Saturday, May 26, 2012

Features

Turkey Signals Opening To Armenia Must Include Nagorno-Karabakh Progress

Turkish President Abdullah Gul is juggling the desire for Armenian contacts with the need for a solution to the Nagorno-Karabakh dispute.

TEXT SIZE - +

By Charles Recknagel, Andrew Tully

April 22, 2009

Commentaries in both the Turkish and Armenian press for weeks have predicted that the border between the two countries could soon be opened.

But the optimism has been based more on diplomatic gestures than public statements from either government.

There was the "football diplomacy" of Turkish President Abdullah Gul's attendance at a World Cup qualifier match in Yerevan in September. That visit suggested an atmosphere of goodwill was being created which -- like the "ping pong" diplomacy between Washington and Beijing in the 1970s -- could lead to normal relations.

There also have been meetings between the Turkish and Armenian foreign ministers.

More recently, there was the additional impetus of U.S. President Barack Obama's visit to Turkey early this month. Obama said in Ankara on April 6 that Washington strongly supports the full normalization of relations between Turkey and Armenia.

But if all this has suggested fast movement, Ankara now appears increasingly to be offering public signs that a slowdown may be coming.

Speaking in Prague on April 21, Turkish Foreign Minister Ali Babacan affirmed that Turkey and Armenia are moving forward with contacts. But he also stressed Turkey's interest in solving the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.

"As of now, we are at a quite advanced stage in this process," Babacan said. "Also, in the South Caucasus there are other problems, like the situation that we now see in Abkhazia and South Ossetia, or the Nagorno-Karabakh issue between Armenia and Azerbaijan."

'Comprehensive Solution'

It was over the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict that Turkey broke off relations with Armenia in 1993. Ankara and Baku are close allies, and Turkish officials often speak of Turkey and Azerbaijan as "one nation, two countries."

As speculation has mounted of a Turkish-Armenian rapprochement, Baku is reported to have become increasingly worried that a deal could bypass the thorny Nagorno-Karabakh issue.

But speaking in the Czech capital, Babacan underlined that Ankara is not only maintaining its engagement with Armenia but it is also working to resolve problems that Armenia has with what he called "other countries," including Azerbaijan.

Is the writing on the wall in Nagorno-Karabakh's capital, Stepanakert?

He noted Turkish officials are in close contact with U.S., Russian, and French mediators leading the Nagorno-Karabakh peace process. And he said he envisions a "real possibility" for the signing of an Armenian-Azerbaijani peace agreement this year.

Babacan made similar statements last week at a meeting of the Black Sea Economic Cooperation (BSEC) organization in Yerevan.

Turkey's "Hurriyet Daily News" reported him saying at the time to Turkish reporters that "we want a comprehensive solution and full normalization." He added that the road to a solution must run parallel with talks between Azerbaijan and Armenia.

The Turkish newspaper "Today's Zaman" reported on April 21 that Turkey's talks with Armenia would be on the agenda of next week's meeting of Turkey's powerful National Security Council, comprising top state officials and army generals.

The newspaper added that Turkish President Gul would visit Baku shortly after the meeting to "inform the Azerbaijani administration about the decisions Turkey has made regarding normalization with Armenia."

All this could signal weeks or months of difficult diplomacy ahead.

Role For Washington?

Armenian leaders say Ankara did not raise the issue of Nagorno-Karabakh during months of conciliatory meetings with the Armenian government.

Yerevan previously has ruled out direct Turkish involvement in the international efforts to end the dispute over the predominantly Armenian enclave inside Azerbaijan.

Where, then, might a breakthrough be made?

Babacan may -- or may not -- have provided a hint as he spoke in Prague about Ankara's interest in working with Washington, its NATO partner, to alleviate trouble in Caucasus hot spots.

