Tweet
RICHARD KIRAKOSYAN: "TODAY RUSSIA, THE US AND EUROPE EXPECT ACTIONS FROM ANKARA, NOT YEREVAN"
Vestnik Kavkaza
Oct 31 2011
Richard Kirakosyan, the head of the Regional Research Center, tells
VK about the prospects for the Armenian-Turkish process and the role
of the US and Russia in it.
- Armenian-Turkish relations are at the focus of international
attention now, but there are very few who are ready to comment on the
prospects for rapprochement between the two countries. Do you think
Armenia is pre-disposed to it?
- When the Armenian-Turkish process is discussed, we usually talk
about what Armenia can expect, but not about what it has to do. I
think this reflects the real state of affairs, as there's not much
that Armenia can actually do right now. Today Russia, the US and
Europe expect actions from Ankara, not Yerevan. I is true that not
much is said today about the prospects for rapprochement. But the
officials responsible for our foreign policy would be better qualified
to answer this question than activists of civil society participating
in the dialogue. However, unfortunately both governments have lost
any grip on reality here. Turkey is preoccupied with other issues. So
the sides should focus on keeping the process rolling, on preventing
its ultimate failure, as such a future doesn't appeal to either party.
- Some Armenian politicians think that the suspended state of the
Zurich agreements isn't in Armenia's best interests. Many demand the
head of the Republic to retract his signature from them... But you
don't agree?
- No, I definitely don't. I think that the very existence of these
protocols, even if they are tabled, keeps the process going. And the
more the civil societies of Turkey and Armenia are involved in the
dialogue, the more Turkey's government will risk losing its authority
among the people, unless it takes some action. I believe that it is
the Turkish government that bears the full burden of responsibility
for stalling the process of reconciliation. And the international
community is already starting to suspect Turkey of insincerity.
- Does the US still play any considerable part in the Turkish-Armenian
process?
- I don't think it actually should.
- So it shouldn't or isn't?
- Well, the so-called 'football diplomacy' that started the new phase
of Armenian-Turkish relations was in no way a US idea. The Armenian
President invited his Turkish counterpart to come to a national teams'
match while visiting Moscow, not Washington. There is a popular, yet
completely false opinion, that the opening of the Armenian-Turkish
border isn't in Russia's best interests and it is the USA that would
profit from it the most. In the current geopolitical situation Russia
won't risk losing the Armenian market, even if the border is opened.
On the contrary, in that case Russia would profit, as its enterprises
in Armenia would finally be able to work to full capacity. Moreover,
if the border is opened, Russia will be able to complete its plan of
isolating Georgia from the rest of the region. That is why Russia
is now more interested in Armenian-Turkish reconciliation than it
was before the war of 2008. So this process is in no way an American
initiative.
- Turkish PM Erdogan has recently visited all the countries touched
by the 'Arab spring'. This event falls in line with Turkey's general
political course, aimed at increasing its influence in the Middle
East and in North Africa. But is Turkey acting on its own here,
or is someone giving these ideas to Ankara?
- This process started this year. And it's in Turkey's best interests,
not NATO's. Today Turkey is more passive in the affairs of the Alliance
than ever. In these affairs Turkey's an integral part of the Eastern
world, and isn't a conduit of Western influence.
- After the collapse of the USSR, Turkey stopped being NATO's outpost
on the borders of the 'Evil Empire". However, some think that Turkey
is still artificially supported by the Alliance as an outpost against
the Iranian threat. Is this true?
- Ankara makes its own policies, even if it's against the interests
of the West. Moreover, Turkey is trying to decrease western influence
in its everyday life. And the tone of Turkey's relations with Russia
and Iran comes into direct contradiction with the interests of the
Western powers in the region. As in its relations with the EU, where
Turkey doesn't merely want to become a part of the united Europe,
but expects Europe to welcome it into its home, it doesn't want to be
just a conduit of Western influence. Turkey wants to be an independent
self-standing power. We don't know yet what impact that would have
on its relations with Armenia. The Pentagon has taken Turkey's side
in this conflict more than once, but now it is growing disappointed
with its eastern partner. And the US doesn't need Turkey anymore,
as it has its soldiers in Afghanistan and Iraq. Turkey, in its turn,
while being a NATO member, still considers its politics in the Black
Sea region in terms of cooperation with Russia, and not in terms of
Western interests. Ankara and Washington are still allies, but it
is unlikely that they will restore the former level of relations,
and in general that is good for the region.
- Are you saying that Turkey finally chose the East as its top priority
and put its relations with the West in the background?
- It seems so. But Turkey might be mistaken, as its strength has
always resided in its middle position between the West and the East.
And if Turkey loses the West, it risks becoming weaker and thus losing
the East too. And that would be very unfortunate for Ankara. Turkey
has reviewed its Euro-integration strategy and isn't asking Europe
to accept it into the EU anymore. Instead, they are trying to turn
Turkey into a great power in the region, thus making EU turn to it. In
theory, Turkey's membership in the EU should prove to be a remedy
for Turkish-Armenian conflict, and obviously Turkey can't remain a
hostile neighbor of Armenia forever.
