Tweet
Armenia-US Relations: Unfulfilled Promise
http://www.armenianweekly.com/2014/03/21/armenia-us-relations-unfulfilled-promise/
By Kate Nahapetian // March 21, 2014
The Armenian Weekly March 2014 Magazine:
Armenia's Foreign Policy in Focus
Armenia has, since the rebirth of her independent state in 1991,
pursued a forward-leaning policy to strengthen ties with the United
States and NATO. Unfortunately, Armenia's outreach and initiatives to
bolster support and investment from the United States have largely not
been reciprocated by the Obama Administration.
Kerry and Davutoglu address reporters after their meeting in
Washington, D.C., on Nov. 18, 2013. (State Department Photo)
Strengthening ties with NATO
Armenia has been a member of NATO's Partnership for Peace program
since 1994 and currently has troops stationed as part of NATO forces
in Afghanistan and Kosovo. Armenia also supported U.S.-led efforts in
the Iraq war.
In June 2011, as countries were pulling out of Afghanistan, Armenia
actually tripled its troop deployment there. Armenia has 4 times more
troops in Afghanistan per capita than Turkey and 10 times more per
capita than either Canada or France. In February of this year, Armenia
pledged to keep its military contingent in Afghanistan even after
NATO's mission is concluded in order to support the U.S.-led alliance
to train and assist the Afghan army. Armenian Defense Minister Seyran
Ohanian stated that Armenia is committed to "continuous contribution
to coalition efforts to establish lasting security in Afghanistan."
Despite regional pressures related to Armenia's relationship with
NATO, Armenia's First Deputy Defense Minister Davit Tonoyan, during a
visit from U.S. Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense Evelyn Farkas in
December 2013, explained that "joining one or another economic bloc
does not inhibit Armenia. On the contrary, our defense cooperation
with the United States will develop and deepen further." Farkas in
turn thanked Armenia for being a "net exporter of security" and noted
that "Armenia is a significant partner to the United States in many
ways."
It is important to note that after the 2008 Georgian-Russian war,
Armenia was the first country to host NATO exercises in the Caucasus.
Armenia announced then that it was going to increase its ties with
NATO, and it has done so ever since.
Remaining an actor in the protocols farce
Perhaps the U.S.'s most significant initiative in the region has been
its effort to end Turkey's blockade of Armenia through the protocols.
The protocols provided President Barack Obama the cover he needed to
dodge his pledge to end U.S. complicity in Armenian Genocide denial.
It was the excuse he used in his first April 24th statement to not
recognize the genocide, even though he assured Armenian Americans that
his "view of that history has not changed."
Armenian Defense Minister Seyran Ohanian with Armenian troops in
Afghanistan in 2010 (Photo: official website of the Defense Ministry
of Armenia)
Although there was strong opposition to the protocols within both
Armenia and the diaspora, Armenian President Serge Sarkisian has
continued to support this U.S.-led initiative, even though Turkey made
it clear, within a day of its signing, that it had no intention of
abiding by the agreement.
Now, more than four years later, Armenia still has not withdrawn its
signature from the protocols--this, despite the fact that they are
being used by Ankara to undermine legitimate Armenian claims, and have
helped forces who wish to turn the Armenian Genocide from a crime to
be internationally condemned into a simple bilateral disagreement
between Turkey and Armenia.
The protocols have helped shield Turkey from outside pressure
concerning the Armenian Genocide. As a result, Turkey has taken an
even more aggressive posture against Armenia, including more vocally
supporting Azerbaijan's anti-Armenian policies, threatening to deport
Armenians in Turkey, accusing Armenia of committing
atrocities--allegedly the "greatest tragedy of the 20th century"--in the
Karabagh War, and demolishing a statue to Armenian-Turkish friendship,
all of which have happened since the protocols were signed.
