. What objectives does Turkey pursue by this action? Futhering their m.ass cover-up
1.3. What are the likely consequences of this action? More deception. A new generation of hatred by the Turks towards Armenians.
1.4. Why is the government of Armenia staying silent about this Turkish initiative?
I really don’t know
1.5. How should the Armenian authorities respond to this action? Demand an investigation by the global community: United Nations. EU, The USA
etc… This hate breeding propaganda should not be tolerated by anyone. Especially Armenia.

Theme 2: Turkey’s stance on the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict
Officials in Armenia and Turkey talk about the development of Armenian-Turkish relations. At the same time, on February 19, 2009, Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan stated that:
a) With regard to the Karabakh conflict, the positions and policies of Turkey and Azerbaijan are completely identical; b) Turkey and Azerbaijan have worked out this policy and are implementing it jointly. At the same time, Azerbaijan does not hide its goal to capture Karabagh.
2.1. What conclusions can be drawn from this statement by Erdogan? His complete support for Azerbaijian, which means lack of support for Armenia.
2.2. Why have the authorities and the political parties of Armenia not officially responded to this statement?
I don’t know. Sounds sinister.
22.3. How should the government of Armenia have responded to Erdogan’s statement?
Openly, critically.
2.4. After this statement by Erdogan, should the authorities of Armenia continue the policy of rapprochement with Turkey?
Absolutely not!!!
Theme 3: The invitation by the Government of the Republic of Armenia to Turkey to participate in the construction of the new nuclear power plant in Armenia
3.1. In the context of the questions discussed above, how do you assess the February 21, 2009 statement by the Armenian Prime Minister, effectively inviting Turkey to participate in the construction of the new nuclear power plant in Armenia?
I can’t believe. Has this prime -minister gone completely mad. I’m very surprised at his actions. Turkey wants to support Azerbaijian who wants to attack Armenia. How could any of this be logical.
3.2. What will Armenia gain from Turkey’s participation in the Armenian nuclear power plant construction?
I have no idea. More heart ache. What will Armenia gain??? I would like the answer to this one.
3.3. What national security problems are likely to arise if Turkey does participate in the construction of the nuclear power plant in Armenia?
Ummmm….let me think. Turkey would have access to Armenia’s nuclear power plant. Hello!!!! They’re teaching there children to hate Armenians by lies and deceit, and they are supporting a country that believes in terrorizing Armenia. So huge national security problem.It’s like the big bad wolf waiting for us to allow it to gobble us up.
th3.4. Why did the Armenian Prime Minister, on the 12 of March (20 days after his first statement), change his position, stating that Turkey is expected to
participate only financially, through the sale of some shares of the new nuclear power plant to Turkish companies?. 3.5. Do you support the idea of selling shares of the new Armenian nuclear power plant to Turkish companies?
Don’t know!

Respondent: Los Angeles, USA

Theme 1: Turkey’s policies on the Armenian Genocide issue
Since December 2007, the Ministry of Education of Turkey has been showing a film in Turkish schools, which conveys that historically, Armenians killed the Turkish people. The film has already been seen by about 12 million Turkish students, including students in elementary grades. 600,000 copies of the film’s DVD were distributed to Schools.
1.1. How do you assess this move by the government of Turkey? Turkish leaders have disabilities and have not diplomatic sense. It is interesting to note that they have no ability to evolve. They have the primitive habit of answering to their impulses and interests. I did not watch this movie yet, but it seems nothing but a negative maneuver to respond to the Turkish people about what happened to the Armenians at the time of the Ottoman Empire. Our struggle will have not end.

11.2. What objectives does Turkey pursue by this action? Their objective is to discredit the Armenian people’s appeal, especially those Armenians of the Diaspora, who are the live witnesses through generations.
1.3. What are the likely consequences of this action? I believe this action will in nothing help the relations between Turkey and Armenia.
1.4. Why is the government of Armenia staying silent about this Turkish initiative? I don't know what measures the Government of Armenia has taken against this action.
1.5. How should the Armenian authorities respond to this action? The Armenian authorities should protest before the Government of Turkey and before the United Nations.

Theme 2: Turkey’s stance on the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict
Officials in Armenia and Turkey talk about the development of Armenian-Turkish relations. At the same time, on February 19, 2009, Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan stated that:
a) With regard to the Karabakh conflict, the positions and policies of Turkey and Azerbaijan are completely identical; b) Turkey and Azerbaijan have worked out this policy and are implementing it jointly. At the same time, Azerbaijan does not hide its goal to capture Karabagh.
2.1. What conclusions can be drawn from this statement by Erdogan? Those are words which denounce the true intentions of the Turkish policy.
2.2. Why have the authorities and the political parties of Armenia not officially responded to this statement?
I believe they are thinking about it.
2.3. How should the government of Armenia have responded to Erdogan’s statement?
In the right time it will be responded to Erdogan.
2.4. After this statement by Erdogan, should the authorities of Armenia continue the policy of rapprochement with Turkey?
Yes, of course.
2Theme 3: The invitation by the Government of the Republic of Armenia to Turkey to participate in the construction of the new nuclear power plant in
Armenia
3.1. In the context of the questions discussed above, how do you assess the February 21, 2009 statement by the Armenian Prime Minister, effectively inviting Turkey to participate in the construction of the new nuclear power plant in Armenia?
I believe that Turkey is unable to undertake this important task.
3.2. What will Armenia gain from Turkey’s participation in the Armenian nuclear power plant construction?
Nothing. Only wrong opinions.
3.3. What national security problems are likely to arise if Turkey does participate in the construction of the nuclear power plant in Armenia?
All problems.
3.4. Why did the Armenian Prime Minister, on the 12th of March (20 days after his first statement), change his position, stating that Turkey is expected to participate only financially, through the sale of some shares of the new nuclear power plant to Turkish companies?
Because he feels that Turkey is not a good partner.
3.5. Do you support the idea of selling shares of the new Armenian nuclear power plant to Turkish companies?
No, because the nuclear power plant is a strategic defense to Armenia.

