Tweet
MENSOIAN: THE ROADMAP TO NORMALIZATION IS A ROADMAP TO OBLIVION FOR ARMENIA
Michael Mensoian
http://www.hairenik.com/weekly/2009/05/1 8/the-roadmap-to-normalization-is-a-roadmap-to-obl ivion-for-armenia/
May 18, 2009
The "roadmap to normalization" is a roadmap to oblivion for
Armenia. Secrecy in the ongoing negotiations may be necessary, but
given the advantage that Turkey enjoys and the strident comments
made by Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, President Abdullah Gul,
and the former Minister of Foreign Affairs Ali Babacan, the only
conclusion that can be reached is that the negotiations are not
beneficial for Armenia.
Turkey still persists in demanding preconditions which, if accepted,
would be a tacit admission by Yerevan that genocide recognition and
Nagorno-Karabagh's continued independence will not stand in the way
of normalizing relations. For sure, Turkey will not budge on the
genocide issue and will not forsake its ally Azerbaijan. Both Ankara
and Washington know that Russia is standing in the wings ready to do
whatever it can to bring Azerbaijan within its orbit. The Nabucco gas
pipeline project has evidently been approved by all participating
nations. Eventually, gas supplies from Central Asia will be pumped
beneath the Caspian Sea to be sent through this pipeline to the
European Union. Armenia will have no part to play in this new economic
endeavor. Having a fairly accurate sense as to what normalization
may cost Armenia, what are the benefits that Yerevan believes it
may obtain?
The opening of the border will result in a significant increase
in traffic. Unfortunately, it will primarily be a one-way flow of
goods from Turkey to Armenia. How Armenia, with its US $18 billion
Gross Domestic Product (GDP), expects to compete with Turkey's US
$800 billion GDP is difficult to imagine. Eventually, Armenia will
not only become part of the Turkish domestic market, but it will be
dependent upon Turkey for much of its manufactured goods. A related
development could well be a rise in unemployment and a decrease in
productivity since Turkey is better positioned to expand its production
facilities and attract the necessary labor. In addition, a real
possibility exists for Armenian entrepreneurs to migrate to Turkey,
where economic opportunity should be greater than in Armenia. Given
the volume and variety of goods stamped "made in Turkey" that will
flood the Armenian market, there will be an imbalance of payment
situation-with Turkey becoming the creditor nation. There are few
goods or commodities produced in Armenia that are not produced in
greater quantities in Turkey, which limits any significant flow of
traffic from Armenia to Turkey. Is this what Yerevan believes will be
a benefit derived from normalization? Within a relatively short time,
the Armenian dram would most likely lose its value as the currency
of choice, being replaced by the Turkish lira.
Any potential the Armenian economy currently has would be limited
since its development will be determined by Turkish entrepreneurs
who will be influenced by Ankara's political objectives vis-a-vis
Yerevan. Normalization will not remove the existing impediments
hampering the Armenian economy. Of greater importance, potential
initiatives that are vital if Armenia's economy is to develop will
be hampered by its economic domination by Turkey.
Politically, Armenia will retain its independent status. However, its
initiatives in the international arena will be influenced by Ankara. To
borrow a term from the distant past, the president of Armenia will be
no better than a satrap. With respect to Nagorno-Karabagh (historic
Artsakh), its future will be bleak. As a precondition, Armenia is
being asked to sacrifice the de facto independence of its brothers
and sisters. This would be a travesty should Yerevan agree. The 7,000
azatamartiks (freedom-fighters) are no less martyrs than the 1,500,000
innocent Armenian men, women, and children who were slaughtered during
the genocide carried out by the Ottoman Turkish government and the
Ataturk Turkish government. Can there be any justification for Yerevan
abandoning Karabagh? For abandoning the martyrs of the genocide?
In 15 years, the Karabaghtsis have overcome obstacles that many thought
were insurmountable. They have developed a democratic government
while Azerbaijan maintains a Soviet-style autocratic government. In
1923, Armenia had no say when the Bolsheviks forced the separation
of historic Armenian Artsakh and Nakhichevan to Azerbaijan. To allow
Artsakh to revert to Azeri control again is unconscionable. This may
well be the moment when it is absolutely necessary for Armenia to
decide whether it will become a compliant neighbor or accept the
challenge, daunting as it may be, to protect its future and the
independence of Artsakh as well. One may say this is easier said
than done. Agreed. However, normalization will reduce Armenia to a
vassal state. How will this differ from the Soviet Socialist Republic
of Armenia?