Interview by David Stepanyan, Yerevan, exclusively to VK
Vestnik Kavkaza
Oct 31 2011
Richard Kirakosyan, the head of the Regional Research Center, tells
VK about the prospects for the Armenian-Turkish process and the role
of the US and Russia in it.
- Armenian-Turkish relations are at the focus of international
attention now, but there are very few who are ready to comment on the
prospects for rapprochement between the two countries. Do you think
Armenia is pre-disposed to it?
- When the Armenian-Turkish process is discussed, we usually talk
about what Armenia can expect, but not about what it has to do. I
think this reflects the real state of affairs, as there's not much
that Armenia can actually do right now. Today Russia, the US and
Europe expect actions from Ankara, not Yerevan. I is true that not
much is said today about the prospects for rapprochement. But the
officials responsible for our foreign policy would be better qualified
to answer this question than activists of civil society participating
in the dialogue. However, unfortunately both governments have lost
any grip on reality here. Turkey is preoccupied with other issues. So
the sides should focus on keeping the process rolling, on preventing
its ultimate failure, as such a future doesn't appeal to either party.
- Some Armenian politicians think that the suspended state of the
Zurich agreements isn't in Armenia's best interests. Many demand the
head of the Republic to retract his signature from them... But you
don't agree?
- No, I definitely don't. I think that the very existence of these
protocols, even if they are tabled, keeps the process going. And the
more the civil societies of Turkey and Armenia are involved in the
dialogue, the more Turkey's government will risk losing its authority
among the people, unless it takes some action. I believe that it is
the Turkish government that bears the full burden of responsibility
for stalling the process of reconciliation. And the international
community is already starting to suspect Turkey of insincerity.
- Does the US still play any considerable part in the Turkish-Armenian
process?
- I don't think it actually should.
- So it shouldn't or isn't?
- Well, the so-called 'football diplomacy' that started the new phase
of Armenian-Turkish relations was in no way a US idea. The Armenian
President invited his Turkish counterpart to come to a national teams'
match while visiting Moscow, not Washington. There is a popular, yet
completely false opinion, that the opening of the Armenian-Turkish
border isn't in Russia's best interests and it is the USA that would
profit from it the most. In the current geopolitical situation Russia
won't risk losing the Armenian market, even if the border is opened.
On the contrary, in that case Russia would profit, as its enterprises
in Armenia would finally be able to work to full capacity. Moreover,
if the border is opened, Russia will be able to complete its plan of
isolating Georgia from the rest of the region. That is why Russia
is now more interested in Armenian-Turkish reconciliation than it
was before the war of 2008. So this process is in no way an American
initiative.
- Turkish PM Erdogan has recently visited all the countries touched
by the 'Arab spring'. This event falls in line with Turkey's general
political course, aimed at increasing its influence in the Middle
East and in North Africa. But is Turkey acting on its own here,
or is someone giving these ideas to Ankara?
- This process started this year. And it's in Turkey's best interests,
not NATO's. Today Turkey is more passive in the affairs of the Alliance
than ever. In these affairs Turkey's an integral part of the Eastern
world, and isn't a conduit of Western influence.
- After the collapse of the USSR, Turkey stopped being NATO's outpost
on the borders of the 'Evil Empire". However, some think that Turkey
is still artificially supported by the Alliance as an outpost against
the Iranian threat. Is this true?
- Ankara makes its own policies, even if it's against the interests
of the West. Moreover, Turkey is trying to decrease western influence
in its everyday life. And the tone of Turkey's relations with Russia
and Iran comes into direct contradiction with the interests of the
Western powers in the region. As in its relations with the EU, where
Turkey doesn't merely want to become a part of the united Europe,
but expects Europe to welcome it into its home, it doesn't want to be
just a conduit of Western influence. Turkey wants to be an independent
self-standing power. We don't know yet what impact that would have
on its relations with Armenia. The Pentagon has taken Turkey's side
in this conflict more than once, but now it is growing disappointed
with its eastern partner. And the US doesn't need Turkey anymore,
as it has its soldiers in Afghanistan and Iraq. Turkey, in its turn,
while being a NATO member, still considers its politics in the Black
Sea region in terms of cooperation with Russia, and not in terms of
Western interests. Ankara and Washington are still allies, but it
is unlikely that they will restore the former level of relations,
and in general that is good for the region.
- Are you saying that Turkey finally chose the East as its top priority
and put its relations with the West in the background?
- It seems so. But Turkey might be mistaken, as its strength has
always resided in its middle position between the West and the East.
And if Turkey loses the West, it risks becoming weaker and thus losing
the East too. And that would be very unfortunate for Ankara. Turkey
has reviewed its Euro-integration strategy and isn't asking Europe
to accept it into the EU anymore. Instead, they are trying to turn
Turkey into a great power in the region, thus making EU turn to it. In
theory, Turkey's membership in the EU should prove to be a remedy
for Turkish-Armenian conflict, and obviously Turkey can't remain a
hostile neighbor of Armenia forever.
Interview by David Stepanyan, Yerevan, exclusively to VK