RESPONDENT: Attorney Brazil 01/ 04/ 2009

Theme 1: Turkey’s policies on the Armenian Genocide issue
Since December 2007, the Ministry of Education of Turkey has been showing a film in Turkish schools, which conveys that historically, Armenians killed the Turkish people. The film has already been seen by about 12 million Turkish students, including students in elementary grades. 600,000 copies of the film’s DVD were distributed to Schools.
1.1. How do you assess this move by the government of Turkey? Turkey's policies regarding Armenia or the Armenian nation has not changed and will not change in the future, anyone who thinks that it will change is living in Alice's wonderland, sadly our present government is one of those who are living in that wonderland.

11.2. What objectives does Turkey pursue by this action? It’s so obvious that Turkey has no intention what so ever to recognize the Armenian Genocide. It is brainwashing its population and thus making near impossible for anyone in Turkey to acknowledge their dark pages of history.
1.3. What are the likely consequences of this action? More hate towards the Armenians and other ethnic minorities in Turkey like Jews,
Assyrians, Kurds, Greeks and others.
1.4. Why is the government of Armenia staying silent about this Turkish initiative?
Sadly, we have a government who have NO national strategy in any field, they govern ad hoc and also the fact that this government is trying to please US and EU in order to stay in power after the famous election fiasco, having said this, it doesn't mean that a government under the opposition with LTP as its leader will be any better, in fact it will be worse, so sadly this is the lesser of the two evils.
1.5. How should the Armenian authorities respond to this action?
Any Armenian government which has Armenian national interest at heart should alter course and be more robust in its approaches on all fronts, they should be more active on all international forums with their ambassadors being proactive rather than be paid up tourists at the expense of the Armenian tax payer in the countries they are residing as ambassadors..
Theme 2: Turkey’s stance on the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict
Officials in Armenia and Turkey talk about the development of Armenian-Turkish relations. At the same time, on February 19, 2009, Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan stated that:
a) With regard to the Karabakh conflict, the positions and policies of Turkey and Azerbaijan is completely identical; b) Turkey and Azerbaijan have worked out this policy and are implementing it jointly. At the same time, Azerbaijan does not hide its goal to capture Karabagh.
22.1. What conclusions can be drawn from this statement by Erdogan?
Let our government learn from its mistakes from Erdogan’s statement. If they have any sense they should allow only NKR government to negotiate with Azerbaijan, as they are the only body which has the right to do so. As far as giving any districts back to the Azeri’s the answer is NO and NEVER, any government which agrees to do so will be viewed as TRAITORS and should be dealt with accordingly.

2.2. Why have the authorities and the political parties of Armenia not officially responded to this statement?
It seems they are all afraid of their own shadows, or have no policies to deal with such harmful statements.
2.3. How should the government of Armenia have responded to Erdogan’s statement?
Robustly, the government should have made known to the Erdogans of this world where we stand.
2.4. After this statement by Erdogan, should the authorities of Armenia continue the policy of rapprochement with Turkey?
Is there anything left for rapprochement?
Theme 3: The invitation by the Government of the Republic of Armenia to Turkey to participate in the construction of the new nuclear power plant in Armenia
3.1. In the context of the questions discussed above, how do you assess the February 21, 2009 statement by the Armenian Prime Minister, effectively inviting Turkey to participate in the construction of the new nuclear power plant in Armenia?
The most stupid and irresponsible statement I have ever heard.
3 3.2. What will Armenia gain from Turkey’s participation in the Armenian nuclear power plant construction?
Armenia will only loose, as there is nothing to gain from this irresponsible action.
3.3. What national security problems are likely to arise if Turkey does participate in the construction of the nuclear power plant in Armenia?
It will be a nightmare for Armenia if Turkey ever was allowed to have any say or allowed to participate in the project.
3.4. Why did the Armenian Prime Minister, on the 12th of March (20 days after his first statement), change his position, stating that Turkey is expected to participate only financially, through the sale of some shares of the new nuclear power plant to Turkish companies?
Pressure from the Armenian public, however even his second statement is nothing but stupid.
3.5. Do you support the idea of selling shares of the new Armenian nuclear power plant to Turkish companies?
Never.

place of residence: UK 28/03/2009

Theme 1: Turkey’s policies on the Armenian Genocide issue
Since December 2007, the Ministry of Education of Turkey has been showing a film in Turkish schools, which conveys that historically, Armenians killed the Turkish people. The film has already been seen by about 12 million Turkish students, including students in elementary grades. 600,000 copies of the film’s DVD were distributed to Schools.
1.1. How do you assess this move by the government of Turkey?
A continuation of a lie to cover their abominable crime.

11.2. What objectives does Turkey pursue by this action? Avoid Moral and legal responsibility.
1.3. What are the likely consequences of this action? Depends on who accepts such lies. For instance, President Obama will not recognize the Genocide.
1.4. Why is the government of Armenia staying silent about this Turkish initiative?
I really do not know.
1.5. How should the Armenian authorities respond to this action? Expose the lies and educate the world of the historical facts.

Theme 2: Turkey’s stance on the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict
Officials in Armenia and Turkey talk about the development of Armenian-Turkish relations. At the same time, on February 19, 2009, Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan stated that:
a) With regard to the Karabakh conflict, the positions and policies of Turkey and Azerbaijan are completely identical; b) Turkey and Azerbaijan have worked out this policy and are implementing it jointly. At the same time, Azerbaijan does not hide its goal to capture Karabagh.
2.1. What conclusions can be drawn from this statement by Erdogan? Turkey is the implacable enemy of Armenia.
2.2. Why have the authorities and the political parties of Armenia not officially responded to this statement?
I really do not know. I hope it is not either cowardice or for personal benefits.
22.3. How should the government of Armenia have responded to Erdogan’s statement?
Armenia is in a difficult position and place. I wish we would have the support of the world and insist on the truth with Turkey. I cannot trust President Obama not to sell Armenia to Islamic Turkey.
2.4. After this statement by Erdogan, should the authorities of Armenia continue the policy of rapprochement with Turkey?
I hope not. But, could it be the only practical thing Armenia can do?
Theme 3: The invitation by the Government of the Republic of Armenia to Turkey to participate in the construction of the new nuclear power plant in Armenia
3.1. In the context of the questions discussed above, how do you assess the February 21, 2009 statement by the Armenian Prime Minister, effectively inviting Turkey to participate in the construction of the new nuclear power plant in Armenia?
At best - good politics, at worst - appeasement.
3.2. What will Armenia gain from Turkey’s participation in the Armenian nuclear power plant construction?
Probably nothing.
3.3. What national security problems are likely to arise if Turkey does participate in the construction of the nuclear power plant in Armenia?
If there is no true gain in such type of participation with Turkey, why do so?
th3.4. Why did the Armenian Prime Minister, on the 12 of March (20 days after his first statement), change his position, stating that Turkey is expected to participate only financially, through the sale of some shares of the new nuclear power plant to Turkish companies?
Good business?
33.5. Do you support the idea of selling shares of the new Armenian nuclear power plant to Turkish companies?
Certainly not! Sell it to other countries and thus gain their support in other issues.
RESPONDENT: Professor Wilmington, NC 01/ 04/ 2009

