Tweet
WHY MAY TURKEY CHANGE ITS MIND?
Hakob Badalyan
http://www.lragir.am/engsrc/comments-lra hos15527.html
14:38:07 - 13/10/2009
Answering reporters' questions at the airport, Serge Sargsyan says if
the Turkish parliament is not going to ratify the Armenian-Turkish
protocols why it signed them in Zurich. Really. Why did the Turks
sign if they are not going to ratify the protocols? We may answer
this question in the following way: not in all the countries,
the parliament is an adjunct system of the government and does
exceptionally what the government says. We may answer saying that there
are countries where the political system is soberer, resistive and
have counterbalance mechanisms which give to the country flexibility
and great possibility in foreign issues. Perhaps, if Serge Sargsyan
was managed to be persuaded in this question, he would have not asked
this question at the airport. If he asks it, this means that Serge
Sargsyan is sure such a thing is impossible and in all the countries,
everything is decided by the will of one person or a group of people.
What answer may be given to Serge Sargsyan question. For example,
one of the possible answers may be that the Turkish government signs
the protocols then it may change its mind and may not ratify them. But
in this case, Serge Sargsyan may ask, why the Turkish government has
to change its mind in several days. And really. What has to happen
for the Turkish government to change its mind? Say the Turks may
change their mind if the Armenian national football team wins the
Turkish one during the 2010 world qualifiers. But this game does
not decide anything because the Turks do not have any chance to pass
the qualifiers, consequently, they may gift the game to the Armenian
deepening the tolerant image of their nation and country that they
are shaping by establishing relations with Armenia.
The Turks may also change their mind because of the reason what Armenia
did not want to make concessions in connection with the Karabakh
issue. From this point of view, the situation is really vague. The
Karabakh issue is not a direct condition though it is doubtless
that the process of the normalization of the Armenian and Turkish
relations makes logically inevitable its connection with it. But
in this connection either, it is vague what concessions have been
promised to the Turks that it can change its mind with regard to the
ratification if the pledge is not fulfilled. In order to have a minimal
idea in this connection we have to imagine what kind of concessions
Turkey would like. It demands openly the return of released areas,
territorial integrity of Azerbaijan and immunity of borders. But
is this what Turkey expects in connection with Karabakh? And maybe
Turkey does not expect any tangible move in this direction besides
its involvement in the present process.
Perhaps Turkey needs this to expand its geopolitical resources and
not the "territorial integrity" of Azerbaijan. Turkey does not care
whose army is in Horadiz if it lacks in the frameworks of those
issues. Consequently, Turkey's expectation is to be practically
involved in the process of the Karabakh settlement. And under the
name of Karabakh settlement there have been taking place many wide
developments for long time which refer to the development in our
region as well as adjacent regions.
This is what Turkey needs. And from this point, Turkey's expectation
is not from Armenia but from the international society, better to
say superpower. They may agree or refuse Turkey's involvement in the
wide frames of regional discussions. It is another question that the
superpowers may use Armenia for this purpose. From this point, Serge
Sargsyan's question should be asked to superpowers whether they will
create grounds for Turkey to change its mind and what role they have
allocated for Armenia in all this.
Hakob Badalyan
http://www.lragir.am/engsrc/comments-lra hos15527.html
14:38:07 - 13/10/2009
Answering reporters' questions at the airport, Serge Sargsyan says if
the Turkish parliament is not going to ratify the Armenian-Turkish
protocols why it signed them in Zurich. Really. Why did the Turks
sign if they are not going to ratify the protocols? We may answer
this question in the following way: not in all the countries,
the parliament is an adjunct system of the government and does
exceptionally what the government says. We may answer saying that there
are countries where the political system is soberer, resistive and
have counterbalance mechanisms which give to the country flexibility
and great possibility in foreign issues. Perhaps, if Serge Sargsyan
was managed to be persuaded in this question, he would have not asked
this question at the airport. If he asks it, this means that Serge
Sargsyan is sure such a thing is impossible and in all the countries,
everything is decided by the will of one person or a group of people.
What answer may be given to Serge Sargsyan question. For example,
one of the possible answers may be that the Turkish government signs
the protocols then it may change its mind and may not ratify them. But
in this case, Serge Sargsyan may ask, why the Turkish government has
to change its mind in several days. And really. What has to happen
for the Turkish government to change its mind? Say the Turks may
change their mind if the Armenian national football team wins the
Turkish one during the 2010 world qualifiers. But this game does
not decide anything because the Turks do not have any chance to pass
the qualifiers, consequently, they may gift the game to the Armenian
deepening the tolerant image of their nation and country that they
are shaping by establishing relations with Armenia.
The Turks may also change their mind because of the reason what Armenia
did not want to make concessions in connection with the Karabakh
issue. From this point of view, the situation is really vague. The
Karabakh issue is not a direct condition though it is doubtless
that the process of the normalization of the Armenian and Turkish
relations makes logically inevitable its connection with it. But
in this connection either, it is vague what concessions have been
promised to the Turks that it can change its mind with regard to the
ratification if the pledge is not fulfilled. In order to have a minimal
idea in this connection we have to imagine what kind of concessions
Turkey would like. It demands openly the return of released areas,
territorial integrity of Azerbaijan and immunity of borders. But
is this what Turkey expects in connection with Karabakh? And maybe
Turkey does not expect any tangible move in this direction besides
its involvement in the present process.
Perhaps Turkey needs this to expand its geopolitical resources and
not the "territorial integrity" of Azerbaijan. Turkey does not care
whose army is in Horadiz if it lacks in the frameworks of those
issues. Consequently, Turkey's expectation is to be practically
involved in the process of the Karabakh settlement. And under the
name of Karabakh settlement there have been taking place many wide
developments for long time which refer to the development in our
region as well as adjacent regions.
This is what Turkey needs. And from this point, Turkey's expectation
is not from Armenia but from the international society, better to
say superpower. They may agree or refuse Turkey's involvement in the
wide frames of regional discussions. It is another question that the
superpowers may use Armenia for this purpose. From this point, Serge
Sargsyan's question should be asked to superpowers whether they will
create grounds for Turkey to change its mind and what role they have
allocated for Armenia in all this.