Tweet
TURKISH-AZERI RELATIONS AND THE PROTOCOLS
news.az
Oct 20 2011
Azerbaijan
by Cem Oguz, head of the Turkish Center for Strategic and International
Studies.
There is no doubt that the Turkish-Azeri relations have made a great
progress during the last couple of years. Next week, for instance,
the Turkish city of İzmir will be hosting a joint session for Turkish
and Azeri ministers under the chairmanship of Turkish Prime Minister
Recep Tayyip Erdogan and Azeri President İlham Aliyev. Both leaders
will also be attending the ceremony of a new İzmir refinery built as
part of a joint initiative of Azeri State Oil Company and its Turkish
partner, Turcas.
In contrast, however, it has become highly customary in the Western
capitals to question the nature of Turkish-Azeri relations. 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. More importantly, an increasing
number of Western diplomats has come to assert that Turkey has been
taken hostage by Azerbaijan.
Those who criticize Turkey's "love affair" with Azerbaijan,
nonetheless, seem to have underestimated key factors in the
relationship between these two countries. Actually, 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.
The reasons that Turkey cannot ratify the protocols 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 infamous protocols, especially 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 January 2010, voices expressing
skepticism among members of the Turkish Parliament have grown louder
than ever. Everyone questions whether the Armenian side is indeed
sincere to keep its obligations with regard to the commission of
historians envisaged in the protocols.
It is precisely for these reasons that the Western capitals need to
demonstrate a more decisive attitude and must pressure Armenia. The
lack of experience regarding the nature of the Azeri-Armenian conflict,
as well as the indifference shown by Western democracies in the region
have been the reason all the international undertakings, including
that of the OSCE, have gone for naught. Until the present, there has
always been calls to continue negotiations. Nevertheless, these weak,
reluctant enterprises have not produced any positive results. They
unfortunately confirm Baku's belief that there is only one way to
restore justice, i.e. resorting to force. They strengthen, in turn,
Yerevan's non-conciliatory approach to both the issue of occupation and
much-speculated normalization of relations between Turkey and Armenia.
In particular, at this stage, some major commitments fall on the
shoulders of France, Russia and the U.S., which are co-chairs of the
OSCE Minsk Group.
C. Cem Oguz [email protected]
News.Az
news.az
Oct 20 2011
Azerbaijan
by Cem Oguz, head of the Turkish Center for Strategic and International
Studies.
There is no doubt that the Turkish-Azeri relations have made a great
progress during the last couple of years. Next week, for instance,
the Turkish city of İzmir will be hosting a joint session for Turkish
and Azeri ministers under the chairmanship of Turkish Prime Minister
Recep Tayyip Erdogan and Azeri President İlham Aliyev. Both leaders
will also be attending the ceremony of a new İzmir refinery built as
part of a joint initiative of Azeri State Oil Company and its Turkish
partner, Turcas.
In contrast, however, it has become highly customary in the Western
capitals to question the nature of Turkish-Azeri relations. 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. More importantly, an increasing
number of Western diplomats has come to assert that Turkey has been
taken hostage by Azerbaijan.
Those who criticize Turkey's "love affair" with Azerbaijan,
nonetheless, seem to have underestimated key factors in the
relationship between these two countries. Actually, 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.
The reasons that Turkey cannot ratify the protocols 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 infamous protocols, especially 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 January 2010, voices expressing
skepticism among members of the Turkish Parliament have grown louder
than ever. Everyone questions whether the Armenian side is indeed
sincere to keep its obligations with regard to the commission of
historians envisaged in the protocols.
It is precisely for these reasons that the Western capitals need to
demonstrate a more decisive attitude and must pressure Armenia. The
lack of experience regarding the nature of the Azeri-Armenian conflict,
as well as the indifference shown by Western democracies in the region
have been the reason all the international undertakings, including
that of the OSCE, have gone for naught. Until the present, there has
always been calls to continue negotiations. Nevertheless, these weak,
reluctant enterprises have not produced any positive results. They
unfortunately confirm Baku's belief that there is only one way to
restore justice, i.e. resorting to force. They strengthen, in turn,
Yerevan's non-conciliatory approach to both the issue of occupation and
much-speculated normalization of relations between Turkey and Armenia.
In particular, at this stage, some major commitments fall on the
shoulders of France, Russia and the U.S., which are co-chairs of the
OSCE Minsk Group.
C. Cem Oguz [email protected]
News.Az