Theme 1: Turkey’s policies on the Armenian Genocide issue
Since December 2007, the Ministry of Education of Turkey has been showing a film in Turkish schools, which conveys that historically, Armenians killed the Turkish people. The film has already been seen by about 12 million Turkish students, including students in elementary grades. 600,000 copies of the film’s DVD were distributed to Schools.
1.1. How do you assess this move by the government of Turkey? Nothing new, interesting, or outstanding.

11.2. What objectives does Turkey pursue by this action? First of all they want to make their people to be sure they have no responsibility for all we call the Armenian Genocide. For this reason all the Turkish authorities, mass media, and the so-called scientists do everything to present all historical facts of the period in the revised condition – as if all that took place in Western Armenia was caused by Armenians.
1.3. What are the likely consequences of this action?
I think most of Turks will believe to those legends – first it’s better when people around the world knows that it’s not you who did a bad thing, second reason is a false patriotism. These two positions will help Turkish nation to resist the real danger of the so-called “truth explosion effect”.
1.4. Why is the government of Armenia staying silent about this Turkish initiative?
First of all, this is the result of the last year’s political tenseness in the Armenian society. Armenia is a small country and since being not a Soviet republic anymore, the country is more and more depending on the finances and support of different kind of international organizations which do everything to rule the world in the used way. There’re countries more or less dependable on the world’s financial support. I think Armenia is on the same level with Azerbaijan – they both are more independent than Georgia. Azerbaijan uses its petrol resources and the support of Turkey as the metropoly. Armenia uses its geographical location, which is more than useful for Russia to prevent the so-called Turkish and NATO expansion – it actually cuts the possible territorial union of the two and more Turk states causing many problems. Armenia is the second after Belorussia (if not the first) proven strategic ally for Russia. The worsest condition is in Georgia – a country with the seashore and the growing support of the US is quite paralised, becoming a battlefield for the US and Russia’s conflicting interests. Armenia in the region has a definite plus – it’s not a federal state. It has a dominating Christian mononational population, and many ethnic Armenians live in the neigbouring states.
1.5. How should the Armenian authorities respond to this action? First of all they have to stop their kiddish behaviour. We shouldn’t forget the tragedy of our people, caused by Turkey. 90 percents of the mainland Armenia is occupated until now, with over 1,5 millions of innocent Armenians killed in the period of 1914-1916. Who took the responsibilities for that crime? Armenian authorities should constantly publish, present and insist on all the historical facts they possess. And the main – we
2should remain by all means the strategic partners with Russia welcoming more and more of its presence in the region.

Theme 2: Turkey’s stance on the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict
Officials in Armenia and Turkey talk about the development of Armenian-Turkish relations. At the same time, on February 19, 2009, Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan stated that:
a) With regard to the Karabakh conflict, the positions and policies of Turkey and Azerbaijan are completely identical; b) Turkey and Azerbaijan have worked out this policy and are implementing it jointly. At the same time, Azerbaijan does not hide its goal to capture Karabagh.
2.1. What conclusions can be drawn from this statement by Erdogan? No comments. Two Turk states are very much mutually depended, so there’s nothing outstanding in their attempts to support each other.
2.2. Why have the authorities and the political parties of Armenia not officially responded to this statement?
1. It’s a result of infected political situation in Armenia. Strong and positively developing Armenia is not wanted by anyone in the region – but Russia – and there’re multiple attempts made to clash the political parties in Armenia to achieve the chaos and cut the country from Russia. Reason number two: too many people in Armenia achieved high positions in the state and society have a very primitive and poor background – they mostly are wealthy but not educated people. This also is a result of the first president’s activities, who did all possible to cut the Armenian people from its thinking part, which unfortunately (or who knows, may be fortunately) were mostly Russian speaking men and women – they were simply isolated from all possible and impossible working projects in the country. Most of them were forced to leave the country in searches for a better life.
32.3. How should the government of Armenia have responded to Erdogan’s statement?
First of all, there was nothing outstanding in his statement. An outstanding was the president Sarkissian’s invitation to Abdulla Gul to visit Armenia and to attend the Armenia-Turkey football game and all the following activities. What was this made for? Turkey’s response was more than predictable and fargoing: they took the ‘friendly’ steps in return – Gul attended the football game, groups of Turkish journalists visited Armenia – they were surprised with everything in Armenia, discovering that Armenians are not animals but not civilized enough to be Turks; and all this activity was very well used to prepare the answering ground for the prevention ofthe danger of the Armenian Genocide recognition by both the newly elected President of the United States and the US Congress. In one word, the Armenian President created excellent conditions for the failure of Genocide recognition campaign at least in 2009 when the stakes were too high – Turkish government took the “we-will-care-about-us-ourselves” policy to stop any really possible Armenia supporting attempts coming from anywhere outside the region.
2.4. After this statement by Erdogan, should the authorities of Armenia continue the policy of rapprochement with Turkey?
Unfortunately, we’re neigbours with Turkey and we have to be careful taking any steps together or apart. It is not shameful to demonstrate that 1. we consult everything we do with Russia, because we’re the country depending on it – we’re forced to depend on Russia, because of Turkey – we are economically weak country because of being territorially minimized and not possessing any natural wayouts to the world, i.e. seashores.
4Theme 3: The invitation by the Government of the Republic of Armenia to Turkey to participate in the construction of the new nuclear power plant in Armenia
3.1. In the context of the questions discussed above, how do you assess the February 21, 2009 statement by the Armenian Prime Minister, effectively inviting Turkey to participate in the construction of the new nuclear power plant in Armenia?
Strictly negative. It was made as if to show that Amenia is not really blocking Turkey from all possible or impossible projects in the country or region. Again this is more a show-expecting step counted on the Turkish refusals, but this is a definitely provincial policy, e.g. policy made by provincials – people standing far from being mentally well developed and contemporarily thinking.
3.2. What will Armenia gain from Turkey’s participation in the Armenian nuclear power plant construction?
Nothing but a loss of financial independence from Turkey, and this may cost us a freedom.
3.3. What national security problems are likely to arise if Turkey does participate in the construction of the nuclear power plant in Armenia?
I’m not a security specialist to say about problems in this sphere, but suppose that a wolf will never construct a safe and wolf-proof house or anything else for a sheep, so think yourself….
th3.4. Why did the Armenian Prime Minister, on the 12 of March (20 days after his first statement), change his position, stating that Turkey is expected to participate only financially, through the sale of some shares of the new nuclear power plant to Turkish companies?
Maybe because the real owner of the NPP is Russia?
53.5. Do you support the idea of selling shares of the new Armenian nuclear power plant to Turkish companies?
Not, I don’t support any joint projects with Turkry until the Genocide recognition will be made by Turkey and it will at least partially refund the territories to Armenia. I do really believe in a possibility of the territories refund but only in case of very accurate joint work of Armenian and Russian diplomats.

