100 Years Later

It has been a century since World War I ended, but it appears the belligerent states of that time still have serious problems with one another. One wonders how many world wars one needs to settle all differences between them.

April 24, 2015 was an odd day, as two official ceremonies took place almost simultaneously in two different countries, to commemorate two different historic events related to the world war. One of these ceremonies gathered the Turkish and Azerbaijani presidents and the Prince of Wales, while the second was attended by the presidents of Armenia, Russia and France. In both commemorations, speeches were delivered, some of them mentioning the common grief of divergent peoples. However, it was more like all the participants were just commemorating their own grief.

In fact, the feelings of the people who have indeed suffered because of what happened during World War I are simply being exploited. During the war, the great powers of the time, from the US to Russia, from Germany to the United Kingdom, played double games. They didn't care about ordinary people's suffering while preparing their plans to dismember the Ottoman Empire. Because of their policies, 100 years later, peoples and states in this part of the world are still struggling with each other.

Now the leaders of those countries commemorate the victims of the war and they publish emotional statements. Their attitude, however, is not about humanitarian feelings, as they still use people for their political and strategic purposes. There is no need to be cheerful when one of these leaders makes a statement that pleases us -- because this is just about politics.

There is a saying, “the bear kills its children while loving them.” This is what great powers do when they look affectionately toward less powerful nations.

French President François Hollande traveled to Yerevan, and on his way he declared that he is willing to contribute to world peace. One, of course, knows that he is also thinking about pleasing the Armenians of France. What is interesting is that what happened during the war happened in Anatolia, not in today's Armenia. Besides, his visit will definitely not encourage peaceful relations between Armenians and Turks; moreover, it will probably deteriorate Turkish-French relations, which are already not that brilliant.

This political behavior will not contribute to world peace but may provoke antagonisms instead. Perhaps this is the real intention.

Similarly, one wonders what Prince Charles was doing in Çanakkale. Wouldn't it better for him to visit Australia or New Zealand to present an apology to those nations whose members were sent to death because of Britain's imperial interests? Besides, the presence of Prince Charles in Çanakkale created an interesting contrast with Russian President Vladimir Putin's presence in Yerevan. These two were reminding everyone that the historic rivalry between Russia and Great Britain still exists.
Furthermore, by his presence, Putin has made it clear that Russia will not let the Western powers have too much influence over Armenia. He has also conveyed a message to the Armenians of the diaspora: Moscow will not let Armenia establish contact with the West without consulting Russia.

As for the US's attitude, it has been very ambiguous: President Barack Obama has been extra careful not to be seen as though he is supporting a particular thesis. He avoided the word "genocide" and rather talked about the “Great Disaster.” So one side could be happy because he didn't use the G-word, and the other side could claim that he did, as this is what Great Disaster means.

In brief, it's like 100 years ago: People are not important, states' interests come first. Along the way, we hear again and again a lot of hate rhetoric. This is definitely not how we will find world peace.(BERİL DEDEOĞLU/Today's Zaman)