Tweet
REVISITING THE ARMENIAN-TURKISH RECONCILIATION
Today's Zaman, Turkey
February 12, 2013 Tuesday 10:02 AM EST
By: Yelena Osipova and Fevzi Bilgin
The dispute between Turkey and Armenia is multidimensional and
there are major stumbling blocks on the way of rapprochement and
reconciliation between the two countries. The most prominent issue is
the nature of the particular actions by the Ottoman government in 1915
regarding Armenians and whether they should be designated as genocide.
This historical conflict feeds into the existing strategic and
geopolitical context of the region. The ongoing conflict between
Armenia and Azerbaijan over the region of Nagorno-Karabakh has further
complicated Armenian-Turkish relations.
Regarding the events of 1915, Armenia and Turkey subscribed to
competing and irreconcilable narratives. While the Armenian side
claims there was a genocide of Armenians by the Ottoman government
during World War I, the Turkish side denies this claim, and considers
the events of 1915 within the context of World War I, a conflict that
brought a tremendous cost to Ottoman Armenians and Muslims alike. We
do not argue for or against any of these narratives, but acknowledges
the importance of both sides adopting a more pragmatic approach to
the issue and dealing with its present ramifications, all the while
being sensitive to painful historical memories.
The need for reconciliation: Given the challenges experienced during
the failed rapprochement talks between Armenia and Turkey in 2009-2010,
we offer a multi-tiered approach to reconciliation. The borders are
closed and both sides but especially Armenia are losing out, while
economic and geopolitical interests of various actors involved in the
region are playing out. In order to participate in and be able to
influence these processes, both Armenia and Turkey need to resolve
the conflict between them and at least achieve a point where viable
diplomatic relations can be established. There are other actors and
processes beyond their immediate control that have an interest (even
if non-obvious) in seeing the conflict prolonged. That is why it is
important for the two sides to step up to the challenge and attempt
to achieve a resolution within their own reach.
2015 as an opportunity: Reconciliation is especially important
given the fast approaching centennial of the 1915 events, which
Armenians have chosen to commemorate for all those who perished. With
a government in Turkey that is more open to dialogue, and with Armenia
being increasingly squeezed in between the greater geopolitical games
taking place in the region, this approaching centennial provides an
invaluable opportunity to find a political opening and the will to get
back to the negotiating table and engage civil society and interested
individuals on both sides to take serious action toward reconciliation.
Public engagement as an essential element: As the failed 2009-2010
rapprochement talks vividly demonstrated, the involvement
and engagement of the population on both sides is absolutely
indispensable. Without it, any solution imposed from above is bound
to meet intense opposition, and possibly ultimate failure. This is
not to say that the role of the government is not important in the
process; however, instead of making decisions first and then opening
them up to the public later, both governments need to take the lead in
establishing dialogue and bringing their respective societies together,
whether directly or indirectly.
Proactive steps toward agreement: Active steps on both sides can
demonstrate goodwill and willingness to reach a compromise, also
putting a start to the long and difficult process of constructing
a shared narrative. As 2015 is approaching, the governments of both
countries have indicated that they want to see reconciliation happen.
Turkish Minister of Foreign Affairs Ahmet Davutoglu has even started
talking about a 'just memory.' And although it might be difficult
for Armenians to get to a point of openness without the recognition
of the 1915 events as genocide, a formal and sincere acknowledgement
by the Turkish government of their suffering will go a long way in
demonstrating goodwill. Armenians, on the other hand, will have to
recognize that lands cannot be 'returned' and reparations cannot be
paid where official documentation and insurance are absent. After all,
compromise means proactive steps toward agreement by both sides.
Academic and professional exchanges: Frequent cultural and long-term
academic exchanges can provide an initial step in laying the ground
for wider public diplomatic initiatives, along with the more exclusive
engagement of civil society leaders and media professionals. The
establishment of relatability recognition that the two sides have
a lot in common and goodwill is perhaps the most important building
block in this process.