journalist, Yerevan, Armenia,27/ 03/ 2009

Theme 1: Turkey’s policies on the Armenian Genocide issue
Since December 2007, the Ministry of Education of Turkey has been showing a film in Turkish schools, which conveys that historically, Armenians killed the Turkish people. The film has already been seen by about 12 million Turkish students, including students in elementary grades. 600,000 copies of the film’s DVD were distributed to Schools.
1.1. How do you assess this move by the government of Turkey? Nothing new here- my parents are from Turkey so I know how they’ve had this consistent pattern for decades.

11.2. What objectives does Turkey pursue by this action? Continued hostilities towards Armenian people and its own history.
1.3. What are the likely consequences of this action? None.
1.4. Why is the government of Armenia staying silent about this Turkish initiative?
Russia hasn’t given them permission to speak.
1.5. How should the Armenian authorities respond to this action? Condemn and ridicule it to third parties, since Turkey has no interest in direct diaglogue.

Theme 2: Turkey’s stance on the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict
Officials in Armenia and Turkey talk about the development of Armenian-Turkish relations. At the same time, on February 19, 2009, Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan stated that:
a) With regard to the Karabakh conflict, the positions and policies of Turkey and Azerbaijan are completely identical; b) Turkey and Azerbaijan have worked out this policy and are implementing it jointly. At the same time, Azerbaijan does not hide its goal to capture Karabagh.
2.1. What conclusions can be drawn from this statement by Erdogan? Turkey is at war with Armenia over Artsakh.
2.2. Why have the authorities and the political parties of Armenia not officially responded to this statement?
They have no permission from Russia.
22.3. How should the government of Armenia have responded to Erdogan’s statement?
Yes, they should respond to declarations of war and hostilities.
2.4. After this statement by Erdogan, should the authorities of Armenia continue the policy of rapprochement with Turkey?
No.
Theme 3: The invitation by the Government of the Republic of Armenia to Turkey to participate in the construction of the new nuclear power plant in Armenia
3.1. In the context of the questions discussed above, how do you assess the February 21, 2009 statement by the Armenian Prime Minister, effectively inviting Turkey to participate in the construction of the new nuclear power plant in Armenia?
They are idiots. Turkey is hostile to Armenia on many levels yet they pander to Turkish interests like the lapdogs the Turks wish them to be.
3.2. What will Armenia gain from Turkey’s participation in the Armenian nuclear power plant construction?
It will gain a headache- The Turks will only joint-venture if they will gain more than Armenia/Armenians.
3.3. What national security problems are likely to arise if Turkey does participate in the construction of the nuclear power plant in Armenia?
Political leverage given to Turkey and military information given to Azerbaijan.
3th3.4. Why did the Armenian Prime Minister, on the 12 of March (20 days after his first statement), change his position, stating that Turkey is expected to participate only financially, through the sale of some shares of the new nuclear power plant to Turkish companies?
Russia changed its mind.
3.5. Do you support the idea of selling shares of the new Armenian nuclear power plant to Turkish companies?
NO. We do not need to. There’re many other things we need to do first.

RESPONDENT: Engineer California 02/ 04/ 2009

Theme 1: Turkey’s policies on the Armenian Genocide issue
Since December 2007, the Ministry of Education of Turkey has been showing a film in Turkish schools, which conveys that historically, Armenians killed the Turkish people. The film has already been seen by about 12 million Turkish students, including students in elementary grades. 600,000 copies of the film’s DVD were distributed to Schools.
1.1. How do you assess this move by the government of Turkey? As an attemt to change history.

1.2. What objectives does Turkey pursue by this action? To change public opinion particularly that of young generation.
11.3. What are the likely consequences of this action? Younger generation will have completely opposite view on Armenian Genocide issue.
1.4. Why is the government of Armenia staying silent about this Turkish initiative?
Lack or even absense of diplomats, just some people who have read couple of articles and have ambitions to be accepted as ELITE class!!!
1.5. How should the Armenian authorities respond to this action? There should be knowlegeble authority first, to response!

