Tweet
ALEKXANDER ZINKER: IT'S BETTER TO RESOLVE PROBLEMS AT THE NEGOTIATING TABLE BUT NOT BATTLE FIELDS
by David Stepanyan
ArmInfo
Wednesday, November 16, 20:00
Interview of Director of Institute for Countries of Eastern Europe and
CIS Countries in Tel-Aviv, member of Knesset of the 15th convocation,
Dr.Alekxander Zinker with ArmInfo news agency Mr. Zinker, will
you please share your predictions regarding possible future of the
Israeli-Turkish relations? Today they seem to be not so good...
It is necessary for everyone to understand that there can be no single
leader in our explosive region, no matter how much Turkey or any other
country wants that. Now, there are groups of politicians in both Israel
and Turkey who think that the former relations between our countries
are no longer possible. It seems to me that we will never return to
the once friendly and strategic relations of Israel and Turkey.
There are several geopolitical axes on our not large globe. The USA,
Turkey and Israel belonged to one of those axes before a certain
period of time, while Russia, Armenia and Iran belonged to another
axis. Israel and Armenia having no problems with each other had no
serious bilateral relations, while Turkey was our key strategic
partner in the Muslim world. Nevertheless, Turkey has been striving
to get EU membership for long years and they in Ankara were well
aware that they would get additional access to Western Europe and
the USA via Israel.
With Erdogan's coming to power in 2003, a peculiar quiet revolution
took place. After the Turkish leadership made sure that no one in the
EU waits for Turkey, it began to develop a new conception to
achieve leadership in the region, in the Middle East and Islamic
world. Therefore, they started islamization of the Turkey that was
a secular country not so long ago with army being its key guarantor of
democracy. In addition, he said, Turkey has chosen quite an aggressive
foreign and regional course refusing its conception of 'no problems
with neighbors.' In fact, Turkey has various problems with its
neighbors now. Europe, for its part, held Turkey from taking an active
position in Libya. French and British leaders arrived in Libya a
couple of days before Erdogan's visit to that country and enjoyed all
the laurels of the winner in the Libyan war. Turkey's relations with
Iran are not good either. As for Syria, Turkey has already yielded
it pinning hopes with certain dividends in case if Asad's regime falls.
Despite the tense relations of Israel and Turkey, all the agreements
made previously had been implemented until very recently. The situation
has reached a critical point after Erdogan refused to meet with Israeli
President Peres in Davos. And after the incident with the so-called
Peace Flotilla and the open support to Hamas, they relations could
not but be broken finally. It seems to me that Erdogan is trying to
get down the too high three he has climbed on.
Frankly speaking, I cannot understand the logical consequence of the
Turkish leadership's actions. I cannot see any realistic goals they
may achieve in exchange for some sacrifices in the relations with
the neighbors.
In Armenia worsening of the Israeli-Turkish relations was taken, I
would say, with a groundless optimism. How far may Israel go in the
matter of recognition of the Armenian genocide, taking into account
the present state of relations with Ankara?
I have always been for recognition of the Armenian genocide and
lobbied this issue in the Knesset as much as I could. For this reason,
with a certain share of optimism I would like to point at consistent
growth of supporters of the Armenian genocide recognition among the
deputies of the Knesset, which are again trying to raise this issue in
Israel. But I think that the Israeli society is not yet ready to adopt
such a decision. Not only Israeli politicians and public activists,
but also the information policy of the leadership of Armenia are
blamed for that. The point is that when discussing the issue about
recognition of the Armenian genocide our parliament should adopt
such a decision which will be clear to the citizens which elected
their representatives to the top legislative body. But today Israeli
citizens do not have enough information about the history of Armenia
and the historical truth about mass murders of Armenians in the
Ottoman Empire. Just the same way as the people of Armenia are not
much informed about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the history
and fight of the Jewish people for their statehood.
For instance, Azerbaijan has been holding a wide-scaled information
work on all the levels in Israel, and gradually local residents of
Israel understand that there is such a country - Azerbaijan which
has rather good relations with us. As for Armenia's image in Israel,
all the work has been implemented by a small Armenian community of
Israel without any significant support of the state structures. Your
Diaspora minister has recently visited Israel. She practically did
not meet representatives of the Armenian Diaspora and only visited
the Armenian church. Naturally, this visit was not fixed in the press
much. Even direct air flights Tel-Aviv - Yerevan are not promoted in
Israel. At the same time, many people in Israel are aware that Iran,
our strategic enemy, the president of which officially announced
about his intention to ruin Israel, is the best friend of Armenia.
