Tweet
THE PROTOCOLS: WHOSE "WISHFUL THINKING"?
Hurriyet
May 16 2010
Turkey
The Western world, the U.S. in particular, has been keen to
express criticism of Turkey concerning the current deadlock in the
normalization of relations between Ankara and Yerevan. Last Monday,
for instance, American expert David Phillips was reported to have
admonished Turkey, saying the country should not have signed the
protocols based on "wishful thinking." Supposedly, "there was no
linkage between the protocols and the Nagorno-Karabakh problem."
Obviously, this line of thinking is particularly prevalent among
members of the U.S. administration. American authorities, as a very
close aide to Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan told me, on
nearly every occasion raise what they describe as the "disappointment"
felt by President Barrack Obama regarding the current state of affairs
on the normalization talks. Given that U.S. promises made prior to the
protocols on the resolution of the Karabakh problem have not been held
either, it is surprising that these figures have failed to understand
that Erdogan is equally disappointed. This raises the question of whose
"wishful thinking" is responsible for the current deadlock.
The reasons that Turkey cannot ratify the protocols without
a solution to the Karabakh problem being found are very simple:
First, for the sake of regional stability, the Karabakh issue should,
without hesitation be bound to the normalization of relations between
Yerevan and Ankara. If Turkey were to open its border with Armenia
unilaterally the Azeri authorities, as they keep reminding their
Turkish counterparts, would have no option left other than resorting
to force. Secondly, the protocols, under current circumstances,
cannot pass ratification in the Turkish Parliament. This is a bitter
reality which has been underlined by Erdogan on a couple occasions
in the recent past as well.
Since the Armenian Constitutional Court's decision of last January,
voices expressing skepticism among members of the Turkish Parliament
have grown louder than ever. Everyone questions whether the Armenian
side is indeed sincere in keeping its obligations with regard to the
commission of historians envisaged in the protocols. Last, but not
least, those who criticize Turkey's "love affair" with Azerbaijan
seem to have underestimated key factors in the relationship between
these two countries. An enlightening comparison can be made between
Turkish ties with Azerbaijan and those of the U.S. and Israel. I
have encountered many U.S. authorities who lamented their country's
unquestioned attachment to Israel which sometimes, in their words,
acquires an "irrational or self-detrimental" character. Given the
complex nature of their relations with Israel (and also the Jewish
people), I wonder if they might envisage it being easy to change this
state of affairs. Thus, they must understand that the same is valid
for Turks as far as Azerbaijan is concerned.
Despite this, however, Ankara is still determined to keep on track.
What Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu has suggested in
referring to the conduct of a "parallel diplomacy" in the following
days is an unambiguous sign of Turkey's goodwill and sincerity in
that regard. More importantly, Ankara has exercised great effort
to persuade Baku to accept a step-by-step solution, which first and
foremost requires Armenian forces' immediate withdrawal from five of
seven Azerbaijani rayons still under occupation. What Ankara in turn
expects from the Minsk Group, its co-chair the U.S. in particular,
is to exercise a similar effort to persuade Yerevan and the diaspora
to seek a compromise, which would be beneficial for all the parties
concerned.
It is in this milieu that Erdogan goes to Baku. Particularly since
Russian President Dmitry Medvedev's visit to Turkey last week, there
are things to share and new standpoints to be discussed between the two
allies. Energy issues will be another subject of the meetings. But I
must remind our Azeri friends that Erdogan has a serious expectation
which he is rightly very keen to see realized: the abolishment of
the visa regime between the two countries. At a time when great
achievements have even been accomplished between Turkey and Greece,
arch adversaries of the recent past, neither Erdogan nor the average
Turk on the street can understand why a visa is needed to set foot
on Azeri soil, a land for which they have made so many sacrifices
throughout history.
Hurriyet
May 16 2010
Turkey
The Western world, the U.S. in particular, has been keen to
express criticism of Turkey concerning the current deadlock in the
normalization of relations between Ankara and Yerevan. Last Monday,
for instance, American expert David Phillips was reported to have
admonished Turkey, saying the country should not have signed the
protocols based on "wishful thinking." Supposedly, "there was no
linkage between the protocols and the Nagorno-Karabakh problem."
Obviously, this line of thinking is particularly prevalent among
members of the U.S. administration. American authorities, as a very
close aide to Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan told me, on
nearly every occasion raise what they describe as the "disappointment"
felt by President Barrack Obama regarding the current state of affairs
on the normalization talks. Given that U.S. promises made prior to the
protocols on the resolution of the Karabakh problem have not been held
either, it is surprising that these figures have failed to understand
that Erdogan is equally disappointed. This raises the question of whose
"wishful thinking" is responsible for the current deadlock.
The reasons that Turkey cannot ratify the protocols without
a solution to the Karabakh problem being found are very simple:
First, for the sake of regional stability, the Karabakh issue should,
without hesitation be bound to the normalization of relations between
Yerevan and Ankara. If Turkey were to open its border with Armenia
unilaterally the Azeri authorities, as they keep reminding their
Turkish counterparts, would have no option left other than resorting
to force. Secondly, the protocols, under current circumstances,
cannot pass ratification in the Turkish Parliament. This is a bitter
reality which has been underlined by Erdogan on a couple occasions
in the recent past as well.
Since the Armenian Constitutional Court's decision of last January,
voices expressing skepticism among members of the Turkish Parliament
have grown louder than ever. Everyone questions whether the Armenian
side is indeed sincere in keeping its obligations with regard to the
commission of historians envisaged in the protocols. Last, but not
least, those who criticize Turkey's "love affair" with Azerbaijan
seem to have underestimated key factors in the relationship between
these two countries. An enlightening comparison can be made between
Turkish ties with Azerbaijan and those of the U.S. and Israel. I
have encountered many U.S. authorities who lamented their country's
unquestioned attachment to Israel which sometimes, in their words,
acquires an "irrational or self-detrimental" character. Given the
complex nature of their relations with Israel (and also the Jewish
people), I wonder if they might envisage it being easy to change this
state of affairs. Thus, they must understand that the same is valid
for Turks as far as Azerbaijan is concerned.
Despite this, however, Ankara is still determined to keep on track.
What Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu has suggested in
referring to the conduct of a "parallel diplomacy" in the following
days is an unambiguous sign of Turkey's goodwill and sincerity in
that regard. More importantly, Ankara has exercised great effort
to persuade Baku to accept a step-by-step solution, which first and
foremost requires Armenian forces' immediate withdrawal from five of
seven Azerbaijani rayons still under occupation. What Ankara in turn
expects from the Minsk Group, its co-chair the U.S. in particular,
is to exercise a similar effort to persuade Yerevan and the diaspora
to seek a compromise, which would be beneficial for all the parties
concerned.
It is in this milieu that Erdogan goes to Baku. Particularly since
Russian President Dmitry Medvedev's visit to Turkey last week, there
are things to share and new standpoints to be discussed between the two
allies. Energy issues will be another subject of the meetings. But I
must remind our Azeri friends that Erdogan has a serious expectation
which he is rightly very keen to see realized: the abolishment of
the visa regime between the two countries. At a time when great
achievements have even been accomplished between Turkey and Greece,
arch adversaries of the recent past, neither Erdogan nor the average
Turk on the street can understand why a visa is needed to set foot
on Azeri soil, a land for which they have made so many sacrifices
throughout history.