Theme 2: Turkey’s stance on the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict
Officials in Armenia and Turkey talk about the development of Armenian-Turkish relations. At the same time, on February 19, 2009, Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan stated that:
a) With regard to the Karabakh conflict, the positions and policies of Turkey and Azerbaijan are completely identical; b) Turkey and Azerbaijan have worked out this policy and are implementing it jointly. At the same time, Azerbaijan does not hide its goal to capture Karabagh.
2.1. What conclusions can be drawn from this statement by Erdogan? Armenia is under a danger to lose its statehood!!! (Overall conclusion)
2.2. Why have the authorities and the political parties of Armenia not officially responded to this statement?
Those who should response have personal business interest, so there is no time to tackle such “minor issues” like Statement by Erdogan.
2.3. How should the government of Armenia have responded to Erdogan’s statement?
Clearly stating the position of the Republic of Armenia and consequences of such a statements for regional security, peace and development.
22.4. After this statement by Erdogan, should the authorities of Armenia continue the policy of rapprochement with Turkey?
There should be continuos negotiations not a rapprochement per se. Armenia must always negotiate with Turkey.
Theme 3: The invitation by the Government of the Republic of Armenia to Turkey to participate in the construction of the new nuclear power plant in Armenia
3.1. In the context of the questions discussed above, how do you assess the February 21, 2009 statement by the Armenian Prime Minister, effectively inviting Turkey to participate in the construction of the new nuclear power plant in Armenia?
In the lights of the official position of the Republic of Armenia, this invitation is an absurd. So, I can assume, that there is another position which differ from that presented to the public.
3.2. What will Armenia gain from Turkey’s participation in the Armenian nuclear power plant construction?
Generally NOTHING!
3.3. What national security problems are likely to arise if Turkey does participate in the construction of the nuclear power plant in Armenia?
Nuclear power plant is a strategically important structure which must be 100% owned by the state. Having in mind our “relations” with neighbours and geographical location of the country it looks even more absurd to invite Turkey. It might lead to energetic dependency, insecurity and as a consequence, instabiilty within the country.
3th3.4. Why did the Armenian Prime Minister, on the 12 of March (20 days after his first statement), change his position, stating that Turkey is expected to participate only financially, through the sale of some shares of the new nuclear power plant to Turkish companies?
There was too much information to hide this fact.
3.5. Do you support the idea of selling shares of the new Armenian nuclear power plant to Turkish companies?
NO.

RESPONDENT: Diplomat Yerevan, Armenia 01/ 04/ 2009

Theme 1: Turkey’s policies on the Armenian Genocide issue
Since December 2007, the Ministry of Education of Turkey has been showing a film in Turkish schools, which conveys that historically, Armenians killed the Turkish people. The film has already been seen by about 12 million Turkish students, including students in elementary grades. 600,000 copies of the film’s DVD were distributed to Schools.
1.1. How do you assess this move by the government of Turkey? Continuation of the same propaganda, keeping Turks in the dark regarding their own past.

11.2. What objectives does Turkey pursue by this action? In my opinion, the objective it to vilify the Armenians in the eyes of Turks and make Armenians to be savages and instill hatered. But such rude methods could backfire if individuals start questioning at a minimal level the objectiveness of the material presented. So it might not be such a bad thing.
1.3. What are the likely consequences of this action? At a minimum, it keeps the theme alive in Turkish circles.
1.4. Why is the government of Armenia staying silent about this Turkish initiative?
Too weak to be able to press Turkey or present to the international community the racist nature of these actions.
1.5. How should the Armenian authorities respond to this action?

Theme 2: Turkey’s stance on the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict
Officials in Armenia and Turkey talk about the development of Armenian-Turkish relations. At the same time, on February 19, 2009, Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan stated that:
a) With regard to the Karabakh conflict, the positions and policies of Turkey and Azerbaijan are completely identical; b) Turkey and Azerbaijan have worked out this policy and are implementing it jointly. At the same time, Azerbaijan does not hide its goal to capture Karabagh.
2.1. What conclusions can be drawn from this statement by Erdogan? That the position of Turkey and Azerbaijan are same and Turkey is not a neutral broker.
2.2. Why have the authorities and the political parties of Armenia not officially responded to this statement?
Too busy infighting, too weak.
22.3. How should the government of Armenia have responded to Erdogan’s statement?
I don’t see a need to respond.
2.4. After this statement by Erdogan, should the authorities of Armenia continue the policy of rapprochement with Turkey?
Yes, after all, they are our neighrors.
Theme 3: The invitation by the Government of the Republic of Armenia to Turkey to participate in the construction of the new nuclear power plant in Armenia
3.1. In the context of the questions discussed above, how do you assess the February 21, 2009 statement by the Armenian Prime Minister, effectively inviting Turkey to participate in the construction of the new nuclear power plant in Armenia?
An invitation is a good gesture…not quite sure how competitive Turkish nuclear power industry would be though.
3.2. What will Armenia gain from Turkey’s participation in the Armenian nuclear power plant construction?
Closer ties with Turkish business circles.
3.3. What national security problems are likely to arise if Turkey does participate in the construction of the nuclear power plant in Armenia?
There is a myriad of national security issues at stake, which makes the possibility of a Turkish participation pretty much zero.
th3.4. Why did the Armenian Prime Minister, on the 12 of March (20 days after his first statement), change his position, stating that Turkey is expected to participate only financially, through the sale of some shares of the new nuclear power plant to Turkish companies?
Possibly they are hoping to secure a market for the electrical energy that the plant will eventually produce. Would be easier for Armenians to sell and Turkish power companies to buy the energy.
33.5. Do you support the idea of selling shares of the new Armenian nuclear power plant to Turkish companies?
Not very desirable, but I do not foresee any problems. It might bring in the needed cash for the construction now and later open up markets. Financial investment and managerial control are different things, and managerial control should be strictly protected.

RESPONDENT: Investments Analyst CA, USA 01/ 04/ 2009

Theme 1: Turkey’s policies on the Armenian Genocide issue
Since December 2007, the Ministry of Education of Turkey has been showing a film in Turkish schools, which conveys that historically, Armenians killed the Turkish people. The film has already been seen by about 12 million Turkish students, including students in elementary grades. 600,000 copies of the film’s DVD were distributed to Schools.
1.1. How do you assess this move by the government of Turkey? This is a continuation of the Turkish denial policy of the Armenian genocide.