What steps does Armenia take? For instance, the recent visit by an
Armenian top official to Israel...
The recent visit by your top official to Israel was initiated
by Israeli Ambassador to Armenia Shmuel Merom,. I don't know the
name of the Armenian top official which visited Israel, but our
ambassador is waiting for certain progress in the relations between
Israel and Armenia in the near future. The breakthrough in the
relations happened in 2006 when the delegation headed by the leader
of Pan-Armenian Congress Ara Abrahamyan arrived in Israel. Today's
President of Armenia, which that time was Armenia's defence minister,
Serzh Sargsyan and Catholicos of All Armenians Karekin II were
also within the delegation consisting of 80 businessmen. That time
the progress was obvious, but after the regular tension in the
Israeli-Palestinian relations, when Armenian mass media covered
the events in a unilateral way, the relations worsened again. It
is clear, that in Israel they negatively treated the last meeting
of representatives of "Dashnaktiutyun" with the delegation of the
"Hamas" terrorist organization. All this complicates rapprochement
between our states.
However, there are some contacts and a little commodity circulation.
Though, I think there are many points for the fruitful cooperation.We
should just want it.
You said about Ahmadinejad's threat to destroy Israel. Nevertheless,
mass media say about the intention of Israel to start bombing Iranian
nuclear facilities. Don't you think that the first target for Iran
will become, let's say, the Israeli reactor in Dimon?
Nobody has officially said that we are going to bomb Iran. First,
if somebody decides to bomb, he does not say about it in advance.
Moreover, it is better to talk peacefully, than to fire. By the
way, in the year before last Israel bombed the facilities of Syria
foreseen for the nuclear weapon production. First, Syrian residents
protested much, but when international experts found the remains of
the elements, which proved their aggressive intentions, everything
calmed down immediately. Israel managed to stop Syrian developments
at least for five years. Many journalists speaking about attacking
Iran refer to the speech of President of Israel Shimon Peres, who just
said that if harsh international sanctions are not adopted regarding
Iran because of possible veto of Russia and China, this may result
in the situation that bombing of the Iranian reactors will be the
only way to stop nuclear programme of Teheran. The bombing of Iran
may really cause not only response strikes upon Israel but also lead
to the large scale war in the region. I think that Israel will not
independently take such radical steps without coordination of its
actions with the USA and the leading countries of the European Union.
We also hope that if Russia and the USA come to a single viewpoint
about the Iranian nuclear issue, which Barack Obama has recently said
about, in that case Ahmadinejad will hardly be so much uncompromising.
What can play a part of the catalyst element in the de-freeing process
of Nagornyy Karabakh conflict?
Today a certain status-quo has been established, which many people
compare with the conflict between Israel and Palestine. Since 1967
the separating "green line" has been established between these
countries. The same situation is in case of Nagornyy Karabakh, where
there is a line of contact. However, I have got an impression, that
just the same way as during the talks between the leaders of Palestine
and Israel, which met just for the sake of appearance, as they were not
going to make any arrangement, the parties to the Karabakh conflict are
not going to arrange about something either. As the Azerbaijani stance
is unacceptable for the Armenian party and visa versa, and the party,
which will make any compromise, will be considered a loser. I have got
an impression that if the key countries which determine geo-policy
in the region, in the person of the USA, Russia and European Union,
would draw out a single approach to resolving of this problem,
as a result of their diplomatic pressure, Armenia and Azerbaijan
with certain corrections would find a mutually acceptable solution
of the conflict. Nothing will change without such consensus, as in
case of Israel and Palestine as well as Armenia and Azerbaijan, the
parties should understand that settlement of problems is impossible
without compromise. For instance, Baku should understand that there
are territories which will not belong to Azerbaijan. As for the
Armenian party, it has to understand that the existing territorial
configuration will hardly become the final option for settlement of
the conflict. Until representatives of Nagornyy Karabakh participate
in the talks, it will be very hard to settle the issue. For instance,
why the Dnister region can take part in a similar process but Karabakh
- cannot.
Absence of the key participant in the conflict, Nagornyy Karabakh,
at the negotiating table turns these negotiations into an ordinary
profanation. Unfortunately, the conflict will not be resolved in
the near future, as such countries like the USA, Russia and France,
which display activeness at the talks, will be busy with resolving of
their local problems connected with holding of presidential elections
in these countries.