Importance of social media: Once these initial points of contact
are established in person, they can then be extended and expanded
online after the participants of exchange programs return to their
respective countries. This expansion and consolidation of the 'trust
base' can, in turn, help change the outright negative attitudes among
greater society, contributing to a more positive and less biased
perception of media reports, information coming from the other side
and reconciliation initiatives undertaken by various groups.
Collaborative projects/initiatives: There have been several prominent
collaborative projects already established and carried out among
civil society activists and journalists on both sides of the border.
However, the number and extent of reach of such projects can never be
sufficient, as long as there is an ongoing conflict or a perception
thereof. Thus, it would be useful for the various international actors,
as well as those within the respective countries, to learn from and
build on the past programs and come up with creative innovations that
would bring people together.
Involvement of the diaspora: It is imperative to keep in mind that
these initiatives and projects will have to involve the Armenian and
Turkish diasporas as well, given that their concerns are much more
immediate, their perceptions of each other are much more hostile, the
issues are more sensitive, while at the same time the incentives for
reconciliation within their respective communities are practically
non-existent. Inviting members of the diasporas to participate in
exchange and collaborative programs will not only help them understand
each other much better and establish unconditional and less hostile
contact, but can also provide them with the opportunity to understand
their respective counterparts from the 'homeland' much better.
Involvement of Azerbaijan: Given the ongoing Nagorno-Karabakh conflict
between Armenia and Azerbaijan, and the strong political, economic
and cultural ties between Azerbaijan and Turkey, it is important to
involve Azerbaijan and the Azerbaijani people in the reconciliation
process, too. There are already some ongoing projects between certain
civil society activists from Armenia and Azerbaijan, usually based in
Georgia and involving Georgian representatives, as well. Bringing them
all to Turkey to establish a wider regional dialogue will not only
contribute to the improvement of Turkish-Armenian relations but also
lead to a broader-based stability and peace in the region as a whole.
Recognizing that the issues involved in the Turkish-Armenian dispute
are much wider and multi-faceted will, therefore, help design more
applicable and viable projects aimed at bringing about reconciliation
and resolution.
Today's Zaman, Turkey
February 12, 2013 Tuesday 10:02 AM EST
By: Yelena Osipova and Fevzi Bilgin
The dispute between Turkey and Armenia is multidimensional and
there are major stumbling blocks on the way of rapprochement and
reconciliation between the two countries. The most prominent issue is
the nature of the particular actions by the Ottoman government in 1915
regarding Armenians and whether they should be designated as genocide.
This historical conflict feeds into the existing strategic and
geopolitical context of the region. The ongoing conflict between
Armenia and Azerbaijan over the region of Nagorno-Karabakh has further
complicated Armenian-Turkish relations.
Regarding the events of 1915, Armenia and Turkey subscribed to
competing and irreconcilable narratives. While the Armenian side
claims there was a genocide of Armenians by the Ottoman government
during World War I, the Turkish side denies this claim, and considers
the events of 1915 within the context of World War I, a conflict that
brought a tremendous cost to Ottoman Armenians and Muslims alike. We
do not argue for or against any of these narratives, but acknowledges
the importance of both sides adopting a more pragmatic approach to
the issue and dealing with its present ramifications, all the while
being sensitive to painful historical memories.
The need for reconciliation: Given the challenges experienced during
the failed rapprochement talks between Armenia and Turkey in 2009-2010,
we offer a multi-tiered approach to reconciliation. The borders are
closed and both sides but especially Armenia are losing out, while
economic and geopolitical interests of various actors involved in the
region are playing out. In order to participate in and be able to
influence these processes, both Armenia and Turkey need to resolve
the conflict between them and at least achieve a point where viable
diplomatic relations can be established. There are other actors and
processes beyond their immediate control that have an interest (even
if non-obvious) in seeing the conflict prolonged. That is why it is
important for the two sides to step up to the challenge and attempt
to achieve a resolution within their own reach.