1.2. What objectives does Turkey pursue by this action? To deny the Armenian genocide
1 1.3. What are the likely consequences of this action? The Armenian side certainly should voice that problem when time is appropriate.
It is worth reminding the Turkish government that this action is not a sign of improving relation diplomacy between two countries. It is a good opportunity for the Armenian side to ask question to the Turkish government: Are we playing the same game or are we ready to move forward where we can find a common ground for discussions?
1.4. Why is the government of Armenia staying silent about this Turkish initiative?
I believe that the Armenian side does not want to react to this fact, finding it not an outstanding one. There were other such actions in the past i.e. Time magazine with DVD (European release). The Armenian side is pursuing some other objective, which will go across in case of voicing this problem.
1.5. How should the Armenian authorities respond to this action? To take any contra measures showing the truth about the Genocide through media widely using the Spurq potential.
Theme 2: Turkey’s stance on the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict
Officials in Armenia and Turkey talk about the development of Armenian-Turkish relations. At the same time, on February 19, 2009, Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan stated that:
a) With regard to the Karabakh conflict, the positions and policies of Turkey and Azerbaijan are completely identical; b) Turkey and Azerbaijan have worked out this policy and are implementing it jointly. At the same time, Azerbaijan does not hide its goal to capture Karabagh.
2.1. What conclusions can be drawn from this statement by Erdogan? Everything remains the same and the both sides are standing on the same
without changes.
2.2. Why have the authorities and the political parties of Armenia not officially responded to this statement?
It is difficult to comment. It seems that only Dashnaktsutyun party is more or less active in reacting on the latest development of Armenian-Turkish relations.
22.3. How should the government of Armenia have responded to Erdogan’s statement?
I would not worry much to respond, but it should be kept in mind
2.4. After this statement by Erdogan, should the authorities of Armenia continue the policy of rapprochement with Turkey?
Certainly yes. It is better to deal with each other having an active dialogue on different issues than afraid of doing so

Theme 3: The invitation by the Government of the Republic of Armenia to Turkey to participate in the construction of the new nuclear power plant in Armenia
3.1. In the context of the questions discussed above, how do you assess the February 21, 2009 statement by the Armenian Prime Minister, effectively inviting Turkey to participate in the construction of the new nuclear power plant in Armenia?
It is just to make some political dividends before the Turkish side and maybe some other as well. We all know that Turkey does not any specific experience in a Nuclear Plant design and construction. Thus, I would not worry much about.
3.2. What will Armenia gain from Turkey’s participation in the Armenian nuclear power plant construction?
Technically probably not much, maybe politically.
3.3. What national security problems are likely to arise if Turkey does participate in the construction of the nuclear power plant in Armenia?
I do not see any serious threat to the national security of Armenia from technical point of view. If Turkey had a Nuclear experience I might be concerned, but I would not be at the current moment.
3.4. Why did the Armenian Prime Minister, on the 12th of March (20 days after his first statement), change his position, stating that Turkey is expected to participate only financially, through the sale of some shares of the new nuclear power plant to Turkish companies?
3In my opinion a Nuclear Plant is a strategic object and fully should be owned by the Armenian Government.
3.5. Do you support the idea of selling shares of the new Armenian nuclear power plant to Turkish companies?
I do not like this idea. No private companies should be involved of buying shares no matter local or foreign ones. I know it sounds very expensive, but that is the way supposed to be.

Electrical Engineer Toronto, Canada 22/03/2009

Theme 1: Turkey’s policies on the Armenian Genocide issue
Since December 2007, the Ministry of Education of Turkey has been showing a film in Turkish schools, which conveys that historically, Armenians killed the Turkish people. The film has already been seen by about 12 million Turkish students, including students in elementary grades. 600,000 copies of the film’s DVD were distributed to Schools.
1.1. How do you assess this move by the government of Turkey? This DVD was inserted in TIME magazine few years ago. Armenian organizations obliged Time magazine to insert a counter documentary DVD on the Armenian genocide with a bonus interview of Dr Ternon. Now the Deep state in Turkey is striking back. Armenia, directly or indirectly, must react.
11.2. What objectives does Turkey pursue by this action? The same thing decided in the 1930s with the establishment of Türk Tarih Kurumu (TTK): falsify the history to back the theory of 'United Turkish nation' initiated by Kemal, ignoring the specificity of more than 25 ethnic groups living there.
1.3. What are the likely consequences of this action? Brainwashing of the new generations, because "the lie must go on".
1.4. Why is the government of Armenia staying silent about this Turkish initiative?
They asked to a camel:" why your neck is not straight?". He answered: "What a question! What part of my body is straight?"
1.5. How should the Armenian authorities respond to this action? Putting in place and financing an Armenia-Spyurk Counter Information and Communication center, as made by the Turkish state, even if Armenia does not have the same financial level.
Theme 2: Turkey’s stance on the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict
Officials in Armenia and Turkey talk about the development of Armenian-Turkish relations. At the same time, on February 19, 2009, Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan stated that:
a) With regard to the Karabakh conflict, the positions and policies of Turkey and Azerbaijan are completely identical; b) Turkey and Azerbaijan have worked out this policy and are implementing it jointly. At the same time, Azerbaijan does not hide its goal to capture Karabagh.
2.1. What conclusions can be drawn from this statement by Erdogan? Whether Islamist or nationalist, the foreign policy of Turkey toward Armenia did
not change an iota: waiting for the first occasion to swallow Karabagh and then probably Armenia.
2.2. Why have the authorities and the political parties of Armenia not officially responded to this statement?
I think, maybe I'm wrong, that authorities generally do not have an autonomous voice on foreign policy in general and on this Karabagh issue in particular.
2As to political parties, what parties are we talking about? As to European standards, there is no real "political" party yet in Armenia. Neither the majority, nor the opposition play their normal democratic role on the political scene. ARF is still working with a "software" dating from 100 years either in Armenia or in Spyurk. The other two "historical" parties are inexistent on the political scene. As to the new parties, they have not the maturity with a real political view concerning mid or long term projects. You can not put together oligarchs, businessmen, etc. – preoccupied with their personal interests, rather than the Armenia's national interests – to make a party. It asks more than this.
2.3. How should the government of Armenia have responded to Erdogan’s statement?
At the minimum, stating the fact that they (Turks) can not have a double language: when the Minister of Foreign affairs Ali Babacan talking to E. Nalbandian, then the P.M. Erdogan talking to public on the same issue. In his late conference in Paris, March 10, E. Nalbandian stated that they were on very good ground with Babacan through more than 10 meetings in last months. Did our Minister asked to Babacan, for example, what he was thinking about the denialist DVD distributed in the Turkish public and private schools?
2.4. After this statement by Erdogan, should the authorities of Armenia continue the policy of rapprochement with Turkey?
Continue to speak yes, otherwise there is no place to diplomacy and the only other alternative could be a confrontation. But, on the other side, I do not understand what's the real definition of "the policy rapprochement".
Theme 3: The invitation by the Government of the Republic of Armenia to Turkey to participate in the construction of the new nuclear power plant in Armenia
3.1. In the context of the questions discussed above, how do you assess the February 21, 2009 statement by the Armenian Prime Minister, effectively inviting Turkey to participate in the construction of the new nuclear power plant in Armenia?
3thAs the director of the revue Europe&Orient, I asked the question to Minister E. Nalbandian at the Paris, March 10 conference underlinig the sensitivity of the subject due to security and the independence of Armenia and what he was hoping to gain from a Turkish participation. He answered that "actually the confirmed partners were, USA, France, Russia and Armenia. As to Turkey, it's one of the numerous partners wishing to participate to this project. Their demand is at study as the others."
3.2. What will Armenia gain from Turkey’s participation in the Armenian nuclear power plant construction?
In my opinion, nothing but trouble.
3.3. What national security problems are likely to arise if Turkey does participate in the construction of the nuclear power plant in Armenia?
I'm not a specialist of nuclear projects, but the simple logical approach push me to think that you simply can not give, even a little part of the control of such a project, to a state that did not normalize its diplomatic relations with you and seems like a threat up today.
3.4. Why did the Armenian Prime Minister, on the 12th of March (20 days after his first statement), change his position, stating that Turkey is expected to participate only financially, through the sale of some shares of the new nuclear power plant to Turkish companies?
??? 3.5. Do you support the idea of selling shares of the new Armenian nuclear power
plant to Turkish companies? Absolutely not.

