Tweet
HULIQ.com, SC
April 17 2010
Benefits of Armenia If Ratifying Protocols Before Turkey
The position of the government of Armenia so far has been if Turkey
ratifies the protocols, signed with Armenia last year to normalize
relations, Armenia would move quickly ratifying it without any delays.
Turkey is dragging the ratification of the those protocols in the
parliament tying them to relations with Azerbaijan. But what if
Armenia moves on and ratifies them first? Surprisingly, there are
benefits here for the entire process.
The reigning public opinion toward ratification of Turkish Armenian
normalization protocols is that Armenia needs it more than Turkey
because Turkey has closed its border with Armenia and will open it for
trade after normalization is achieved. While there is truth in this
Turkey needs that border to be open as much as Armenia. The eastern
provinces of Turkey would benefit from the increased trade. Westward
moving Armenian goods would pass through Turkey (not for free of
course), and Turkish Armenian open border would serve as a trade link
between Middle East and Russia. After all, Turkey did not close that
border because it had a problem with Amenia, but because it made a
sacrifice for Azerbaijan, siding with it in Nagorno Karabakh issue.
The word "sacrifice" is important term here. As veteran Turkish
journalist Mehmed Ali Birand writes in April 14th issue of Hurriyet,
many in Turkey don't see the same mutual care and sacrifice in
Azerbaijan for Turkish needs. Thus, Turkey is sacrificing its trade
with Armenia and its EU ambitions by keeping a border with a
neighboring country closed in the 21st century. Europeans, of course,
do not understand this and say that an EU aspiring country should not
have closed border with a neighbor.
Thus, Turkey conditions ratifying the Armenian normalization protocols
with Azerbaijan and Armenia weight for Turkish ratification to make
its own move. But what would happen if Armenia becomes first to ratify
those protocols?
Many in Armenia may oppose this view. For them the concern is that
Turkey and Azerbaijan will look at that as a sign o weakness. They
think Turkey and Azerbaijan may conclude that Armenia was quick to
ratify it because it needs the open border.
However, the short answer is that Armenia should ratify the protocols
first because when it signed them, it believed this is the right thing
to do. Armenia should first ratify the protocols because that would
show an international leadership of looking forward and beyond things.
That would put Turkey in a very difficult position and possibly speed
up the Nagorno Karabakh process as well.
The dynamic of the international relations today considers reliable
those countries that show leadership and stick to their word. Already
for more than 6 months Turkey keeps saying left and right that it is
faithful to its commitment to the protocols and taking necessary
steps. The latest were in Washington. However, no practical steps are
seen. Protocols are not ratified and the border is close.
If Armenia, on the other hand, ratifies the protocols before Turkey
that move will put Turkey in a very difficult and uneasy position in
front of the international community. What would Turkey be able to say
to the international community after Armenia ratifies those protocols?
How would Turkey reason its own delay after that? It would put Turkey
in a situation that unless the parliament takes an action ratifying
the protocols the executive branch of the government will have
tremendous difficulties explaining the Westerners and the Russians why
it is unable to ratify the protocols.
Then Turkey would have three options. The first, is to keep playing
with the same rule sand dragging the issue demanding concessions from
Armenia on Nagorno Karabakh issue. This option would be a weaker
choice. Just today, the U.S. State Department said that the U.S. wants
to see "Turkey and Armenia ratify those protocols, normalize
relations, open borders." Thus, this first choice is less likely to be
the followup if Armenia ratifies the protocols first.
The second option for Turkey would be to follow Armenia and ratify
those protocols immediately. Otherwise, they would risk being the
unreliable partner in the region. Turkey, aspiring to be an EU member
and a regional leader should not want the label of being unreliable.
In case Armenia ratifies the protocols before April 24 (the date when
Armenians commemorate the 1.5 million victims of the Armenian
genocide) and Turkey does not followup it would give the U.S.
president more grounds to keep his campaign promise and call the sad
events in the Ottoman Empire as genocide. Turkish leadership is very
sensitive to this definition and denies the genocide claim.
