Tweet
Today's Zaman, Turkey
Sept 5 2008
Talking with elected politicians instead of Diaspora
by Kenan DAÄ?CI*
Both Armenia and Turkey are eager to preserve the status quo in
bilateral relations. Armenia developed an official policy involving
Armenian genocide allegations and territorial claims whereas Turkey
closed all communication channels to Armenia and created an official
stance vis-à-vis this country. It closed its borders withArmenia;
additionally, it has also declared that it would never abandon its
current policy unless Armenia gives up on its allegations with regard
to so-called Armenian genocide and the territorial claims.
Status quo disruptive to interests of both countries
Armenia's uncompromising stance alienates Armenian people with
international community; for this reason, Armenia fails to integrate
with the civilized world. The people are suffering from extreme
poverty because of this policy. Armenia's integration with the West
and the international community through Turkey which shares sea and
land borders with the Western world. An Armenian with good ties with
Turkey may become a country which enjoys economic prosperity and
greater political independence.
Likewise, Turkey expects any probable change in Armenian attitude
without compromising from its official policies. However, preservation
of the current status quo is harmful to both Turkish and Armenian
interests. Armenia is an important country `at least as important as
Georgia is'in terms of geopolitical location. It serves as a vital
bridge for Turkey's reach to the eastern markets and its energy
policies. It also has a crucial place for Turkey in terms of its
connection with the Turkic republics in Central Asia. As observed in
the recent war between Georgia and Russia, Turkey's reliance on
policies that only consider Georgia in the region may bear great risks
for the present and for the future.
Instead of remaining inactive, Turkey can create an island of peace
and stability in its east by developing new instruments. Why is Turkey
anticipating the first step that will be useful for its interests from
Armenia?
Whether or not President Abdullah Gül should watch a soccer
game between Turkish and Armenian national squads on September 6 has
been extensively discussed. Armenian President Serj Sarkisyan's
invitation can actually be interpreted as their eagerness to take some
action and to voice the will of Armenian people. President Gül
positively responded to the olive branch extended by Sarkisyan by
accepting the invitation. Turkey should be able to use this invitation
as a new instrument.
Should Turkey hold talks with the elected Armenian President or the
Armenian Diaspora?
Serj Sarkisyan is the President of Armenia who was elected to this
post after receiving support of 57 percent of Armenian people. For the
first time, Sarkisyan took such a great risk after his election as
president. He ignored harsh criticisms by the diaspora and extremely
nationalist Dashnak Party and invited Gül.
In Turkey, National Movement Party (MHP) and People's Republican Party
(CHP) carried out a campaign to prevent Gül's visit to
Yerevan. MHP described Gül's visit as a historically grave
mistake, adding that this would injure our national honor and
pride. CHP leader Baykal who said, `I rather go to Baku instead of
Armenia,' tried to put pressure over the president. However, the
discourse of both parties does not involve a vision that will
contribute to the resolution of the existing problems. What could this
approach do other than sustaining the current status quo? However,
Gül's visit to Yerevan could serve as a great opportunity that
will initiate a peace process between the peoples of Armenia and
Turkey. If such opportunities are properly used, the current situation
cannot be changed. A dialogue process that could possibly include
Armenia Azerbaijan, Turkey and Georgia could open new communication
channels and ultimately contribute to the improvement of stability and
peace in the region.
Improved relations between Turkey and Armenia could contribute to
resolution of Karabagh Question
Improved relations between Armenia and Turkey and opening of new
communication channels in these relations are also helpful for
Azerbaijan to attain its goals. Policies pursued in regards to the
Karabagh Question under the auspices of countries and international
organizations including the US, Russia and Organization of Security
and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) have not produced any fruitful
results for many years. It is evident that these policies will not be
useful at the present time as well because big powers which have
interests in the region do not want to see this issue resolved. As
long as the Karabagh issue remains, Azerbaijan and Armenia stay
dependent on big powers including Russia and the US. Sustenance of
this state of dependence is consistent with the interests of big
powers because they are able to keep their control and influence over
Azerbaijan and Armenia. For instance, Russia has installed bases in
Armenian territories by exploiting the tension between Azerbaijan and
Armenia in connection with this issue whereas the US seeks to maintain
political and economic influence in relation to the energy issues
relying on this problem.
Normalization in the bilateral relations between Turkey and Armenia in
a geography where big powers have such certain and important interests
may also serve to the interests of Azerbaijan. Turkey can play an
active role in the resolution of KArabagh Question after making sure
that the projected policy is well explained to Azerbaijan. Last but
not least, Gül's visit to Yerevan will create a positive image
of Turkey in international arena, further showing that it is pursuing
a constructive policy vis-à-vis the Armenian issues. And of
course, such moves will take Turkey to a stronger position in
international relations. It is time for Turkey to reconsider its
policy towards Armenia.
http://www.todayszaman.com/tz-web/detaylar.do?loa d=detay&link=152239&bolum=109
Sept 5 2008
Talking with elected politicians instead of Diaspora
by Kenan DAÄ?CI*
Both Armenia and Turkey are eager to preserve the status quo in
bilateral relations. Armenia developed an official policy involving
Armenian genocide allegations and territorial claims whereas Turkey
closed all communication channels to Armenia and created an official
stance vis-à-vis this country. It closed its borders withArmenia;
additionally, it has also declared that it would never abandon its
current policy unless Armenia gives up on its allegations with regard
to so-called Armenian genocide and the territorial claims.