Paris, France 20/03/2009

Theme 1: Turkey’s policies on the Armenian Genocide issue
Since December 2007, the Ministry of Education of Turkey has been showing a film in Turkish schools, which conveys that historically, Armenians killed the Turkish people. The film has already been seen by about 12 million Turkish students, including students in elementary grades. 600,000 copies of the film’s DVD were distributed to Schools.
1.1. How do you assess this move by the government of Turkey? Falsifying history and preparing a future generation of Turks ignorant of the truth and full of hatred and anger against Armenia and Armenians.

1.2. What objectives does Turkey pursue by this action?
1To continue its denial of its crimes committed during the beginning of the last century
1.3. What are the likely consequences of this action? In the very near future, the whole Turkish population (the future adults who are school aged children now) will believe that the Armenians massacered them instead of the other way around and then it will be even more difficult to get Turkey to accept its crimes.
1.4. Why is the government of Armenia staying silent about this Turkish initiative?
Due to the lack of preparedness of the Armenian government to deal with such matters. The Armenian government does not have an established policy to deal with such issues and is simply overwhelmed.
1.5. How should the Armenian authorities respond to this action? By doing the following:
1. A counter propaganda refuting all the denialist propaganda of the Turkish government and address it to the Turkish people. 2. Initiating a similar campaign in Armenian schools to teach the Armenian children the TRUTH. 3. Protesting to foreign governments to put pressure on Turkey to stop this false propaganda and history falsification.

Theme 2: Turkey’s stance on the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict
Officials in Armenia and Turkey talk about the development of Armenian-Turkish relations. At the same time, on February 19, 2009, Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan stated that:
a) With regard to the Karabakh conflict, the positions and policies of Turkey and Azerbaijan are completely identical; b) Turkey and Azerbaijan have worked out this policy and are implementing it jointly. At the same time, Azerbaijan does not hide its goal to capture Karabagh.
2.1. What conclusions can be drawn from this statement by Erdogan?
2That Turkey is 100% on Azerbaijan’s side and should not be trusted at all. This implies that Turkey should not play any role in mediation efforts around the NK conflict or any other crucial issue to Armenia.
2.2. Why have the authorities and the political parties of Armenia not officially responded to this statement?
Again because of a lack of an organised effort on the part of the government. This shows that the present government has no long term plan or established policy to deal with such matters. The government is simply overwhelmed by events.
2.3. How should the government of Armenia have responded to Erdogan’s statement?
By being firm and going on an international media campaign protesting the bias of Turkey in this conflict and demanding Turkey's neutrality in this conflict.
2.4. After this statement by Erdogan, should the authorities of Armenia continue the policy of rapprochement with Turkey?
NO NEVER, unless publicly Turkey reverses its position.
Theme 3: The invitation by the Government of the Republic of Armenia to Turkey to participate in the construction of the new nuclear power plant in Armenia
3.1. In the context of the questions discussed above, how do you assess the February 21, 2009 statement by the Armenian Prime Minister, effectively inviting Turkey to participate in the construction of the new nuclear power plant in Armenia?
I was not aware of this. But if this is the case, then it is pure stupidity on the part of the Armenian government.
3.2. What will Armenia gain from Turkey’s participation in the Armenian nuclear power plant construction?
Nothing to gain and everything to lose.
3.3. What national security problems are likely to arise if Turkey does participate in the construction of the nuclear power plant in Armenia?
3thThe operation and maintenance and the reliability of an extremely important national resource will be in the hands of Turkey who can literally pull the plug on Armenia and chock Armenia to death any time they want. 3.4. Why did the Armenian Prime Minister, on the 12 of March (20 days after his first statement), change his position, stating that Turkey is expected to participate only financially, through the sale of some shares of the new nuclear power plant to Turkish companies? I assume due to the outcry of the Armenian public and media pressure over the issue.
3.5. Do you support the idea of selling shares of the new Armenian nuclear power plant to Turkish companies?
Of course NOT.

