Something ‘fishy’ about Sargsian’s Russia trip

Presidents Dmitry Medvedev of Russia and Serzh Sarkisian of Armenia fish during their informal meeting in Zavidovo, Russia on April 23, 2009.

Presidents Dmitry Medvedev of Russia and Serzh Sarkisian of Armenia fish during their informal meeting in Zavidovo, Russia on April 23, 2009.

Armenia’s president Serzh Sargsian met his Russian counterpart today. The two presidents made optimistic comments about Karbakh resolution while fishing dressed up in designer’s suits.

“Both my recent contacts with the president of Azerbaijan and our negotiations today with Serzh Azatovich confirm that the parties are ready move in the constructive direction in order to solve this very difficult problem,” Medvedev told the journalists, who came to watch the presidents fish.

End of last week also saw Azerbaijan’s Aliev making optimistic remarks about “rather quick” Karabakh resolution, and a meeting of Serzh Azatovich with OSCE Minsk group mediators on Karabakh in Yerevan on Tuesday.  Matthew Bryza, the group’s U.S. co-chair, told RFE/RL that the Karabakh peace process is entering a “new phase” that will involve a “deeper, more detailed discussion” of the remaining Armenian-Azerbaijani differences.

Yesterday came with more suprises: a top ARF-Dashnaktsutyun politician spoke of Armenia’s loosing diplomatic bettle; Erdoghan – reaffirming that no diplomatic relations are possible without Karabakh settlement, Armenia – Turkey deal announced; Azerbaijan’s suprisingly mild reaction to it (which possibly means the deal is a symbolic one), etc, etc.

One can’t help but wonder: what a hell is going on? What on earth does the mentioned Armenia – Turkish deal/roadmap mean? And for God’s sake – why is Serzh away fishing while things are moving at this crazy pace around here?

Advertisements

16 thoughts on “Something ‘fishy’ about Sargsian’s Russia trip

  1. Onnik just twitted about Wall Street Journal’s Interview with Armenian President Serge Sargsyan on relations with Azerbaijan and Turkey — http://tinyurl.com/c3ydpt

    Here’s a curious extract:

    Serzh Sargsyan: “By inviting President Gül to Armenia, we reiterated our position that non-recognition by the Turkish side of the genocide is not an insurmountable obstacle to restoration of relations between our countries.”

  2. Here’s another interesting bit from Serzh Sargsyan’s WSJ interview:

    WSJ: So your preference, the preference of the Armenian government, would be for Mr. Obama to recognize the Armenian genocide, even if that puts the last nail in the coffin of any deal with Turkey to open the border any time soon?

    Mr. Sargsyan: I would not like to see this process in a coffin. I would like us to be more open and broad-minded when watching this issue. That is why we want this issue of genocide not to be an obstacle to our relations with Turkey. After all, by recognizing the genocide neither we nor other countries that recognize it want to harm Turkey. I think this matter is very straightforward, restoration of justice and prevention of genocide in the future. Because if we try to tie relations between Armenia and Turkey to recognition of the genocide by one country or another …Armenian-Turkish relations will always be the footballs of other countries. If some countries decide to create difficulties in those relations, they would just announce a recognition of genocide and so would compromise relations between Armenia and Turkey. Once again, it is not we who are pushing the U.S. to recognize the genocide.

  3. what a disgrace the armenian leadership at ho,me and in diaspora are. will give up my armenian citizenship the first time i will have a chance

  4. There’s more interesting news from Washington Post. Here’s an interesting extract:

    The accord would open the border between the neighbors and establish a “road map” for normalized relations, with subcommittees handling matters ranging from economic ties to the environment, the U.S. official said. One of the subcommittees would examine historical issues — namely the massacres.

    In reaching the agreement, Turkey also won a commitment from Washington to accelerate its efforts to settle the dispute over the breakaway territory of Nagorno-Karabakh, which is inside Azerbaijan, a Turkish ally, but is under ethnic Armenian control.

  5. When I saw this picture first that I thought is that russian military divers are busy now hanging fishes on the hooks for presidents fishing (: bwahaha…

  6. Here’s the roadmap from Turkish SABAH:
    http://www.hurriyet.com.tr/english/domestic/11503494.asp

    — HERE IS TURKISH-ARMENIAN ROAD MAP
    The Upper Karabakh dispute did not have a place in the agreement envisaging normalization of relations between Turkey and Armenia. Here is an outline of the agreement:

    1. Armenia will recognize the Treaty of Kars, signed between Turkey and Russia in 1923.

    2. Third countries will be allowed to join the commission to be formed by historians to deal with allegations of genocide.

    3. The border crossings between the two countries will be opened, and the necessary agreements will be signed to boost commercial relations.

    4. The two countries will first accredit their ambassadors in Tbilisi. Then, they will appoint ambassadors mutually.

    5. An agreement about the road map, which requires approval from Parliament, will be submitted to the Turkish Parliament.

  7. I think people should take to the streets. This is disgrace. Actually all the people already out in the streets to commemorate the Genocide Day should head directly to the presidential afterwards. Someone should make a stance for God’s sake!

  8. I would be wary to believe anything from Hurriyet. While the whole process is worrisome, I think the Hurriyet track record of mis- and dis-information should make the reader pause.

    • The problem is – we contacte the Armenian FM spokesperson to check the Sabah info, and his response (published above), wasn’t much of anything. Certainly not a refutation.

      • Yep. that’s the real problem and it is because All 9maybe with (5-6 exceptions)of the officials were not elected by people so they instinctively don’t find it necessary to report to people. They are not civil servants and they naturally dont have the sense of it.

Comments are closed.