Despite Turkey making a mockery of the process and the U.S.'s
unwillingness to pressure Turkey beyond the occasional empty rhetoric
that the "ball is in Turkey's court," Armenia continues to keep its
signature on the protocols. Armenia has made it clear that it has done
so out of deference to foreign powers, such as the United States.
What has been the US response?
Armenia is small in size, but big in terms of America's strategic
interests in the world. It sits in the middle of Washington's top
foreign policy priorities--Iran, Russia, Turkey, Azerbaijan, and
Syria--where it can play an important role. Although the second largest
U.S. embassy in the world sits not in Baghdad or Berlin, but in
Yerevan, the United States does not have much to show for its efforts
to promote trade or investment or reciprocate Armenia's efforts to
strengthen the partnership.
Its signature diplomatic initiative in Armenia was the protocols,
which garnered the intense attention of Secretary of State Hillary
Clinton and President Obama before Armenia and Turkey agreed to sign
the accord. Since Turkey quickly made it clear that it was not going
to abide by that agreement, the United States' willingness to pour
political capital into realizing the agreement dramatically decreased.
The U.S. has not made Turkey pay a price for its failure to ratify the
protocols and end its blockade. Instead, it has rewarded Turkey by
publicly saying it could have a role to play in the Karabakh peace
process, whereas previous administrations made it clear that Turkey
would only have a negative impact on the peace process. For instance,
in November 2013 at a joint press conference with Turkish Foreign
Minister Ahmet Davutoglu, Secretary of State John Kerry discussed
consultations with Turkey over Nagorno-Karabagh without even
mentioning the protocols or Turkey's need to end its blockade of
Armenia. Davutoglu felt comfortable claiming, "Today I am happy to see
that John and me and Turkey and the United States look to
[Nagorno-Karabagh] from the same perspective."
Not only did President Obama fail to honor his pledge to recognize the
Armenian Genocide, but his former Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton,
questioned the veracity of the Armenian Genocide--a move no other
former Secretary of State in recent memory has made. In addition,
Obama's Solicitor General filed a brief in opposition to a California
statute that allowed for Armenian Genocide-era property claims to be
brought in U.S. courts. The Supreme Court refused to hear the case and
the California law was struck down, denying justice to Armenian
Americans.
Even on issues that would not risk the unreasonable wrath of Turkey,
and even though numerous Members of Congress and U.S. corporations
(such as Microsoft, NASDAQ, and Fed Ex) have urged the administration
to immediately negotiate a Trade and Investment Framework Agreement
(TIFA) with Armenia, the Obama Administration hasn't pursued U.S.
interests in promoting trade with Armenia.
After a near continuous four years of Armenia extending its hand
towards NATO and continuing to support the failed U.S.-backed
protocols with Turkey, Armenian Americans cannot point to any
meaningful benefit to U.S.-Armenia relations or trade. In fact, as the
examples above illustrate, there were actually steps that undermined a
strengthening of the partnership. What did, it seems, finally get the
attention of the Obama Administration was not Armenia's continued
support for the protocols and other U.S. policies, but rather
Armenia's decision to move toward Russia's Custom's Union. Soon after
the United States announced an over $250 million investment by the
U.S. firm ContourGlobal in hydroelectric power plants in Armenia.
The announcement of a major U.S. investment in Armenia is a welcome
first step in promoting greater U.S.-Armenia ties. Despite the many
regional challenges, most notably the hostile neighbors it faces in
both Turkey and Azerbaijan, Armenia is determined to strengthen its
ties with the United States and Europe. The United States should do
more to strengthen this partnership. Doing so will provide the United
States with greater options to pursue its interests and promote
stability in a geostrategic region. Moreover, the Obama Administration
should stop compromising our values as a country to placate the most
radical elements in Turkey, especially when it concerns confronting
Turkey's state-sponsored denial of the Armenian Genocide, which is at
the root of instability between Turkey, Armenia, and Azerbaijan. As
Americans, we are, in our relations with Armenia and all nations, at
our best when we align our policies with our values.
http://www.armenianweekly.com/2014/03/21/armenia-us-relations-unfulfilled-promise/
By Kate Nahapetian // March 21, 2014
The Armenian Weekly March 2014 Magazine:
Armenia's Foreign Policy in Focus
Armenia has, since the rebirth of her independent state in 1991,
pursued a forward-leaning policy to strengthen ties with the United
States and NATO. Unfortunately, Armenia's outreach and initiatives to
bolster support and investment from the United States have largely not
been reciprocated by the Obama Administration.
