Tweet
DEEDS AND WORDS ABOUT ARMENIA
Today's Zaman, Turkey
April 28 2014
by Omer Taspinar
One usually associates authoritarianism in domestic politics with
reckless and tactless foreign policy. There is no denying that Turkey's
image has become increasingly authoritarian in the last couple of
years. The brutal suppression of protests during the summer of 2013,
increasing restrictions on the freedom of expression and the recent
corruption scandals have exposed a different face of Turkey.
Coupled with the loss of regional influence in the wake of the
Syrian civil war, the positive image of a democratic, prosperous and
influential country has been replaced by authoritarianism in domestic
politics, cronyism and corruption in the economy and deadlock in
foreign policy.
Last week, in this rather gloomy political context, Prime Minister
Recep Tayyip Erdogan unexpectedly offered a message of empathy and
condolence to Armenians. The occasion was Armenian Remembrance Day,
when most of the Western world commemorates what is usually referred
to as the Armenian genocide of 1915. This message of condolence was
a small step to those who expect Turkey to recognize the events
of 1915 as genocide and to offer a clear apology. Yet what needs
to be recognized is that even such a limited gesture is a huge
step for a leader who is not known for his commitment to liberal
democracy, tolerance and freedom of speech. So why did Erdogan take
this unexpected step that surprised both friends and foes? Before
answering this question, it is important to remember that this is
not the only paradox of the current situation in Turkey. The same
authoritarian leader is also currently the first Turkish leader
who agreed to negotiate with the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK)
and appears willing to take significant reformist steps to solve
Turkey's long-standing Kurdish problem. Therefore, Erdogan is a man
who is hard to categorize as a typical autocrat.
As in the Kurdish question, some will see a cosmetic, tactical
and hollow step in Erdogan's recent gesture about 1915. After all,
Turkey is under pressure from the West for policies such as banning
Twitter and YouTube and the international image of the country has
suffered a great deal because of jailed journalists and corruption
scandals. So, one can see Erdogan's gesture as a pragmatic attempt at
damage control. Some have already predicted that an embattled Erdogan
at home may take unexpected steps in foreign policy - an opening
in Cyprus, a gesture towards Armenia, normalization with Israel -
to placate his Western critics. Of course, if Turkey manages to
take all these steps, one can also argue that they will amount to a
significant policy change, rather than just cosmetic steps.
Yet, even if you think Erdogan is not sincere in such foreign
policy gestures, one should recognize his ability to identify with
victimhood. He, after all, adopted a similar narrative of victimhood
based on being a pious Muslim under secular Kemalist hegemony. In
the Kurdish context, the dynamics are more or less the same. What
we may potentially be witnessing is a coalition of pious Muslims
and Kurds taking their revenge on the Kemalist circles. Such an
approach naturally requires creating some distance from official
Turkish nationalism.
If Erdogan can distance himself from official Turkish nationalism,
wouldn't this also help to empathize with the Armenian victims of
Turkish nationalism? The short answer is that it is too early to tell.
Yes, Erdogan the autocrat is able to say some surprising things on
the Kurdish and Armenian fronts; but such words have to be matched
with deeds. Otherwise, the accusations of tactical and Machiavellian
behaviour will stick. This is why words of condolence to Armenians
need to be matched with concrete steps, such as opening the border
with Armenia and the establishment of diplomatic relations. Only then
will the credibility gap narrow.
From: Baghdasarian
Today's Zaman, Turkey
April 28 2014
by Omer Taspinar
One usually associates authoritarianism in domestic politics with
reckless and tactless foreign policy. There is no denying that Turkey's
image has become increasingly authoritarian in the last couple of
years. The brutal suppression of protests during the summer of 2013,
increasing restrictions on the freedom of expression and the recent
corruption scandals have exposed a different face of Turkey.
Coupled with the loss of regional influence in the wake of the
Syrian civil war, the positive image of a democratic, prosperous and
influential country has been replaced by authoritarianism in domestic
politics, cronyism and corruption in the economy and deadlock in
foreign policy.
Last week, in this rather gloomy political context, Prime Minister
Recep Tayyip Erdogan unexpectedly offered a message of empathy and
condolence to Armenians. The occasion was Armenian Remembrance Day,
when most of the Western world commemorates what is usually referred
to as the Armenian genocide of 1915. This message of condolence was
a small step to those who expect Turkey to recognize the events
of 1915 as genocide and to offer a clear apology. Yet what needs
to be recognized is that even such a limited gesture is a huge
step for a leader who is not known for his commitment to liberal
democracy, tolerance and freedom of speech. So why did Erdogan take
this unexpected step that surprised both friends and foes? Before
answering this question, it is important to remember that this is
not the only paradox of the current situation in Turkey. The same
authoritarian leader is also currently the first Turkish leader
who agreed to negotiate with the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK)
and appears willing to take significant reformist steps to solve
Turkey's long-standing Kurdish problem. Therefore, Erdogan is a man
who is hard to categorize as a typical autocrat.
As in the Kurdish question, some will see a cosmetic, tactical
and hollow step in Erdogan's recent gesture about 1915. After all,
Turkey is under pressure from the West for policies such as banning
Twitter and YouTube and the international image of the country has
suffered a great deal because of jailed journalists and corruption
scandals. So, one can see Erdogan's gesture as a pragmatic attempt at
damage control. Some have already predicted that an embattled Erdogan
at home may take unexpected steps in foreign policy - an opening
in Cyprus, a gesture towards Armenia, normalization with Israel -
to placate his Western critics. Of course, if Turkey manages to
take all these steps, one can also argue that they will amount to a
significant policy change, rather than just cosmetic steps.
Yet, even if you think Erdogan is not sincere in such foreign
policy gestures, one should recognize his ability to identify with
victimhood. He, after all, adopted a similar narrative of victimhood
based on being a pious Muslim under secular Kemalist hegemony. In
the Kurdish context, the dynamics are more or less the same. What
we may potentially be witnessing is a coalition of pious Muslims
and Kurds taking their revenge on the Kemalist circles. Such an
approach naturally requires creating some distance from official
Turkish nationalism.
If Erdogan can distance himself from official Turkish nationalism,
wouldn't this also help to empathize with the Armenian victims of
Turkish nationalism? The short answer is that it is too early to tell.
Yes, Erdogan the autocrat is able to say some surprising things on
the Kurdish and Armenian fronts; but such words have to be matched
with deeds. Otherwise, the accusations of tactical and Machiavellian
behaviour will stick. This is why words of condolence to Armenians
need to be matched with concrete steps, such as opening the border
with Armenia and the establishment of diplomatic relations. Only then
will the credibility gap narrow.
From: Baghdasarian