Tweet
ARMENIAN PRESIDENT HIMSELF HAS ALREADY LOST HIS INTEREST IN ARMENIAN-TURKISH PROCESS
ArmInfo
2010-03-23 16:14:00
Interview of Sergey Markedonov, Head of the Department for Problems of
Ethnic Relations at the Institute of Political and Military Analysis,
with ArmInfo news agency
Mr.Markedonov, how much perspective is further promotion of H.Res.252
on the Armenian Genocide?
The prospects of the H.Res.252 for adoption over the general voting
at the US Congress are not as big, as the political expediency itself
makes US Administration to argue against this pro-Armenian resolution.
Almost a similar situation was created in 2007 when the Subcommittee
of the US House of Representatives also voted "for" Resolution
106, however, the latter did not pass further. There are numerous
objective and subjective reasons for such alignment among supporters
and opponents of H.Res.252. The standstill in the Armenian-Turkish
process is one of such objective reasons. Of course, the standstill
is not a deadlock yet but it is not promotion either. There are not
only opponents but also supporters of recognition of the Armenian
Genocide in the USA, and these supporters do not take care whether
it is beneficial for the USA in the political aspect or not, they
just proceed from the sense of justice. So, the fight among the
supporters and advocates of justice and the supporters of a value
approach to recognition of the Armenian Genocide will go on. As
regards the Administration, it will do its best to prevent or at
least fail further promotion of H.Res. 252 in the Congress. In case
these efforts fail and the resolution is put on vote in the Congress,
President Obama will veto it.
By the way, do you expect Obama to speak Armenian again or to call
the Genocide in some different way?
I think that on April 24 Obama will speak Armenian again. I think
that something like this will happen. As regards the prospects
and probability if Obama will pronounce the word "genocide" in his
traditional address to the Armenian community in the USA on April 24,
I do not think it will happen. Obama will most probably find another
way to avoid responsibility and mention the fact of Genocide without
calling things by their proper names. I expect reoccurrence of last
year's situation.
Why is Turkey so much dear to the US Administration?
There are many reasons why Turkey is so much dear to US Administration,
and the problem of Iraq, which American servicemen got bogged
down in, is the most important one. Everything is simple, 70%
of military cargo to supply the American contingent in Iraq pass
via the territory of Turkey, and I don't think that in this case
Armenia may be an alternative to Turkey, since it is geographically
impossible. There is quite a specific problem of Afghanistan in which
the Turkish factor also plays its stable part. Moreover, there is also
the American base in the Turkish town of Injirlik, which Americans
cannot leave at present. And finally, the most important answer to
the question about the role of Turkey is hidden in the ideological and
political significance of Turkey for Washington. In fact, unlike the
rest Muslim, in particular, Arab world, Turkey is the only country
of the Islamic West which the USA has friendly relations with. So,
there are many obstacles, like the above-water and underwater reefs,
on the way of Resolution 252 promotion.
The Swedish Riksdag has recently recognized the Armenian Genocide in
Turkey, to which no importance is attached in Europe.
The situation with Sweden's recognition of the Armenian Genocide has
quite a different history and motivation. Moreover, this situation is
applicable not only to certain countries but to the whole European
Union. EU holds a rigid position with respect to Turkey concerning
the Armenian Genocide and demonstrates its unwillingness to accept
70-million Turkey to Europe. That is to say, the issue of recognition
of the Armenian Genocide for the European policy is a tool of
suppressing Turkey on the way to EU. In this context, the Europeans'
striving to recognize extirpation of Greeks and Assyrians by Turks
as genocide is of much significance. This is very important as the
Assyrian community in Europe is one of the largest ones despite the
fact that Assyrians have no motherland.
What has the process of ratification of the Armenian-Turkish Protocols
stumbled over?
Ratification of the Armenian-Turkish Protocols has stumbled over
Azerbaijan. Baku has managed to achieve much in this area by its
permanent militarist rhetoric and elementary blackmail with regards to
Turkey. The ruling elite in Turkey that is not ready for establishment
of full-fledged relations with Armenia has been subjected to pressure
and blackmail by Azerbaijan, which served a good opportunity for
Turkey to resolve its doubts. Azerbaijan has rather successfully
used Turkey's hesitations and Ankara has come back to the previous
situation and drawn parallels between the Armenian-Turkish process
and the Karabakh conflict, though these two processes cannot be linked.
Against this background even the initiator of the process, President
of Armenia Serzh Sargsyan, has already lost his interest in it.
