"Recognition of far-fetched "Armenian genocide" is much more important for Armenian diaspora than Armenia's problems"

How do you assess the outcomes of the Russian President’s latest visit to Turkey? What impact can it have on resolution of the Armenia-Azerbaijan Nagorno-Karabakh conflict?

Of course, it is difficult to give an unambiguous assessment of the whole nature of the current Turkish-Russian relations. But the fact that during Dmitry Medvedev’s visit to Turkey, the to sides signed nearly 20 bilateral documents, covering a wide spectrum of cooperation from the construction of nuclear power plants and transition to a visa-free regime, supply of Turkish poultry to Russia, as well as Russia and Turkey’s intention to increase bilateral trade turnover to 100 billion dollars over the next five years shows that the Turkish-Russian relations are flourishing and have a tendency to develop further.    

Of course, the fact that two such large states as Turkey and Russia build a relationship and there are no conflicts of interest between them has a very positive impact on the overall atmosphere in our region. At the same time, we must admit that Turkey’s influence on Russia in terms of settlement of Armenian-Azerbaijani Nagorno-Karabakh conflict can be great, but still not decisive.

You mentioned the overall atmosphere in the region. Why Armenia does not want or can not be part of a peaceful, vibrant South Caucasus and opts to play a destructive role?

Needless to say that Armenia has become object of international politics rather than its subject long ago. Decisions are made on behalf of Armenia by everyone who can including the Armenian diaspora and the United States. Even Armenia’s budget in many ways is not coming from the resources of this country, but from to outside assistance, which comes either from the Diaspora, or from other sources that have influence on this country.

So, as you see, it is not necessary to seriously think about why Armenia does not want or can not be part of a peaceful, vibrant South Caucasus, preferring to play a destructive role. It would be better to ask this question those who make decisions for Armenia.

According to media reports, the total amount of money Armenians across the world posess, is between $100 billion and above based on various estimations. In your opinion, why these funds are not invested in Armenia to the extent to ensure that this country solves its ever deepening economic problems?

A true state should create its own budget not based on pockets of its countrymen living in different parts of the world, but from its own resources. Also, I think, by and large, statements about amount of the world Armenians’ capital are voiced to give significance to the diaspora while, in fact, these things are only craftiness aimed at ignorant average citizens.

For example, according to Forbes magazine, Kirk Kerkorian, American businessman, a billionaire of Armenian descent, had a wealth of $15 billion in 2007 and $5 billion in 2009. As we see, in just two years Kerkorian’s wealth decreased threefold. So, it is wrong to indicate a specific figure to shows amount of the capital of the Armenian diaspora.

The capital of wealthy Armenians, as well as the capital of wealthy people of any nationality, can both increase and decrease. In addition, capitals of wealthy people are kept not at home or in the closet, not even in banks. This money is put in circulation and invested in real estate projects. So, it is wrong to assume that funds of the Armenian diaspora including those invested in projects and real estate will be spent to resolve Armenia’s economic problems.

Billionaires and millionaires of Armenian origin can provide donations to Armenia. But its sum is unlikely to total $100 million a year. But this does not promise a way out of the tough situation Armenia has wound up due to its policy of isolation, which originates from the territorial claims not only to Azerbaijan but also to other states in our region.

The Armenian diaspora does not pay much attention to Armenia’s problems. Recognition of the so-called "Armenian genocide", which in fact was deportation of Armenian population of the Ottoman Empire due to betrayal to their own homeland, is much more important for them. It is like a painting on the wall, left by great-grandfather for them.

They do not care about the UN estimates which show that 700,000 to 1.300.000 people emigrated from the Republic of Armenia since 1991. Similarly, they are less and less concerned about the reasons that force people to leave the country in large numbers.

Armenian leadership, regardless of who is in charge of the country, should worry about these problems. In your opinion, can any Armenian politician radically change the situation and eliminate the causes of Armenia’s self-isolation once he reaches power?

To put it mildly, given my ambiguous attitude toward Armenia’s current President Serzh Sargsyan, who was involved in the genocide of Azerbaijani civilians in Khojaly, I do not think that he cannot address causes of self-isolation of the country and de-occupy Azerbaijan’s territories in particular. But to implement this step, he needs solid guarantees that he will not be deposed from the presidency by any rebels. He expects superpowers to make these assurances. But apparently, Serzh Sargsyan has not yet received this kind of guarantee.


/Day.Az/