The third option for Turkey is to help Azerbaijan to see the reality
of the Nagorno Karabakh conflict and bring Azerbaijan to more
constructive position, thus making a progress to the solution of
Nagorno Karabakh issue. If Turkey follows the second option it would
go without Azerbaijan. But if Turkey wants to keep its word given to
Azerbaijan it may one day realize that Azerbaijan is being the problem
in this conflict refusing to recognize people's right to self
determination. So if Turkey can show Azerbaijan that after so many
bellicose statements it's impossible to convince the Armenian
population of Nagorno Karabakh to be back under Azerbaijan's control,
then that would, in turn, speed up the Nagorno Karabakh conflict
resolution. Then Azerbaijan may show signs that it is prepared to
fully respect the UN charter on people's right to self determination,
which in turn brings progress in Armenia Azerbaijan relations. This is
what Turkey wanted to see in the past two decades.
In our view, if Armenia ratifies the Turkish-Armenian normalization
protocols Turkey will either go with the second or the third option.
If Armenia ratifies the protocols early next week before April 24,
considering there is less time for Turkey to convince Azerbaijan,
Turkey may simply go with the second option. In fact, today Turkish
foreign minister said he will leave for Baku and Tehran. In Baku he
will discuss the dynamics of the recent Turk-Armenian and U.S.-Turkish
meetings.
Looking from the above perspective Armenia would benefit in many ways
by becoming the first to ratify the protocols. It will seriously
challenge Turkey by showing leadership in relations. After all,
improving relations in the 21st century does not mean who needs it
most. We all need better relations. This is why the European countries
created EU.
In conclusion, Armenian leadership and the decision making authorities
know better and know more. They make their decisions based on
information not available to us. This article is just a
review-analysis. However, when Armenia and Turkey signed the protocols
last year in Zurich to normalize mutual relations, they did not do it
conditioning by other site's ratification, but because it was the
right thing to do.
Armenia signed the protocols because the government decided it meets
the Armenian national interest and is a good political strategic
decision. In the same way, it may well surprise Turkey and the
international community by ratifying them because those two protocols
meet its national interest and are good from strategic point of view.
Written by Armen Hareyan
HULIQ.com
http://www.huliq.com/1/92749/be nefits-armenia-if-ratifying-protocols-turkey
April 17 2010
Benefits of Armenia If Ratifying Protocols Before Turkey
The position of the government of Armenia so far has been if Turkey
ratifies the protocols, signed with Armenia last year to normalize
relations, Armenia would move quickly ratifying it without any delays.
Turkey is dragging the ratification of the those protocols in the
parliament tying them to relations with Azerbaijan. But what if
Armenia moves on and ratifies them first? Surprisingly, there are
benefits here for the entire process.
The reigning public opinion toward ratification of Turkish Armenian
normalization protocols is that Armenia needs it more than Turkey
because Turkey has closed its border with Armenia and will open it for
trade after normalization is achieved. While there is truth in this
Turkey needs that border to be open as much as Armenia. The eastern
provinces of Turkey would benefit from the increased trade. Westward
moving Armenian goods would pass through Turkey (not for free of
course), and Turkish Armenian open border would serve as a trade link
between Middle East and Russia. After all, Turkey did not close that
border because it had a problem with Amenia, but because it made a
sacrifice for Azerbaijan, siding with it in Nagorno Karabakh issue.
The word "sacrifice" is important term here. As veteran Turkish
journalist Mehmed Ali Birand writes in April 14th issue of Hurriyet,
many in Turkey don't see the same mutual care and sacrifice in
Azerbaijan for Turkish needs. Thus, Turkey is sacrificing its trade
with Armenia and its EU ambitions by keeping a border with a
neighboring country closed in the 21st century. Europeans, of course,
do not understand this and say that an EU aspiring country should not
have closed border with a neighbor.
Thus, Turkey conditions ratifying the Armenian normalization protocols
with Azerbaijan and Armenia weight for Turkish ratification to make
its own move. But what would happen if Armenia becomes first to ratify
those protocols?
Many in Armenia may oppose this view. For them the concern is that
Turkey and Azerbaijan will look at that as a sign o weakness. They
think Turkey and Azerbaijan may conclude that Armenia was quick to
ratify it because it needs the open border.