From: Baghdasarian
by David Stepanyan
ArmInfo
Wednesday, November 16, 20:00
Interview of Director of Institute for Countries of Eastern Europe and
CIS Countries in Tel-Aviv, member of Knesset of the 15th convocation,
Dr.Alekxander Zinker with ArmInfo news agency Mr. Zinker, will
you please share your predictions regarding possible future of the
Israeli-Turkish relations? Today they seem to be not so good...
It is necessary for everyone to understand that there can be no single
leader in our explosive region, no matter how much Turkey or any other
country wants that. Now, there are groups of politicians in both Israel
and Turkey who think that the former relations between our countries
are no longer possible. It seems to me that we will never return to
the once friendly and strategic relations of Israel and Turkey.
There are several geopolitical axes on our not large globe. The USA,
Turkey and Israel belonged to one of those axes before a certain
period of time, while Russia, Armenia and Iran belonged to another
axis. Israel and Armenia having no problems with each other had no
serious bilateral relations, while Turkey was our key strategic
partner in the Muslim world. Nevertheless, Turkey has been striving
to get EU membership for long years and they in Ankara were well
aware that they would get additional access to Western Europe and
the USA via Israel.
With Erdogan's coming to power in 2003, a peculiar quiet revolution
took place. After the Turkish leadership made sure that no one in the
EU waits for Turkey, it began to develop a new conception to
achieve leadership in the region, in the Middle East and Islamic
world. Therefore, they started islamization of the Turkey that was
a secular country not so long ago with army being its key guarantor of
democracy. In addition, he said, Turkey has chosen quite an aggressive
foreign and regional course refusing its conception of 'no problems
with neighbors.' In fact, Turkey has various problems with its
neighbors now. Europe, for its part, held Turkey from taking an active
position in Libya. French and British leaders arrived in Libya a
couple of days before Erdogan's visit to that country and enjoyed all
the laurels of the winner in the Libyan war. Turkey's relations with
Iran are not good either. As for Syria, Turkey has already yielded
it pinning hopes with certain dividends in case if Asad's regime falls.
Despite the tense relations of Israel and Turkey, all the agreements
made previously had been implemented until very recently. The situation
has reached a critical point after Erdogan refused to meet with Israeli
President Peres in Davos. And after the incident with the so-called
Peace Flotilla and the open support to Hamas, they relations could
not but be broken finally. It seems to me that Erdogan is trying to
get down the too high three he has climbed on.
Frankly speaking, I cannot understand the logical consequence of the
Turkish leadership's actions. I cannot see any realistic goals they
may achieve in exchange for some sacrifices in the relations with
the neighbors.
In Armenia worsening of the Israeli-Turkish relations was taken, I
would say, with a groundless optimism. How far may Israel go in the
matter of recognition of the Armenian genocide, taking into account
the present state of relations with Ankara?
I have always been for recognition of the Armenian genocide and
lobbied this issue in the Knesset as much as I could. For this reason,
with a certain share of optimism I would like to point at consistent
growth of supporters of the Armenian genocide recognition among the
deputies of the Knesset, which are again trying to raise this issue in
Israel. But I think that the Israeli society is not yet ready to adopt
such a decision. Not only Israeli politicians and public activists,
but also the information policy of the leadership of Armenia are
blamed for that. The point is that when discussing the issue about
recognition of the Armenian genocide our parliament should adopt
such a decision which will be clear to the citizens which elected
their representatives to the top legislative body. But today Israeli
citizens do not have enough information about the history of Armenia
and the historical truth about mass murders of Armenians in the
Ottoman Empire. Just the same way as the people of Armenia are not
much informed about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the history
and fight of the Jewish people for their statehood.
For instance, Azerbaijan has been holding a wide-scaled information
work on all the levels in Israel, and gradually local residents of
Israel understand that there is such a country - Azerbaijan which
has rather good relations with us. As for Armenia's image in Israel,
all the work has been implemented by a small Armenian community of
Israel without any significant support of the state structures. Your
Diaspora minister has recently visited Israel. She practically did
not meet representatives of the Armenian Diaspora and only visited
the Armenian church. Naturally, this visit was not fixed in the press
much. Even direct air flights Tel-Aviv - Yerevan are not promoted in
Israel. At the same time, many people in Israel are aware that Iran,
our strategic enemy, the president of which officially announced
about his intention to ruin Israel, is the best friend of Armenia.
