Tweet
Hurriyet, Turkey
March 19 2010
Fate of the protocols
Friday, March 19, 2010
SAMÄ° KOHEN
Despite the insistence of the opposition, Foreign Minister Ahmet
DavutoÄ?lu announced during the Parliamentary Foreign Relations
Commission that the protocols signed with Armenia will not be
withdrawn.
This is a sign that: 1) The government is determined to pursue these
protocols aimed at the normalization of bilateral relations between
Armenia and Turkey despite all odds. 2) This determination is not
affected by the fact that the Unites States House of Representatives
Foreign Affairs Committee and the Swedish Parliament passed the
genocide resolutions, or at least at this stage. In other words,
Turkey is not throwing the protocols away as a reaction.
This is a smart act, I believe. If Ankara had withdrawn the protocols,
it could've angered the international community from the United States
to Russia, all of whom ask Turkey to implement the protocols.
Therefore, Turkey could've been the guilty party for missing such a
great historic opportunity. And of course, the Armenian Diaspora
conducting the genocide campaign could've been delighted with that.
Another negative result of such a possible move could've been that
Turkey would have lost all trump cards in hand to play in the solution
of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan, for
which Turkey plays the mediator. Ankara has tied the approval of the
protocols to some kind of progress on the Karabakh issue. In order to
reach a decision in favor of Azerbaijan, Turkish diplomacy has pushed
the Minsk Group for more active involvement. If the protocols are
withdrawn from the Turkish Parliament, and if the process comes to an
end even before a start, a solution to the Karabakh question will be
history.
There is hope¦
What could be the benefit if the protocols remain on Parliament's
agenda? What could decide the fate of these protocols?
Top Foreign Ministry officials held a briefing the other day in
Istanbul. We see through the information provided that Ankara is both
prudent and optimistic.
Such optimism stems from the fact that the Minsk Group, the U.S. and
Russia in particular, have exerted a great deal on efforts for the
solution of the Karabakh conflict and pressuring Armenia to withdraw
from the territories occupied. We see signs of progress recently. A
new form of agreement seems to have shaped up based on the Madrid
Criteria determined in 2007. The Azerbaijani Foreign Minister
announced progress in the subject¦
Since the Turkish government has made a solution on the Karabakh issue
binding for the approval of the protocols, what could we expect from
the efforts of the Minsk Group? Officials have made important
explanations: Expected progress on the Karabakh question is a
`framework agreement;' in other words, a new agreement draft based on
the Madrid Criteria.
What I understand is this: After the protocols' signature ceremony,
Prime Minister Recep Tayyip ErdoÄ?an had many times said, `If there is
no solution on the Karabakh conflict, there would be no implementation
of these protocols' upon heavy pressures by Azerbaijan. The Karabakh
question is quite complex and it could take some time to decide the
final status of Karabakh. But what is meant is the Armenian withdrawal
from seven occupied Azeri regions. This is not at all an easy process.
Yet there is progress¦
No timeline
When could we expect a result from such a framework agreement?
Officials say it is impossible to utter a specific timeline. I think
expecting a conclusion within a few weeks is too optimistic. But the
process needs to be kept alive and Yerevan needs to be pressured.
If you put away the Zurich protocols, two parallel processes come to a
block: There would be no progress for the solution of the Karabakh
conflict, and no normalization in relations with Armenia and between
Yerevan and Baku.
Therefore, it is critical to keep the protocols on the agenda.
* Mr. Sami Kohen is a columnist for the daily Milliyet in which this
piece appeared Friday. It was translated into English by the Daily
News staff.
March 19 2010
Fate of the protocols
Friday, March 19, 2010
SAMÄ° KOHEN
Despite the insistence of the opposition, Foreign Minister Ahmet
DavutoÄ?lu announced during the Parliamentary Foreign Relations
Commission that the protocols signed with Armenia will not be
withdrawn.
This is a sign that: 1) The government is determined to pursue these
protocols aimed at the normalization of bilateral relations between
Armenia and Turkey despite all odds. 2) This determination is not
affected by the fact that the Unites States House of Representatives
Foreign Affairs Committee and the Swedish Parliament passed the
genocide resolutions, or at least at this stage. In other words,
Turkey is not throwing the protocols away as a reaction.
This is a smart act, I believe. If Ankara had withdrawn the protocols,
it could've angered the international community from the United States
to Russia, all of whom ask Turkey to implement the protocols.
Therefore, Turkey could've been the guilty party for missing such a
great historic opportunity. And of course, the Armenian Diaspora
conducting the genocide campaign could've been delighted with that.
Another negative result of such a possible move could've been that
Turkey would have lost all trump cards in hand to play in the solution
of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan, for
which Turkey plays the mediator. Ankara has tied the approval of the
protocols to some kind of progress on the Karabakh issue. In order to
reach a decision in favor of Azerbaijan, Turkish diplomacy has pushed
the Minsk Group for more active involvement. If the protocols are
withdrawn from the Turkish Parliament, and if the process comes to an
end even before a start, a solution to the Karabakh question will be
history.
There is hope¦
What could be the benefit if the protocols remain on Parliament's
agenda? What could decide the fate of these protocols?
Top Foreign Ministry officials held a briefing the other day in
Istanbul. We see through the information provided that Ankara is both
prudent and optimistic.
Such optimism stems from the fact that the Minsk Group, the U.S. and
Russia in particular, have exerted a great deal on efforts for the
solution of the Karabakh conflict and pressuring Armenia to withdraw
from the territories occupied. We see signs of progress recently. A
new form of agreement seems to have shaped up based on the Madrid
Criteria determined in 2007. The Azerbaijani Foreign Minister
announced progress in the subject¦
Since the Turkish government has made a solution on the Karabakh issue
binding for the approval of the protocols, what could we expect from
the efforts of the Minsk Group? Officials have made important
explanations: Expected progress on the Karabakh question is a
`framework agreement;' in other words, a new agreement draft based on
the Madrid Criteria.
What I understand is this: After the protocols' signature ceremony,
Prime Minister Recep Tayyip ErdoÄ?an had many times said, `If there is
no solution on the Karabakh conflict, there would be no implementation
of these protocols' upon heavy pressures by Azerbaijan. The Karabakh
question is quite complex and it could take some time to decide the
final status of Karabakh. But what is meant is the Armenian withdrawal
from seven occupied Azeri regions. This is not at all an easy process.
Yet there is progress¦
No timeline
When could we expect a result from such a framework agreement?
Officials say it is impossible to utter a specific timeline. I think
expecting a conclusion within a few weeks is too optimistic. But the
process needs to be kept alive and Yerevan needs to be pressured.
If you put away the Zurich protocols, two parallel processes come to a
block: There would be no progress for the solution of the Karabakh
conflict, and no normalization in relations with Armenia and between
Yerevan and Baku.
Therefore, it is critical to keep the protocols on the agenda.
* Mr. Sami Kohen is a columnist for the daily Milliyet in which this
piece appeared Friday. It was translated into English by the Daily
News staff.