However, the short answer is that Armenia should ratify the protocols
first because when it signed them, it believed this is the right thing
to do. Armenia should first ratify the protocols because that would
show an international leadership of looking forward and beyond things.
That would put Turkey in a very difficult position and possibly speed
up the Nagorno Karabakh process as well.
The dynamic of the international relations today considers reliable
those countries that show leadership and stick to their word. Already
for more than 6 months Turkey keeps saying left and right that it is
faithful to its commitment to the protocols and taking necessary
steps. The latest were in Washington. However, no practical steps are
seen. Protocols are not ratified and the border is close.
If Armenia, on the other hand, ratifies the protocols before Turkey
that move will put Turkey in a very difficult and uneasy position in
front of the international community. What would Turkey be able to say
to the international community after Armenia ratifies those protocols?
How would Turkey reason its own delay after that? It would put Turkey
in a situation that unless the parliament takes an action ratifying
the protocols the executive branch of the government will have
tremendous difficulties explaining the Westerners and the Russians why
it is unable to ratify the protocols.
Then Turkey would have three options. The first, is to keep playing
with the same rule sand dragging the issue demanding concessions from
Armenia on Nagorno Karabakh issue. This option would be a weaker
choice. Just today, the U.S. State Department said that the U.S. wants
to see "Turkey and Armenia ratify those protocols, normalize
relations, open borders." Thus, this first choice is less likely to be
the followup if Armenia ratifies the protocols first.
The second option for Turkey would be to follow Armenia and ratify
those protocols immediately. Otherwise, they would risk being the
unreliable partner in the region. Turkey, aspiring to be an EU member
and a regional leader should not want the label of being unreliable.
In case Armenia ratifies the protocols before April 24 (the date when
Armenians commemorate the 1.5 million victims of the Armenian
genocide) and Turkey does not followup it would give the U.S.
president more grounds to keep his campaign promise and call the sad
events in the Ottoman Empire as genocide. Turkish leadership is very
sensitive to this definition and denies the genocide claim.
The third option for Turkey is to help Azerbaijan to see the reality
of the Nagorno Karabakh conflict and bring Azerbaijan to more
constructive position, thus making a progress to the solution of
Nagorno Karabakh issue. If Turkey follows the second option it would
go without Azerbaijan. But if Turkey wants to keep its word given to
Azerbaijan it may one day realize that Azerbaijan is being the problem
in this conflict refusing to recognize people's right to self
determination. So if Turkey can show Azerbaijan that after so many
bellicose statements it's impossible to convince the Armenian
population of Nagorno Karabakh to be back under Azerbaijan's control,
then that would, in turn, speed up the Nagorno Karabakh conflict
resolution. Then Azerbaijan may show signs that it is prepared to
fully respect the UN charter on people's right to self determination,
which in turn brings progress in Armenia Azerbaijan relations. This is
what Turkey wanted to see in the past two decades.
In our view, if Armenia ratifies the Turkish-Armenian normalization
protocols Turkey will either go with the second or the third option.
If Armenia ratifies the protocols early next week before April 24,
considering there is less time for Turkey to convince Azerbaijan,
Turkey may simply go with the second option. In fact, today Turkish
foreign minister said he will leave for Baku and Tehran. In Baku he
will discuss the dynamics of the recent Turk-Armenian and U.S.-Turkish
meetings.
Looking from the above perspective Armenia would benefit in many ways
by becoming the first to ratify the protocols. It will seriously
challenge Turkey by showing leadership in relations. After all,
improving relations in the 21st century does not mean who needs it
most. We all need better relations. This is why the European countries
created EU.
In conclusion, Armenian leadership and the decision making authorities
know better and know more. They make their decisions based on
information not available to us. This article is just a
review-analysis. However, when Armenia and Turkey signed the protocols
last year in Zurich to normalize mutual relations, they did not do it
conditioning by other site's ratification, but because it was the
right thing to do.
Armenia signed the protocols because the government decided it meets
the Armenian national interest and is a good political strategic
decision. In the same way, it may well surprise Turkey and the
international community by ratifying them because those two protocols
meet its national interest and are good from strategic point of view.
Written by Armen Hareyan
HULIQ.com
http://www.huliq.com/1/92749/be nefits-armenia-if-ratifying-protocols-turkey