What steps does Armenia take? For instance, the recent visit by an
Armenian top official to Israel...
The recent visit by your top official to Israel was initiated
by Israeli Ambassador to Armenia Shmuel Merom,. I don't know the
name of the Armenian top official which visited Israel, but our
ambassador is waiting for certain progress in the relations between
Israel and Armenia in the near future. The breakthrough in the
relations happened in 2006 when the delegation headed by the leader
of Pan-Armenian Congress Ara Abrahamyan arrived in Israel. Today's
President of Armenia, which that time was Armenia's defence minister,
Serzh Sargsyan and Catholicos of All Armenians Karekin II were
also within the delegation consisting of 80 businessmen. That time
the progress was obvious, but after the regular tension in the
Israeli-Palestinian relations, when Armenian mass media covered
the events in a unilateral way, the relations worsened again. It
is clear, that in Israel they negatively treated the last meeting
of representatives of "Dashnaktiutyun" with the delegation of the
"Hamas" terrorist organization. All this complicates rapprochement
between our states.
However, there are some contacts and a little commodity circulation.
Though, I think there are many points for the fruitful cooperation.We
should just want it.
You said about Ahmadinejad's threat to destroy Israel. Nevertheless,
mass media say about the intention of Israel to start bombing Iranian
nuclear facilities. Don't you think that the first target for Iran
will become, let's say, the Israeli reactor in Dimon?
Nobody has officially said that we are going to bomb Iran. First,
if somebody decides to bomb, he does not say about it in advance.
Moreover, it is better to talk peacefully, than to fire. By the
way, in the year before last Israel bombed the facilities of Syria
foreseen for the nuclear weapon production. First, Syrian residents
protested much, but when international experts found the remains of
the elements, which proved their aggressive intentions, everything
calmed down immediately. Israel managed to stop Syrian developments
at least for five years. Many journalists speaking about attacking
Iran refer to the speech of President of Israel Shimon Peres, who just
said that if harsh international sanctions are not adopted regarding
Iran because of possible veto of Russia and China, this may result
in the situation that bombing of the Iranian reactors will be the
only way to stop nuclear programme of Teheran. The bombing of Iran
may really cause not only response strikes upon Israel but also lead
to the large scale war in the region. I think that Israel will not
independently take such radical steps without coordination of its
actions with the USA and the leading countries of the European Union.
We also hope that if Russia and the USA come to a single viewpoint
about the Iranian nuclear issue, which Barack Obama has recently said
about, in that case Ahmadinejad will hardly be so much uncompromising.
What can play a part of the catalyst element in the de-freeing process
of Nagornyy Karabakh conflict?
Today a certain status-quo has been established, which many people
compare with the conflict between Israel and Palestine. Since 1967
the separating "green line" has been established between these
countries. The same situation is in case of Nagornyy Karabakh, where
there is a line of contact. However, I have got an impression, that
just the same way as during the talks between the leaders of Palestine
and Israel, which met just for the sake of appearance, as they were not
going to make any arrangement, the parties to the Karabakh conflict are
not going to arrange about something either. As the Azerbaijani stance
is unacceptable for the Armenian party and visa versa, and the party,
which will make any compromise, will be considered a loser. I have got
an impression that if the key countries which determine geo-policy
in the region, in the person of the USA, Russia and European Union,
would draw out a single approach to resolving of this problem,
as a result of their diplomatic pressure, Armenia and Azerbaijan
with certain corrections would find a mutually acceptable solution
of the conflict. Nothing will change without such consensus, as in
case of Israel and Palestine as well as Armenia and Azerbaijan, the
parties should understand that settlement of problems is impossible
without compromise. For instance, Baku should understand that there
are territories which will not belong to Azerbaijan. As for the
Armenian party, it has to understand that the existing territorial
configuration will hardly become the final option for settlement of
the conflict. Until representatives of Nagornyy Karabakh participate
in the talks, it will be very hard to settle the issue. For instance,
why the Dnister region can take part in a similar process but Karabakh
- cannot.
Absence of the key participant in the conflict, Nagornyy Karabakh,
at the negotiating table turns these negotiations into an ordinary
profanation. Unfortunately, the conflict will not be resolved in
the near future, as such countries like the USA, Russia and France,
which display activeness at the talks, will be busy with resolving of
their local problems connected with holding of presidential elections
in these countries.
From: Baghdasarian