No one should fail to see the duplicitous nature of United States
foreign policy with respect to Armenia. The present Democrat
administration supports Turkey's entry into the European Union. It
suggests that Turkey should have a role in bringing the Karabagh
conflict to an end. It supports the territorial integrity of
Azerbaijan. And just recently, aid to Armenia in the budget year for
2010 was reduced while aid to Azerbaijan was increased. As it is said,
when you know that the cards are stacked against you, only the fool
continues to play.
Leaders of our advocacy organizations have misread the political
landscape once again. The emotional issue of genocide recognition
is not the battle that should be fought at this time. While the
Armenian Caucus is working diligently to line up additional support
for the genocide resolution, the "war" for Armenia's future and
that of Karabagh is being lost in the international arena. It is
conceivable in the Machiavellian world of international politics for
the genocide resolution to be passed by the United States Congress
and reluctantly signed by President Obama, accompanied by an innocuous
statement that Turkey would condemn with the proper amount of public
indignation. Washington and Ankara could well have discussed this
possibility notwithstanding the usual pressure from the pro-Turkish
lobbying organizations. The price Turkey would extract from the
Obama Administration would be its support in the ongoing negotiations
with Armenia and the return of Karabagh to Azerbaijan. This would be
Turkey's reward while the geostrategic interests of the United States
would be served.
With limited political capital, the Armenian advocacy organization
in the United States must speak with a unified voice and pick the
single battle it will fight. Genocide recognition is not the battle
that should be fought at this time. The efforts of the Congressional
Armenian Caucus must be utilized in more effective ways to bring
immediate economic and military benefits to Armenia and to Karabagh.
How the negotiations leading to normalization will eventually play out
can only be inferred from the public statements by Turkish leaders and
the foreign policy of the United States. Once Armenia has accepted the
conditions necessary for normalization, or whatever euphemistic term
that may be substituted, Yerevan will have no valid reason to believe
that Ankara will be motivated or even have the need to consider the
legitimate issues that have separated the two countries. And what of
those countries that have recognized the Armenian Genocide? Will they
support Armenia, once normalization has been achieved, as it seeks
to have Turkey consider the legitimate claims requiring restitution,
reparation, rectification, and yes, recognition. Definitely not.
Normalization is the end of Hai Tahd and it is the end for the justice
that generations of Armenians have worked to achieve. Let's not say
this is a pessimistic view because it doesn't comport with what we want
to believe. It is an objective assessment of the situation based on
the available evidence. Let us all hope that Yerevan will realize that
normalization is not a panacea for the Armenian nation. If anything, it
is detrimental to Armenia's national interests and its future security.
Michael Mensoian
http://www.hairenik.com/weekly/2009/05/1 8/the-roadmap-to-normalization-is-a-roadmap-to-obl ivion-for-armenia/
May 18, 2009
The "roadmap to normalization" is a roadmap to oblivion for
Armenia. Secrecy in the ongoing negotiations may be necessary, but
given the advantage that Turkey enjoys and the strident comments
made by Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, President Abdullah Gul,
and the former Minister of Foreign Affairs Ali Babacan, the only
conclusion that can be reached is that the negotiations are not
beneficial for Armenia.
Turkey still persists in demanding preconditions which, if accepted,
would be a tacit admission by Yerevan that genocide recognition and
Nagorno-Karabagh's continued independence will not stand in the way
of normalizing relations. For sure, Turkey will not budge on the
genocide issue and will not forsake its ally Azerbaijan. Both Ankara
and Washington know that Russia is standing in the wings ready to do
whatever it can to bring Azerbaijan within its orbit. The Nabucco gas
pipeline project has evidently been approved by all participating
nations. Eventually, gas supplies from Central Asia will be pumped
beneath the Caspian Sea to be sent through this pipeline to the
European Union. Armenia will have no part to play in this new economic
endeavor. Having a fairly accurate sense as to what normalization
may cost Armenia, what are the benefits that Yerevan believes it
may obtain?
The opening of the border will result in a significant increase
in traffic. Unfortunately, it will primarily be a one-way flow of
goods from Turkey to Armenia. How Armenia, with its US $18 billion
Gross Domestic Product (GDP), expects to compete with Turkey's US
$800 billion GDP is difficult to imagine. Eventually, Armenia will
not only become part of the Turkish domestic market, but it will be
dependent upon Turkey for much of its manufactured goods. A related
development could well be a rise in unemployment and a decrease in
productivity since Turkey is better positioned to expand its production
facilities and attract the necessary labor. In addition, a real
possibility exists for Armenian entrepreneurs to migrate to Turkey,
where economic opportunity should be greater than in Armenia. Given
the volume and variety of goods stamped "made in Turkey" that will
flood the Armenian market, there will be an imbalance of payment
situation-with Turkey becoming the creditor nation. There are few
goods or commodities produced in Armenia that are not produced in
greater quantities in Turkey, which limits any significant flow of
traffic from Armenia to Turkey. Is this what Yerevan believes will be
a benefit derived from normalization? Within a relatively short time,
the Armenian dram would most likely lose its value as the currency
of choice, being replaced by the Turkish lira.