Status quo disruptive to interests of both countries
Armenia's uncompromising stance alienates Armenian people with
international community; for this reason, Armenia fails to integrate
with the civilized world. The people are suffering from extreme
poverty because of this policy. Armenia's integration with the West
and the international community through Turkey which shares sea and
land borders with the Western world. An Armenian with good ties with
Turkey may become a country which enjoys economic prosperity and
greater political independence.
Likewise, Turkey expects any probable change in Armenian attitude
without compromising from its official policies. However, preservation
of the current status quo is harmful to both Turkish and Armenian
interests. Armenia is an important country `at least as important as
Georgia is'in terms of geopolitical location. It serves as a vital
bridge for Turkey's reach to the eastern markets and its energy
policies. It also has a crucial place for Turkey in terms of its
connection with the Turkic republics in Central Asia. As observed in
the recent war between Georgia and Russia, Turkey's reliance on
policies that only consider Georgia in the region may bear great risks
for the present and for the future.
Instead of remaining inactive, Turkey can create an island of peace
and stability in its east by developing new instruments. Why is Turkey
anticipating the first step that will be useful for its interests from
Armenia?
Whether or not President Abdullah Gül should watch a soccer
game between Turkish and Armenian national squads on September 6 has
been extensively discussed. Armenian President Serj Sarkisyan's
invitation can actually be interpreted as their eagerness to take some
action and to voice the will of Armenian people. President Gül
positively responded to the olive branch extended by Sarkisyan by
accepting the invitation. Turkey should be able to use this invitation
as a new instrument.
Should Turkey hold talks with the elected Armenian President or the
Armenian Diaspora?
Serj Sarkisyan is the President of Armenia who was elected to this
post after receiving support of 57 percent of Armenian people. For the
first time, Sarkisyan took such a great risk after his election as
president. He ignored harsh criticisms by the diaspora and extremely
nationalist Dashnak Party and invited Gül.
In Turkey, National Movement Party (MHP) and People's Republican Party
(CHP) carried out a campaign to prevent Gül's visit to
Yerevan. MHP described Gül's visit as a historically grave
mistake, adding that this would injure our national honor and
pride. CHP leader Baykal who said, `I rather go to Baku instead of
Armenia,' tried to put pressure over the president. However, the
discourse of both parties does not involve a vision that will
contribute to the resolution of the existing problems. What could this
approach do other than sustaining the current status quo? However,
Gül's visit to Yerevan could serve as a great opportunity that
will initiate a peace process between the peoples of Armenia and
Turkey. If such opportunities are properly used, the current situation
cannot be changed. A dialogue process that could possibly include
Armenia Azerbaijan, Turkey and Georgia could open new communication
channels and ultimately contribute to the improvement of stability and
peace in the region.
Improved relations between Turkey and Armenia could contribute to
resolution of Karabagh Question
Improved relations between Armenia and Turkey and opening of new
communication channels in these relations are also helpful for
Azerbaijan to attain its goals. Policies pursued in regards to the
Karabagh Question under the auspices of countries and international
organizations including the US, Russia and Organization of Security
and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) have not produced any fruitful
results for many years. It is evident that these policies will not be
useful at the present time as well because big powers which have
interests in the region do not want to see this issue resolved. As
long as the Karabagh issue remains, Azerbaijan and Armenia stay
dependent on big powers including Russia and the US. Sustenance of
this state of dependence is consistent with the interests of big
powers because they are able to keep their control and influence over
Azerbaijan and Armenia. For instance, Russia has installed bases in
Armenian territories by exploiting the tension between Azerbaijan and
Armenia in connection with this issue whereas the US seeks to maintain
political and economic influence in relation to the energy issues
relying on this problem.
Normalization in the bilateral relations between Turkey and Armenia in
a geography where big powers have such certain and important interests
may also serve to the interests of Azerbaijan. Turkey can play an
active role in the resolution of KArabagh Question after making sure
that the projected policy is well explained to Azerbaijan. Last but
not least, Gül's visit to Yerevan will create a positive image
of Turkey in international arena, further showing that it is pursuing
a constructive policy vis-à-vis the Armenian issues. And of
course, such moves will take Turkey to a stronger position in
international relations. It is time for Turkey to reconsider its
policy towards Armenia.
http://www.todayszaman.com/tz-web/detaylar.do?loa d=detay&link=152239&bolum=109