Tweet
TURKEY'S FEARS ARE FACTUAL
news.am
Sept 6 2010
Armenia
Below is an interview by Mr. Zafer Yoruk, a Turkish expert and doctor
of political science, lecturer at Izmir University of Economics,
to NEWS.am
Question: What do you think of the current state of the
Armenian-Turkish relations and what are the prospects of their
development?
Answer: There have been some developments in the Armenian-Turkish
relations within recent years. All began from the Armenia-Turkey
football match and the visit of the Turkish President here for a
football match. Then the same happened in Bursa in Turkey when the
Armenian President arrived. It was followed by talks and Protocols.
Now as we understand the protocols are somehow suspended. This is
probably for domestic political reasons both in Armenia and Turkey. I
think that after the forthcoming elections, constitutional referendum
and imminent general elections in 2011. Until then I do not expect
the suspension will go any better because AKP's coming closer to
Armenia will be used by the opposition as an anti-national move and
they will lose some votes for that. So they are probably are happy
about the suspension at the moment. Therefore, I expect that if they
are elected again, which is likely, the AKP will look forward for
good relations again after the elections in 2011-2012.
Question: So you expect there will be the second turn in the
rapprochement?
Answer: Yes, I expect it. You know I do not really know the contents
of the Protocols and nobody knows in Turkey. I am not interested I
have not read them. But newspapers also do not write about contents.
They are talking just about the fact that the Protocols were signed,
about the U.S. pressure and so on. I expect some kind of concession
on the Armenian side regarding Karabakh. I do know what kind of
concession it could be. I also expect in return the border to be
opened as a concession from the Turkish side.
Question: You have talked about American pressure. How is the U.S.
pressurizing Turkey in general? What are the reasons and motives?
Answer: To get an answer to this question you should look at Turkey's
foreign policy. There have been recently some shifts of axes in
Turkey's foreign policy. Since 1915, Turkey has been acting as a
closest ally of the U.S., especially in the Middle East and the region
in general. But, of course, there were some issues on which the sides
had disagreement, for example Cyprus. In 1970s the Turkish government
tried to establish good links with the Soviet Union as well. So all
this things showed some kind of autonomy of Turkish policy from U.S.
demand. But today something different is happening. Turkey is changing
its role in the region, for example, in the Caucasus. In all the
disagreements between different countries in the Caucasus, Turkey sided
with Muslim states. Ankara supported them unconditionally. Now this
role is changing, it tries to change the role in the Caucasus and the
Middle East on the whole. Turkey is not an unconditional supporter of
Turkic groups or nations, but a kind of "big brother" or negotiator,
a peace envoy who is able to solve the problems and negotiate with
different sides. In this move the largest pressure comes not from
the U.S. but from the Turkic nations, one of them Azerbaijan. This
is more important. I think the U.S. is happy to see Turkey playing
more independent role and adopting more bilateral position in the
region. However, U.S. is much concerned about Turkey's relations with
Iran and the possibility of end of relations with Israel.
Question: Many foreign experts think that the recent incident with the
Freedom Flotilla was a kind of show staged by Israel and Turkey. What
do you think about it?
Answer: You know there are seven people dead. And no one sacrifices
its seven citizens for a show. It is not ethical to sacrifice people's
lives for a show. I do not believe there was conspiracy to popularize
Turkey in the Middle East by pretending to have bad relations with
Israel.
Question: Some politicians and experts consider that the
Armenian-Turkish process was suspended due to Azerbaijan's pressure
on Turkey. Do you think so?
Answer: That is a big factor but also Azerbaijani pressure has a
great effect on the Turkish Opposition and it provided good arguments
for them, the Republican People's Party (CHP) and especially the
Nationalist Movement Party (MHP), which is responsible for stepping
back in Armenian-Turkish rapprochement. If it was Azerbaijan alone
it could have been solved through relations with Azerbaijan. However,
when it comes to domestic policy or affects domestic policy, it means
losing votes.
Question: Two Armenians have recently filed a lawsuit against the
Turkish Government, demanding compensation. What do you think what can
be the consequences? Will such precedents affect the Armenian-Turkish
relations and be advantageous or disadvantageous for the process?
Answer: Of course, such cases will be disadvantageous for the process,
as they are remembered more than the contents of the protocols. It
will be on the headlines of the media. It negatively affects public
opinion due to exaggeration by the media. Media likes speculations
about Turks and Armenians. It tells us about what might happen in
the future regarding the developments of Turkish-Armenian relations
and phobia or fear I was talking about, the fear that Armenians can
come and want their land back. When this kind of case is opened,
it means there is substance in this phobia.
Question: In fact we can see that the two issues: establishment
of political relations and genocide recognition are considered as
two separate issues. They say, "Let's establish diplomatic ties and
open the border and then we will talk about Genocide recognition and
compensation." What do you think if we separate these two issues,
how will we manage to push forward the Genocide recognition?
Answer: In 1980s Turkish President Turgut Ozal and Greek Premier
Andreas Papandreou met in Davos. Since then Turkish-Greek relations
have improved a lot. One item of their talks was history textbooks,
how Turks are presented in Greece and vice versa. The commissions were
established to change the contents of the textbooks in most acceptable
way for the both sides. I think it bore important fruits for the both
sides. The rapprochement between Armenian and Turkish governments
must lead to this in future. A physical contact, that is opening the
border, is better than filing cases against Turkey. It will lead to
discussions of the issue in Turkish society because if you swear at
Turks in every sentence in the textbooks, it means the educational
system needs reform, and it will affect the mentality of both sides.
