Tweet
news.az, Azerbaijan
April 10 2010
Sweden remains strong proponent of Turkish EU membership - analyst
Sat 10 April 2010 | 05:00 GMT Text size:
Fredrik Langdal News.Az interviews Fredrik Langdal, Researcher in
Political Science of Swedish Institute for European Policy Studies
(SIEPS).
The Swedish parliament has recognized so called `Armenian genocide'.
What was the motive and necessity of this act?
The decision in parliament was one of very few lost votes of the
majority coalition centre-right government and it lost with only one
vote (due to a number of centre-right MP's which voted with the
opposition).
It is said in the decision that '¦ Research and a free and open
discussion regarding what happened are important tools to create a
process of reconciliation. It is therefore the responsibility of
politicians to acknowledge the historical fact that the genocide is.
Sweden should act forcefully within the EU and the UN to ensure an
international recognition of this genocide. A recognition is
exceptionally important to achieve a redress for Armenians',
Assyrians/Syrians', Chaeldeans', Ponti's, amongst others, situation
and identity and to create an improved base for future dialogue' [my
translation ` not official].
This text was supported by the Social Democratic Party, The Left Party
and the Green Party.
Against this view was the Government view which rested on three
arguments. First, politicians should not write history. Second,
genocide is a legal concept and should be left to courts. Third, the
adoption of the genocide position would be counterproductive to the
reconciliation process between Turkey and Armenia.
Won't this decision harm Swedish-Turkish relations and the process of
normalization of relations between Turkey and Armenia?
The reasons given by the opposition (that is those who voted in favor)
was exactly the opposite. They stated that the position adopted by the
Swedish parliament would benefit the rapprochement between Turkey and
Armenia while those who voted against the decision said it would, on
the contrary, harm reconciliation and only benefit the military and
nationalistic forces in Turkey. Judging by the Turkish reaction to the
decision it can be said that in the short run the decision seems to
have done more harm than good and the development in the long run
remains to be seen. However, one should perhaps not overestimate the
impact either way of the decision of the Swedish Parliament on the
normalization process between Turkey and Armenia.
Does Armenia and Turkey mean the same for Sweden?
What one can say regarding Turkey is that Sweden has been ` and
remains ` a strong proponent of a Turkish EU membership. This position
is supported by all parties in parliament but if the current
opposition wins the election in September one may see a tougher policy
towards Turkey, especially regarding minority rights issues but Turkey
would nonetheless be welcomed as a member of the EU when it fulfills
the criteria for membership.
As for Armenia it does not feature as high on the foreign policy
agenda. The foreign policy towards Armenia is mainly conducted via the
European Union and its Eastern Partnership Initiative. In general
Swedish policy towards the Eastern neighbors aims at fostering
democracy, rule of law and market economy.
The Swedish authorities were against the recognition of "Armenian
genocide" but the parliament adopted this decision. Does it mean that
Armenian diaspora has a large influence to Swedish parliament?
The Swedish government was against this decision but was defeated in
parliament by a number of back bench MPs who voted with the opposition
on this particular issue. I do not know the influence of the Armenian
diaspora but the key decision to understand the decision of the
parliament is the changed policy position of the Social Democratic
Party. During its congress in 2009 the party leadership lost the vote
on this issue and it became the policy of the party to work for a
recognition of the genocide of Armenians, Assyrians, Syrians and
Chaldeans and other Christian groups in the Ottoman Empire. This
change of the policy position of the Social democrats seems to have
primarily advocated by a constituency with a high number of Assyrians.
After the recognition of `Armenian genocide' by Sweden, Turkey has
called back its ambassador. But in few days Turkish ambassador
returned to Stockholm. Do you expect that tension in Turkish-Swedish
relations will grow or they will remain on normal level?
I do not expect the tensions to grow at present as long as the
government - which is in charge of foreign policy - does not raise the
stakes which is it will not. The government will thus not pursue the
decision adopted by parliament.
However, as I said earlier if there is a change of government after
the elections in September and a new red-green government makes the
promotion of genocide recognition within the EU and the UN a
government policy (which it has said that it will), this is likely to
add to tension between Sweden and Turkey (combined with increased
emphasis on the situation and human ` and minority - rights of Kurds).
Azerbaijan and Armenia are going to involve some countries (and Sweden
among them) to the peacekeeping mission in the South Caucasus after
the agreement on settlement of Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. Does Sweden
have the necessary experience in other parts of the world to provide
such mission?
Yes. In recent years Sweden has sent peace-keeping missions to Congo
and Afghanistan and international tasks of this kind is nowadays one
of the key tasks for the Swedish military. However, any deployment
would be conditioned on having enough troops to send and a decision by
the United Nations.