Kerry and Davutoglu address reporters after their meeting in
Washington, D.C., on Nov. 18, 2013. (State Department Photo)
Strengthening ties with NATO
Armenia has been a member of NATO's Partnership for Peace program
since 1994 and currently has troops stationed as part of NATO forces
in Afghanistan and Kosovo. Armenia also supported U.S.-led efforts in
the Iraq war.
In June 2011, as countries were pulling out of Afghanistan, Armenia
actually tripled its troop deployment there. Armenia has 4 times more
troops in Afghanistan per capita than Turkey and 10 times more per
capita than either Canada or France. In February of this year, Armenia
pledged to keep its military contingent in Afghanistan even after
NATO's mission is concluded in order to support the U.S.-led alliance
to train and assist the Afghan army. Armenian Defense Minister Seyran
Ohanian stated that Armenia is committed to "continuous contribution
to coalition efforts to establish lasting security in Afghanistan."
Despite regional pressures related to Armenia's relationship with
NATO, Armenia's First Deputy Defense Minister Davit Tonoyan, during a
visit from U.S. Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense Evelyn Farkas in
December 2013, explained that "joining one or another economic bloc
does not inhibit Armenia. On the contrary, our defense cooperation
with the United States will develop and deepen further." Farkas in
turn thanked Armenia for being a "net exporter of security" and noted
that "Armenia is a significant partner to the United States in many
ways."
It is important to note that after the 2008 Georgian-Russian war,
Armenia was the first country to host NATO exercises in the Caucasus.
Armenia announced then that it was going to increase its ties with
NATO, and it has done so ever since.
Remaining an actor in the protocols farce
Perhaps the U.S.'s most significant initiative in the region has been
its effort to end Turkey's blockade of Armenia through the protocols.
The protocols provided President Barack Obama the cover he needed to
dodge his pledge to end U.S. complicity in Armenian Genocide denial.
It was the excuse he used in his first April 24th statement to not
recognize the genocide, even though he assured Armenian Americans that
his "view of that history has not changed."
Armenian Defense Minister Seyran Ohanian with Armenian troops in
Afghanistan in 2010 (Photo: official website of the Defense Ministry
of Armenia)
Although there was strong opposition to the protocols within both
Armenia and the diaspora, Armenian President Serge Sarkisian has
continued to support this U.S.-led initiative, even though Turkey made
it clear, within a day of its signing, that it had no intention of
abiding by the agreement.
Now, more than four years later, Armenia still has not withdrawn its
signature from the protocols--this, despite the fact that they are
being used by Ankara to undermine legitimate Armenian claims, and have
helped forces who wish to turn the Armenian Genocide from a crime to
be internationally condemned into a simple bilateral disagreement
between Turkey and Armenia.
The protocols have helped shield Turkey from outside pressure
concerning the Armenian Genocide. As a result, Turkey has taken an
even more aggressive posture against Armenia, including more vocally
supporting Azerbaijan's anti-Armenian policies, threatening to deport
Armenians in Turkey, accusing Armenia of committing
atrocities--allegedly the "greatest tragedy of the 20th century"--in the
Karabagh War, and demolishing a statue to Armenian-Turkish friendship,
all of which have happened since the protocols were signed.