RESPONDENT: Engineer Montreal, Canada 17 March 2009

Theme 1: Turkey’s policies on the Armenian Genocide issue
Since December 2007, the Ministry of Education of Turkey has been showing a film in Turkish schools, which conveys that historically, Armenians killed the Turkish people. The film has already been seen by about 12 million Turkish students, including students in elementary grades. 600,000 copies of the film’s DVD were distributed to Schools.
1.1. How do you assess this move by the government of Turkey? I see NO inconsistencies, or tangible difference in what has now been almost two
centuries old policy of removing one last barrier, to reunification of Turkic people, from Japan to Europe pan Turkism is nothing new for various flavoured Turkish governments. This move is to refresh and fortify the propaganda that Armenians are the enemy and should be eliminated as soon as possible. Every one knows if you want 1a dirty job done you must either pay well or make it sound for the good of nation. It is easier to call upon someone to remain quiet or participate in a war if the war is seen as removing an enemy of Turkey. Unlike what our government is doing in every possible opportunity of presenting our two hundred years old sworn enemy as neighbours to our east who we should let bygones be bygones for the sake of cheap goods and services.
1.2. What objectives does Turkey pursue by this action? Teaching the propaganda “Blood thirsty Armenians” to the new internet aware generation of Turks who may have inadvertently fallen into trap, intended for the gullible Armenians “apology for the genocide website” probably orchestrated or at least funded by the Turkish security services, I believe.
1.3. What are the likely consequences of this action? Keeping up the good work, of a good government, attempting to reach the goal set for them nearly two hundred years ago, no expenses spared, in the midst of world wide financial crises they can always find good few million, from somewhere, it is money well spent. (By the way question gives the impression that only Turkish students have seen the material; the truth is despite objections from minority community leaders, non Turk, amongst them Armenian students were forced to see the material too).
1.4. Why is the government of Armenia staying silent about this Turkish initiative?
Because they do not know how to react, they are not thinking of the state of Armenia, but think of their bank balance and that of their pay masters and friends, that are helping them stay in power. They are overcome by the sense of greed and indifference. A government mostly made up from novo reach ill, if not at all educated individuals who have gained power through corruption and bribe. Like the rabbit stuck in the headlight they have been surprised yet again. Because they do not have a strategic plan in place of how to deal with an enemy who at first opportune moment will destroy you to reach its strategic long term survival plan. Our government has forgotten to read “non Soviet” version of our history, and believes in its childish idea of “open borders without preconditions”.
1.5. How should the Armenian authorities respond to this action? Try to read some of our recent and not too irrelevant history, to see Turkey as what it is
– a state hell bent on destruction of this peaceful ancient people, one-way or another. They need to start thinking as government for the people of Armenia, not like the
manager of uncle Bernie’s little corner shop or Hotel, that will do any thing, provide any service to appease the neighbours stay from the east or west most comfortable. They need to wake up and see these neighbours do not want the bygones be bygones; they are not intended to be gests they want to become the landlords! Finally they should at least respond like with like, immediately remove, questionable people in charge of our mass media, and start using them as tools to educate our people that it is time again to get of our knees and forget about our hunger and sense of injustice at the hands of our own, and be ready to face the future that awaits all people who unite for the sake of all, a bright and prosperous future awaits for all of those Armenians who will participate in reaching the goal of secure, peaceful, and just state of Armenia, Home for over ten million of us scattered round the world.

Theme 2: Turkey’s stance on the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict
Officials in Armenia and Turkey talk about the development of Armenian-Turkish relations. At the same time, on February 19, 2009, Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan stated that:
a) With regard to the Karabakh conflict, the positions and policies of Turkey and Azerbaijan are completely identical; b) Turkey and Azerbaijan have worked out this policy and are implementing it jointly. At the same time, Azerbaijan does not hide its goal to capture Karabagh.
2.1. What conclusions can be drawn from this statement by Erdogan? That as far as pan Turkism is concerned all is well and relationship building exercise is
only a front for the rest of the world, and what Turkey does can not and will not endanger the interests of Azerbaijan, as they are one and the same as Turkey’s interest and long term goal. In fact I would hazard a guess that Azerbaijan and Turkey have already decided how they would divide Armenia between them! Not just “capture Karabagh”.
2.2. Why have the authorities and the political parties of Armenia not officially responded to this statement?
Because they do not have anything to say, they are like the rabbit caught in the headlights, how can a band of uneducated greed driven village corner-shop keepers and their family from back home, be capable of concentrating on that and watching his back or the fear of loosing his undeserved but well bribed for position in government! He probably does not even care or understand what is being said or done.

32.3. How should the government of Armenia have responded to Erdogan’s statement?
The Government should have broken off all talks until such time as Erdogan clarified his position, and announced it loud and clear to the rest of the world. Instead of remaining silent like the rabbit in the headlight, fixed to the spot ready for the kill.
2.4. After this statement by Erdogan, should the authorities of Armenia continue the policy of rapprochement with Turkey?
NO, rapprochement, there should not have been any until such time that Turkey stops acting like and talking like an enemy. Simply you do not make friends with an Enemy while he is hell bent on destroying you and does not mind telling the world that he has been planning for this goal, with your other neighbour!
Theme 3: The invitation by the Government of the Republic of Armenia to Turkey to participate in the construction of the new nuclear power plant in Armenia
3.1. In the context of the questions discussed above, how do you assess the February 21, 2009 statement by the Armenian Prime Minister, effectively inviting Turkey to participate in the construction of the new nuclear power plant in Armenia?
Flabbergasted, dumbfounded, stupefied at the stupidity of such feeble attempt to get Turkey to agree with the plans for building the plant in the first place, they have done this amongst themselves for so long and it has worked, poor man thought if might work if he offers to spread the loot a bit thinly to will make all the thefts happy, after all that approach works very well in everyday government negotiations!
3.2. What will Armenia gain from Turkey’s participation in the Armenian nuclear power plant construction?
Armenia will gain Nothing, Absolutely NOTHING.
3.3. What national security problems are likely to arise if Turkey does participate in the construction of the nuclear power plant in Armenia?
It is an incredible question! How on earth can you have any thing but Nation security problems, when you invite an enemy and he accepts to take part in constructing, managing even part owning your nuclear power plant!? Simply WOW
4th3.4. Why did the Armenian Prime Minister, on the 12 of March (20 days after his first statement), change his position, stating that Turkey is expected to participate only financially, through the sale of some shares of the new nuclear power plant to Turkish companies?
Because someone reminded him of that age old problem, you can not hope to share the loot with the enemy; He is after having all of it for himself sooner or later. In any case those sorts of offers only work to appease members of the government his coalition members!
3.5. Do you support the idea of selling shares of the new Armenian nuclear power plant to Turkish companies?
NO. Otherwise it would have been like selling bullets to the guy holding a gun to your head!

IT Systems Engineer Republic of Armenia 23/03/2009

Armenian Genocide Resource Center

3.4.09

2794) Interviews: Present-Day Problems of the Armenian-Turkish Conflict

0 comments:

Post a Comment

Translate