From: A. Papazian
news.am
Sept 6 2010
Armenia
Below is an interview by Mr. Zafer Yoruk, a Turkish expert and doctor
of political science, lecturer at Izmir University of Economics,
to NEWS.am
Question: What do you think of the current state of the
Armenian-Turkish relations and what are the prospects of their
development?
Answer: There have been some developments in the Armenian-Turkish
relations within recent years. All began from the Armenia-Turkey
football match and the visit of the Turkish President here for a
football match. Then the same happened in Bursa in Turkey when the
Armenian President arrived. It was followed by talks and Protocols.
Now as we understand the protocols are somehow suspended. This is
probably for domestic political reasons both in Armenia and Turkey. I
think that after the forthcoming elections, constitutional referendum
and imminent general elections in 2011. Until then I do not expect
the suspension will go any better because AKP's coming closer to
Armenia will be used by the opposition as an anti-national move and
they will lose some votes for that. So they are probably are happy
about the suspension at the moment. Therefore, I expect that if they
are elected again, which is likely, the AKP will look forward for
good relations again after the elections in 2011-2012.
Question: So you expect there will be the second turn in the
rapprochement?
Answer: Yes, I expect it. You know I do not really know the contents
of the Protocols and nobody knows in Turkey. I am not interested I
have not read them. But newspapers also do not write about contents.
They are talking just about the fact that the Protocols were signed,
about the U.S. pressure and so on. I expect some kind of concession
on the Armenian side regarding Karabakh. I do know what kind of
concession it could be. I also expect in return the border to be
opened as a concession from the Turkish side.
Question: You have talked about American pressure. How is the U.S.
pressurizing Turkey in general? What are the reasons and motives?
Answer: To get an answer to this question you should look at Turkey's
foreign policy. There have been recently some shifts of axes in
Turkey's foreign policy. Since 1915, Turkey has been acting as a
closest ally of the U.S., especially in the Middle East and the region
in general. But, of course, there were some issues on which the sides
had disagreement, for example Cyprus. In 1970s the Turkish government
tried to establish good links with the Soviet Union as well. So all
this things showed some kind of autonomy of Turkish policy from U.S.
demand. But today something different is happening. Turkey is changing
its role in the region, for example, in the Caucasus. In all the
disagreements between different countries in the Caucasus, Turkey sided
with Muslim states. Ankara supported them unconditionally. Now this
role is changing, it tries to change the role in the Caucasus and the
Middle East on the whole. Turkey is not an unconditional supporter of
Turkic groups or nations, but a kind of "big brother" or negotiator,
a peace envoy who is able to solve the problems and negotiate with
different sides. In this move the largest pressure comes not from
the U.S. but from the Turkic nations, one of them Azerbaijan. This
is more important. I think the U.S. is happy to see Turkey playing
more independent role and adopting more bilateral position in the
region. However, U.S. is much concerned about Turkey's relations with
Iran and the possibility of end of relations with Israel.
Question: Many foreign experts think that the recent incident with the
Freedom Flotilla was a kind of show staged by Israel and Turkey. What
do you think about it?
Answer: You know there are seven people dead. And no one sacrifices
its seven citizens for a show. It is not ethical to sacrifice people's
lives for a show. I do not believe there was conspiracy to popularize
Turkey in the Middle East by pretending to have bad relations with
Israel.
Question: Some politicians and experts consider that the
Armenian-Turkish process was suspended due to Azerbaijan's pressure
on Turkey. Do you think so?
Answer: That is a big factor but also Azerbaijani pressure has a
great effect on the Turkish Opposition and it provided good arguments
for them, the Republican People's Party (CHP) and especially the
Nationalist Movement Party (MHP), which is responsible for stepping
back in Armenian-Turkish rapprochement. If it was Azerbaijan alone
it could have been solved through relations with Azerbaijan. However,
when it comes to domestic policy or affects domestic policy, it means
losing votes.
Question: Two Armenians have recently filed a lawsuit against the
Turkish Government, demanding compensation. What do you think what can
be the consequences? Will such precedents affect the Armenian-Turkish
relations and be advantageous or disadvantageous for the process?
Answer: Of course, such cases will be disadvantageous for the process,
as they are remembered more than the contents of the protocols. It
will be on the headlines of the media. It negatively affects public
opinion due to exaggeration by the media. Media likes speculations
about Turks and Armenians. It tells us about what might happen in
the future regarding the developments of Turkish-Armenian relations
and phobia or fear I was talking about, the fear that Armenians can
come and want their land back. When this kind of case is opened,
it means there is substance in this phobia.
Question: In fact we can see that the two issues: establishment
of political relations and genocide recognition are considered as
two separate issues. They say, "Let's establish diplomatic ties and
open the border and then we will talk about Genocide recognition and
compensation." What do you think if we separate these two issues,
how will we manage to push forward the Genocide recognition?
Answer: In 1980s Turkish President Turgut Ozal and Greek Premier
Andreas Papandreou met in Davos. Since then Turkish-Greek relations
have improved a lot. One item of their talks was history textbooks,
how Turks are presented in Greece and vice versa. The commissions were
established to change the contents of the textbooks in most acceptable
way for the both sides. I think it bore important fruits for the both
sides. The rapprochement between Armenian and Turkish governments
must lead to this in future. A physical contact, that is opening the
border, is better than filing cases against Turkey. It will lead to
discussions of the issue in Turkish society because if you swear at
Turks in every sentence in the textbooks, it means the educational
system needs reform, and it will affect the mentality of both sides.
From: A. Papazian