This is proved by adoption of amendments to the Law "On International
Treaties" by the parliament in the second reading, according to which
at any moment Armenia may recall its signature under the Protocols
with Turkey. The Armenian Constitutional Court's decision on the
Protocols poured oil on the flames. Of course, Armenia hit the right
path having approved the Protocols via the Constitutional Court -
it was dictated by diplomatic prudence. Anyone having an idea about
the Constitution of Armenia perfectly realizes what kind of catch
was prepared for Turkey. The Constitution of Armenia clearly says
that Armenia consistently demands recognition of the Genocide, so,
having recognized the Protocols as complying with the republic's
Constitution, Armenia did not give up its requirements on recognition
of the Armenian Genocide in Ottoman Turkey. If desired, they in Turkey
could not even notice it and ratify the Protocols; however, against
the background of the Azerbaijani military rhetoric, in Ankara they
could not but notice it.
In Baku they constantly say about some mythical terms of the Karabakh
conflict settlement. Can one speak of any terms of settlement today?
Actually, like earlier, it is impossible to speak about the terms of
the Karabakh settlement today. One can speak about the terms only if
the parties finally understand that to arrange around any formula is
better than to preserve neither war nor peace situation. Let's look at
Israeli-Egyptian conflict. In 1979 after the war Egypt understood that
it could not prevail over Israel and made up its mind to existence
of the Jewish state having got peace in exchange. For their part,
they understood in Tel-Aviv that they would not manage to destroy
Egypt finally and returned the Sinai to Egypt. That is to say,
an elementary exchange took place, which is so much necessary for
peaceful settlement of the Karabakh conflict at present.
How do you imagine this exchange in case of the Karabakh settlement?
The idea to integrate Nagornyy Karabakh and the Armenians residing
there in Azerbaijan with the highest status of autonomy in the world,
is problematic, first of all, for Baku. In case Karabakh gets a
status of autonomy, actual independence, as part of Azerbaijan, the
other national minorities densely populated in that country may also
demand such high level of autonomy. It is not difficult to foretell
what this will lead to. In addition, penetration of Armenians into
Azerbaijani business, which will be inevitable, does not meet Baku's
interests either. On the other hand, Armenia has no resources to
develop the 7 regions conquered over the Karabakh war. Armenia will
be able to develop only Lachin and Kelbajar at best. It is rather
difficult for Armenia and Karabakh to refuse the other 5 regions. And
it is difficult for Azerbaijan to recognize independence of the NKR
even in exchange for those 5 regions. However, I think that the only
possible solution will be the above exchange.
ArmInfo
2010-03-23 16:14:00
Interview of Sergey Markedonov, Head of the Department for Problems of
Ethnic Relations at the Institute of Political and Military Analysis,
with ArmInfo news agency
Mr.Markedonov, how much perspective is further promotion of H.Res.252
on the Armenian Genocide?
The prospects of the H.Res.252 for adoption over the general voting
at the US Congress are not as big, as the political expediency itself
makes US Administration to argue against this pro-Armenian resolution.
Almost a similar situation was created in 2007 when the Subcommittee
of the US House of Representatives also voted "for" Resolution
106, however, the latter did not pass further. There are numerous
objective and subjective reasons for such alignment among supporters
and opponents of H.Res.252. The standstill in the Armenian-Turkish
process is one of such objective reasons. Of course, the standstill
is not a deadlock yet but it is not promotion either. There are not
only opponents but also supporters of recognition of the Armenian
Genocide in the USA, and these supporters do not take care whether
it is beneficial for the USA in the political aspect or not, they
just proceed from the sense of justice. So, the fight among the
supporters and advocates of justice and the supporters of a value
approach to recognition of the Armenian Genocide will go on. As
regards the Administration, it will do its best to prevent or at
least fail further promotion of H.Res. 252 in the Congress. In case
these efforts fail and the resolution is put on vote in the Congress,
President Obama will veto it.
By the way, do you expect Obama to speak Armenian again or to call
the Genocide in some different way?
I think that on April 24 Obama will speak Armenian again. I think
that something like this will happen. As regards the prospects
and probability if Obama will pronounce the word "genocide" in his
traditional address to the Armenian community in the USA on April 24,
I do not think it will happen. Obama will most probably find another
way to avoid responsibility and mention the fact of Genocide without
calling things by their proper names. I expect reoccurrence of last
year's situation.
Why is Turkey so much dear to the US Administration?