Any potential the Armenian economy currently has would be limited
since its development will be determined by Turkish entrepreneurs
who will be influenced by Ankara's political objectives vis-a-vis
Yerevan. Normalization will not remove the existing impediments
hampering the Armenian economy. Of greater importance, potential
initiatives that are vital if Armenia's economy is to develop will
be hampered by its economic domination by Turkey.
Politically, Armenia will retain its independent status. However, its
initiatives in the international arena will be influenced by Ankara. To
borrow a term from the distant past, the president of Armenia will be
no better than a satrap. With respect to Nagorno-Karabagh (historic
Artsakh), its future will be bleak. As a precondition, Armenia is
being asked to sacrifice the de facto independence of its brothers
and sisters. This would be a travesty should Yerevan agree. The 7,000
azatamartiks (freedom-fighters) are no less martyrs than the 1,500,000
innocent Armenian men, women, and children who were slaughtered during
the genocide carried out by the Ottoman Turkish government and the
Ataturk Turkish government. Can there be any justification for Yerevan
abandoning Karabagh? For abandoning the martyrs of the genocide?
In 15 years, the Karabaghtsis have overcome obstacles that many thought
were insurmountable. They have developed a democratic government
while Azerbaijan maintains a Soviet-style autocratic government. In
1923, Armenia had no say when the Bolsheviks forced the separation
of historic Armenian Artsakh and Nakhichevan to Azerbaijan. To allow
Artsakh to revert to Azeri control again is unconscionable. This may
well be the moment when it is absolutely necessary for Armenia to
decide whether it will become a compliant neighbor or accept the
challenge, daunting as it may be, to protect its future and the
independence of Artsakh as well. One may say this is easier said
than done. Agreed. However, normalization will reduce Armenia to a
vassal state. How will this differ from the Soviet Socialist Republic
of Armenia?
No one should fail to see the duplicitous nature of United States
foreign policy with respect to Armenia. The present Democrat
administration supports Turkey's entry into the European Union. It
suggests that Turkey should have a role in bringing the Karabagh
conflict to an end. It supports the territorial integrity of
Azerbaijan. And just recently, aid to Armenia in the budget year for
2010 was reduced while aid to Azerbaijan was increased. As it is said,
when you know that the cards are stacked against you, only the fool
continues to play.
Leaders of our advocacy organizations have misread the political
landscape once again. The emotional issue of genocide recognition
is not the battle that should be fought at this time. While the
Armenian Caucus is working diligently to line up additional support
for the genocide resolution, the "war" for Armenia's future and
that of Karabagh is being lost in the international arena. It is
conceivable in the Machiavellian world of international politics for
the genocide resolution to be passed by the United States Congress
and reluctantly signed by President Obama, accompanied by an innocuous
statement that Turkey would condemn with the proper amount of public
indignation. Washington and Ankara could well have discussed this
possibility notwithstanding the usual pressure from the pro-Turkish
lobbying organizations. The price Turkey would extract from the
Obama Administration would be its support in the ongoing negotiations
with Armenia and the return of Karabagh to Azerbaijan. This would be
Turkey's reward while the geostrategic interests of the United States
would be served.
With limited political capital, the Armenian advocacy organization
in the United States must speak with a unified voice and pick the
single battle it will fight. Genocide recognition is not the battle
that should be fought at this time. The efforts of the Congressional
Armenian Caucus must be utilized in more effective ways to bring
immediate economic and military benefits to Armenia and to Karabagh.
How the negotiations leading to normalization will eventually play out
can only be inferred from the public statements by Turkish leaders and
the foreign policy of the United States. Once Armenia has accepted the
conditions necessary for normalization, or whatever euphemistic term
that may be substituted, Yerevan will have no valid reason to believe
that Ankara will be motivated or even have the need to consider the
legitimate issues that have separated the two countries. And what of
those countries that have recognized the Armenian Genocide? Will they
support Armenia, once normalization has been achieved, as it seeks
to have Turkey consider the legitimate claims requiring restitution,
reparation, rectification, and yes, recognition. Definitely not.
Normalization is the end of Hai Tahd and it is the end for the justice
that generations of Armenians have worked to achieve. Let's not say
this is a pessimistic view because it doesn't comport with what we want
to believe. It is an objective assessment of the situation based on
the available evidence. Let us all hope that Yerevan will realize that
normalization is not a panacea for the Armenian nation. If anything, it
is detrimental to Armenia's national interests and its future security.