2015 as an opportunity: Reconciliation is especially important
given the fast approaching centennial of the 1915 events, which
Armenians have chosen to commemorate for all those who perished. With
a government in Turkey that is more open to dialogue, and with Armenia
being increasingly squeezed in between the greater geopolitical games
taking place in the region, this approaching centennial provides an
invaluable opportunity to find a political opening and the will to get
back to the negotiating table and engage civil society and interested
individuals on both sides to take serious action toward reconciliation.
Public engagement as an essential element: As the failed 2009-2010
rapprochement talks vividly demonstrated, the involvement
and engagement of the population on both sides is absolutely
indispensable. Without it, any solution imposed from above is bound
to meet intense opposition, and possibly ultimate failure. This is
not to say that the role of the government is not important in the
process; however, instead of making decisions first and then opening
them up to the public later, both governments need to take the lead in
establishing dialogue and bringing their respective societies together,
whether directly or indirectly.
Proactive steps toward agreement: Active steps on both sides can
demonstrate goodwill and willingness to reach a compromise, also
putting a start to the long and difficult process of constructing
a shared narrative. As 2015 is approaching, the governments of both
countries have indicated that they want to see reconciliation happen.
Turkish Minister of Foreign Affairs Ahmet Davutoglu has even started
talking about a 'just memory.' And although it might be difficult
for Armenians to get to a point of openness without the recognition
of the 1915 events as genocide, a formal and sincere acknowledgement
by the Turkish government of their suffering will go a long way in
demonstrating goodwill. Armenians, on the other hand, will have to
recognize that lands cannot be 'returned' and reparations cannot be
paid where official documentation and insurance are absent. After all,
compromise means proactive steps toward agreement by both sides.
Academic and professional exchanges: Frequent cultural and long-term
academic exchanges can provide an initial step in laying the ground
for wider public diplomatic initiatives, along with the more exclusive
engagement of civil society leaders and media professionals. The
establishment of relatability recognition that the two sides have
a lot in common and goodwill is perhaps the most important building
block in this process.
Importance of social media: Once these initial points of contact
are established in person, they can then be extended and expanded
online after the participants of exchange programs return to their
respective countries. This expansion and consolidation of the 'trust
base' can, in turn, help change the outright negative attitudes among
greater society, contributing to a more positive and less biased
perception of media reports, information coming from the other side
and reconciliation initiatives undertaken by various groups.
Collaborative projects/initiatives: There have been several prominent
collaborative projects already established and carried out among
civil society activists and journalists on both sides of the border.
However, the number and extent of reach of such projects can never be
sufficient, as long as there is an ongoing conflict or a perception
thereof. Thus, it would be useful for the various international actors,
as well as those within the respective countries, to learn from and
build on the past programs and come up with creative innovations that
would bring people together.
Involvement of the diaspora: It is imperative to keep in mind that
these initiatives and projects will have to involve the Armenian and
Turkish diasporas as well, given that their concerns are much more
immediate, their perceptions of each other are much more hostile, the
issues are more sensitive, while at the same time the incentives for
reconciliation within their respective communities are practically
non-existent. Inviting members of the diasporas to participate in
exchange and collaborative programs will not only help them understand
each other much better and establish unconditional and less hostile
contact, but can also provide them with the opportunity to understand
their respective counterparts from the 'homeland' much better.
Involvement of Azerbaijan: Given the ongoing Nagorno-Karabakh conflict
between Armenia and Azerbaijan, and the strong political, economic
and cultural ties between Azerbaijan and Turkey, it is important to
involve Azerbaijan and the Azerbaijani people in the reconciliation
process, too. There are already some ongoing projects between certain
civil society activists from Armenia and Azerbaijan, usually based in
Georgia and involving Georgian representatives, as well. Bringing them
all to Turkey to establish a wider regional dialogue will not only
contribute to the improvement of Turkish-Armenian relations but also
lead to a broader-based stability and peace in the region as a whole.
Recognizing that the issues involved in the Turkish-Armenian dispute
are much wider and multi-faceted will, therefore, help design more
applicable and viable projects aimed at bringing about reconciliation
and resolution.