Despite Turkey making a mockery of the process and the U.S.'s
unwillingness to pressure Turkey beyond the occasional empty rhetoric
that the "ball is in Turkey's court," Armenia continues to keep its
signature on the protocols. Armenia has made it clear that it has done
so out of deference to foreign powers, such as the United States.
What has been the US response?
Armenia is small in size, but big in terms of America's strategic
interests in the world. It sits in the middle of Washington's top
foreign policy priorities--Iran, Russia, Turkey, Azerbaijan, and
Syria--where it can play an important role. Although the second largest
U.S. embassy in the world sits not in Baghdad or Berlin, but in
Yerevan, the United States does not have much to show for its efforts
to promote trade or investment or reciprocate Armenia's efforts to
strengthen the partnership.
Its signature diplomatic initiative in Armenia was the protocols,
which garnered the intense attention of Secretary of State Hillary
Clinton and President Obama before Armenia and Turkey agreed to sign
the accord. Since Turkey quickly made it clear that it was not going
to abide by that agreement, the United States' willingness to pour
political capital into realizing the agreement dramatically decreased.
The U.S. has not made Turkey pay a price for its failure to ratify the
protocols and end its blockade. Instead, it has rewarded Turkey by
publicly saying it could have a role to play in the Karabakh peace
process, whereas previous administrations made it clear that Turkey
would only have a negative impact on the peace process. For instance,
in November 2013 at a joint press conference with Turkish Foreign
Minister Ahmet Davutoglu, Secretary of State John Kerry discussed
consultations with Turkey over Nagorno-Karabagh without even
mentioning the protocols or Turkey's need to end its blockade of
Armenia. Davutoglu felt comfortable claiming, "Today I am happy to see
that John and me and Turkey and the United States look to
[Nagorno-Karabagh] from the same perspective."
Not only did President Obama fail to honor his pledge to recognize the
Armenian Genocide, but his former Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton,
questioned the veracity of the Armenian Genocide--a move no other
former Secretary of State in recent memory has made. In addition,
Obama's Solicitor General filed a brief in opposition to a California
statute that allowed for Armenian Genocide-era property claims to be
brought in U.S. courts. The Supreme Court refused to hear the case and
the California law was struck down, denying justice to Armenian
Americans.
Even on issues that would not risk the unreasonable wrath of Turkey,
and even though numerous Members of Congress and U.S. corporations
(such as Microsoft, NASDAQ, and Fed Ex) have urged the administration
to immediately negotiate a Trade and Investment Framework Agreement
(TIFA) with Armenia, the Obama Administration hasn't pursued U.S.
interests in promoting trade with Armenia.
After a near continuous four years of Armenia extending its hand
towards NATO and continuing to support the failed U.S.-backed
protocols with Turkey, Armenian Americans cannot point to any
meaningful benefit to U.S.-Armenia relations or trade. In fact, as the
examples above illustrate, there were actually steps that undermined a
strengthening of the partnership. What did, it seems, finally get the
attention of the Obama Administration was not Armenia's continued
support for the protocols and other U.S. policies, but rather
Armenia's decision to move toward Russia's Custom's Union. Soon after
the United States announced an over $250 million investment by the
U.S. firm ContourGlobal in hydroelectric power plants in Armenia.
The announcement of a major U.S. investment in Armenia is a welcome
first step in promoting greater U.S.-Armenia ties. Despite the many
regional challenges, most notably the hostile neighbors it faces in
both Turkey and Azerbaijan, Armenia is determined to strengthen its
ties with the United States and Europe. The United States should do
more to strengthen this partnership. Doing so will provide the United
States with greater options to pursue its interests and promote
stability in a geostrategic region. Moreover, the Obama Administration
should stop compromising our values as a country to placate the most
radical elements in Turkey, especially when it concerns confronting
Turkey's state-sponsored denial of the Armenian Genocide, which is at
the root of instability between Turkey, Armenia, and Azerbaijan. As
Americans, we are, in our relations with Armenia and all nations, at
our best when we align our policies with our values.