"We have initiated the Caucasus Stable Tent Cooperation Platform involving five countries, namely the Russian Federation, Turkey, Georgia, Armenia, and Azerbaijan -- and actually yesterday we had the third deputy minister-level meeting of the platform," Babacan said. "So this is a comprehensive approach that we have which targets stability and peace in our region."

Washington is anxious to bolster friendly states in the Caucasus following the Russia-Georgia war in August. It has appeared to endorse Ankara's policy of becoming more active in the region while Moscow seems determined to reassert its influence over the former Soviet republics.

That could mean increasing pressure from Washington on all three states -- Turkey, Armenia, and Azerbaijan -- to find ways to cooperate in the suddenly more volatile Caucasus.

If so, it may mean the stakes are now too high to let the possibility of a Turkish-Armenian rapprochement pass without trying to include progress on the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict as well.

RFE/RL's Armenian and Azerbaijani services contributed to this report

This forum has been closed.

Comment Sorting

Comments

by: John Harduny from: Reston, VA

April 22, 2009 22:11

RFERL, an organization which I really like, is so far continuing doing a rather substandard job explaining to the public the nature of and realities behind the Armenian-Turkish talks on opening of the Armenian-Turkish border. Partly, it is because of the apparent ignorance of the journalists involved, and partly—due to the complexity of the issue itself. The Turkish blockade of Armenia that began 16 years ago—an illegal measure to induce Yerevan to bow to the pressure of Azerbaijan’s homicidal Muslim oil dictatorship and Turkey’s little brother—has never worked. Armenia has adapted to the blockade, and now, when Armenia’s economy has somewhat shrunk because of the global economic crisis, its need of an open border with Turkey, in fact, decreased.

But even if Armenia was indeed that desperate in getting the border open, why would it ever entrust its supply lifeline to a country that remains oddly and disturbingly hostile to Armenians—by its refusal to recognize the genocide of 1915 and by its support of another country, Azerbaijan, whose leaders start their day by broadcasting a promise to erase Armenia from the face of the earth with the help of oil shipped through the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline? Visualize an imaginary situation where a Holocaust-denying Germany has a common border with Israel, and which supports Syria to such an extent that it would characterize German-Syrian relations as “two states, one nation.” Why on earth would Israel want to become logistically dependent on that Germany? … especially if that Germany openly declares that its relations with Israel are conditional on Syrian approval?

The entire Armenian-Turkish talks initiative has been a house of cards, and the game of factoring in Nagorno Karabakh into this flawed equation will never work. There is indeed “writing on the wall” in Stepanakert. It says to everyone, including Turkish generals, and Azerbaijani autocratic genocidaires: “at the time when the inventor of the Armenian alphabet, St. Mesrob Mashtots, established the first Armenian school in Nagorno Karabakh’s Amaras Monastery, in 410 AD, the ancestors of the modern Turks and Azerbaijanis had not even had a chance to migrate to Central Asia—a land widely considered as the original homeland for all Turkic-speaking peoples; in 410 AD, proto-Turko-Azerbaijanis were in fact in Eastern Siberia, possibly raising reindeers—1000 miles away from the land that they subsequently conquered and other lands—like Nagorno Karabakh or Montenegro—which they have never been able to conquer no matter how hard they tried; the Nagorno Karabakh Republic—the democratic state of Armenian Christians—cannot imaginably be part of the Azerbaijan’s Muslim oil dictatorship. That would amount to a claim to return Greece, Bulgaria, Serbia and Romania under the control of the modern Turkish Republic. As a joke only—perhaps Turkey has more “rights” to Greece, Bulgaria, Serbia and Romania since its Ottoman predecessors have physically and legally controlled these countries for a long time. In contrast, an independent “Azerbaijan,” a state and a people invented from scratch in 1918, has never ever controlled Nagorno Karabakh, and it will never be controlling it. Ever.”

by: J from: USA

April 23, 2009 14:46

Maybe turks shouldn't open the border then. Also, why are they so keen on helping Shiites? Turks are Sunni, aren't they? Baku is populated by shiites.