There are many reasons why Turkey is so much dear to US Administration,
and the problem of Iraq, which American servicemen got bogged
down in, is the most important one. Everything is simple, 70%
of military cargo to supply the American contingent in Iraq pass
via the territory of Turkey, and I don't think that in this case
Armenia may be an alternative to Turkey, since it is geographically
impossible. There is quite a specific problem of Afghanistan in which
the Turkish factor also plays its stable part. Moreover, there is also
the American base in the Turkish town of Injirlik, which Americans
cannot leave at present. And finally, the most important answer to
the question about the role of Turkey is hidden in the ideological and
political significance of Turkey for Washington. In fact, unlike the
rest Muslim, in particular, Arab world, Turkey is the only country
of the Islamic West which the USA has friendly relations with. So,
there are many obstacles, like the above-water and underwater reefs,
on the way of Resolution 252 promotion.
The Swedish Riksdag has recently recognized the Armenian Genocide in
Turkey, to which no importance is attached in Europe.
The situation with Sweden's recognition of the Armenian Genocide has
quite a different history and motivation. Moreover, this situation is
applicable not only to certain countries but to the whole European
Union. EU holds a rigid position with respect to Turkey concerning
the Armenian Genocide and demonstrates its unwillingness to accept
70-million Turkey to Europe. That is to say, the issue of recognition
of the Armenian Genocide for the European policy is a tool of
suppressing Turkey on the way to EU. In this context, the Europeans'
striving to recognize extirpation of Greeks and Assyrians by Turks
as genocide is of much significance. This is very important as the
Assyrian community in Europe is one of the largest ones despite the
fact that Assyrians have no motherland.
What has the process of ratification of the Armenian-Turkish Protocols
stumbled over?
Ratification of the Armenian-Turkish Protocols has stumbled over
Azerbaijan. Baku has managed to achieve much in this area by its
permanent militarist rhetoric and elementary blackmail with regards to
Turkey. The ruling elite in Turkey that is not ready for establishment
of full-fledged relations with Armenia has been subjected to pressure
and blackmail by Azerbaijan, which served a good opportunity for
Turkey to resolve its doubts. Azerbaijan has rather successfully
used Turkey's hesitations and Ankara has come back to the previous
situation and drawn parallels between the Armenian-Turkish process
and the Karabakh conflict, though these two processes cannot be linked.
Against this background even the initiator of the process, President
of Armenia Serzh Sargsyan, has already lost his interest in it.
This is proved by adoption of amendments to the Law "On International
Treaties" by the parliament in the second reading, according to which
at any moment Armenia may recall its signature under the Protocols
with Turkey. The Armenian Constitutional Court's decision on the
Protocols poured oil on the flames. Of course, Armenia hit the right
path having approved the Protocols via the Constitutional Court -
it was dictated by diplomatic prudence. Anyone having an idea about
the Constitution of Armenia perfectly realizes what kind of catch
was prepared for Turkey. The Constitution of Armenia clearly says
that Armenia consistently demands recognition of the Genocide, so,
having recognized the Protocols as complying with the republic's
Constitution, Armenia did not give up its requirements on recognition
of the Armenian Genocide in Ottoman Turkey. If desired, they in Turkey
could not even notice it and ratify the Protocols; however, against
the background of the Azerbaijani military rhetoric, in Ankara they
could not but notice it.
In Baku they constantly say about some mythical terms of the Karabakh
conflict settlement. Can one speak of any terms of settlement today?
Actually, like earlier, it is impossible to speak about the terms of
the Karabakh settlement today. One can speak about the terms only if
the parties finally understand that to arrange around any formula is
better than to preserve neither war nor peace situation. Let's look at
Israeli-Egyptian conflict. In 1979 after the war Egypt understood that
it could not prevail over Israel and made up its mind to existence
of the Jewish state having got peace in exchange. For their part,
they understood in Tel-Aviv that they would not manage to destroy
Egypt finally and returned the Sinai to Egypt. That is to say,
an elementary exchange took place, which is so much necessary for
peaceful settlement of the Karabakh conflict at present.
How do you imagine this exchange in case of the Karabakh settlement?
The idea to integrate Nagornyy Karabakh and the Armenians residing
there in Azerbaijan with the highest status of autonomy in the world,
is problematic, first of all, for Baku. In case Karabakh gets a
status of autonomy, actual independence, as part of Azerbaijan, the
other national minorities densely populated in that country may also
demand such high level of autonomy. It is not difficult to foretell
what this will lead to. In addition, penetration of Armenians into
Azerbaijani business, which will be inevitable, does not meet Baku's
interests either. On the other hand, Armenia has no resources to
develop the 7 regions conquered over the Karabakh war. Armenia will
be able to develop only Lachin and Kelbajar at best. It is rather
difficult for Armenia and Karabakh to refuse the other 5 regions. And
it is difficult for Azerbaijan to recognize independence of the NKR
even in exchange for those 5 regions. However, I think that the only
possible solution will be the above exchange.