W.W.
News.Az
April 10 2010
Sweden remains strong proponent of Turkish EU membership - analyst
Sat 10 April 2010 | 05:00 GMT Text size:
Fredrik Langdal News.Az interviews Fredrik Langdal, Researcher in
Political Science of Swedish Institute for European Policy Studies
(SIEPS).
The Swedish parliament has recognized so called `Armenian genocide'.
What was the motive and necessity of this act?
The decision in parliament was one of very few lost votes of the
majority coalition centre-right government and it lost with only one
vote (due to a number of centre-right MP's which voted with the
opposition).
It is said in the decision that '¦ Research and a free and open
discussion regarding what happened are important tools to create a
process of reconciliation. It is therefore the responsibility of
politicians to acknowledge the historical fact that the genocide is.
Sweden should act forcefully within the EU and the UN to ensure an
international recognition of this genocide. A recognition is
exceptionally important to achieve a redress for Armenians',
Assyrians/Syrians', Chaeldeans', Ponti's, amongst others, situation
and identity and to create an improved base for future dialogue' [my
translation ` not official].
This text was supported by the Social Democratic Party, The Left Party
and the Green Party.
Against this view was the Government view which rested on three
arguments. First, politicians should not write history. Second,
genocide is a legal concept and should be left to courts. Third, the
adoption of the genocide position would be counterproductive to the
reconciliation process between Turkey and Armenia.
Won't this decision harm Swedish-Turkish relations and the process of
normalization of relations between Turkey and Armenia?
The reasons given by the opposition (that is those who voted in favor)
was exactly the opposite. They stated that the position adopted by the
Swedish parliament would benefit the rapprochement between Turkey and
Armenia while those who voted against the decision said it would, on
the contrary, harm reconciliation and only benefit the military and
nationalistic forces in Turkey. Judging by the Turkish reaction to the
decision it can be said that in the short run the decision seems to
have done more harm than good and the development in the long run
remains to be seen. However, one should perhaps not overestimate the
impact either way of the decision of the Swedish Parliament on the
normalization process between Turkey and Armenia.
Does Armenia and Turkey mean the same for Sweden?
What one can say regarding Turkey is that Sweden has been ` and
remains ` a strong proponent of a Turkish EU membership. This position
is supported by all parties in parliament but if the current
opposition wins the election in September one may see a tougher policy
towards Turkey, especially regarding minority rights issues but Turkey
would nonetheless be welcomed as a member of the EU when it fulfills
the criteria for membership.
As for Armenia it does not feature as high on the foreign policy
agenda. The foreign policy towards Armenia is mainly conducted via the
European Union and its Eastern Partnership Initiative. In general
Swedish policy towards the Eastern neighbors aims at fostering
democracy, rule of law and market economy.
The Swedish authorities were against the recognition of "Armenian
genocide" but the parliament adopted this decision. Does it mean that
Armenian diaspora has a large influence to Swedish parliament?
The Swedish government was against this decision but was defeated in
parliament by a number of back bench MPs who voted with the opposition
on this particular issue. I do not know the influence of the Armenian
diaspora but the key decision to understand the decision of the
parliament is the changed policy position of the Social Democratic
Party. During its congress in 2009 the party leadership lost the vote
on this issue and it became the policy of the party to work for a
recognition of the genocide of Armenians, Assyrians, Syrians and
Chaldeans and other Christian groups in the Ottoman Empire. This
change of the policy position of the Social democrats seems to have
primarily advocated by a constituency with a high number of Assyrians.
After the recognition of `Armenian genocide' by Sweden, Turkey has
called back its ambassador. But in few days Turkish ambassador
returned to Stockholm. Do you expect that tension in Turkish-Swedish
relations will grow or they will remain on normal level?
I do not expect the tensions to grow at present as long as the
government - which is in charge of foreign policy - does not raise the
stakes which is it will not. The government will thus not pursue the
decision adopted by parliament.
However, as I said earlier if there is a change of government after
the elections in September and a new red-green government makes the
promotion of genocide recognition within the EU and the UN a
government policy (which it has said that it will), this is likely to
add to tension between Sweden and Turkey (combined with increased
emphasis on the situation and human ` and minority - rights of Kurds).
Azerbaijan and Armenia are going to involve some countries (and Sweden
among them) to the peacekeeping mission in the South Caucasus after
the agreement on settlement of Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. Does Sweden
have the necessary experience in other parts of the world to provide
such mission?
Yes. In recent years Sweden has sent peace-keeping missions to Congo
and Afghanistan and international tasks of this kind is nowadays one
of the key tasks for the Swedish military. However, any deployment
would be conditioned on having enough troops to send and a decision by
the United Nations.
W.W.
News.Az