Tweet
A TURKISH-ARMENIAN RAPPROCHEMENT?
The National Interest Online
May 6 2014
Kemal KirisciAndrew Moffatt
May 2, 2014
inShare0
Turkish Prime Minister Recep Erdogan's declaration regarding the
1915 Armenian killings was not, in itself, a surprise, coming just
ahead of the April 24 commemoration date. However, the conciliatory
language used in the statement was quite different than previous
Turkish characterizations of the events during which the Armenian
community of the Ottoman Empire underwent deportation and near total
destruction at the hands of a collapsing state. The statement, which
was issued in eight languages other than Turkish, including Eastern
and Western Armenian, recognized the particular significance of the
day for Armenians around the world, described the historic events as
"inhumane" and conveyed condolences to the grandchildren of those
who lost their lives.
While falling short of acknowledging genocide, the declaration marks
a fundamental change in Turkey's approach to dealing with the events
during which up to 1.5 million Armenians perished. Understandably,
the wounds between Armenia and Turkey run very deep. The statement
could help to resuscitate the shelved rapprochement between the two
nations, but reconciliation will need to be backed by a genuine effort
to "better understand historical issues" and to approach the differing
accounts "with empathy and tolerance."
It has now been nearly five years since the signing of the diplomatic
accords between Armenia and Turkey, commonly known as the protocols.
The documents were meant to establish relations and open the
borders between the two countries that have been closed since
1993 in response to the Armenian occupation of areas surrounding
Nagorno-Karabakh in Azerbaijan. Meticulously mediated by Swiss and
American diplomats, the protocols aimed to lay the groundwork for
a historic reconciliation process between Armenia and Turkey ahead
of the centenary of the Armenian genocide in 2015. Unfortunately,
both the Armenian and Turkish sides ran into obstacles and domestic
political sensitivities that caused the initiatives to lose traction
and stall before they were ratified by their respective legislatures.
Currently, there are no official relations between Armenia and Turkey.
Yet, informally, there is a great deal of activity taking place. Most
importantly, economic relations continue, mostly in the form of trade
via Georgia. The absence of official relations makes it difficult
to gauge the extent of such ties. Official Turkish statistics show a
trade volume of only half a million USD for 2012 and 2013 in contrast
to Armenian national statistics that show imports from and exports to
Turkey at about $214 million USD in 2012. However, an Armenian civil
society activist familiar with business relations between the two
countries estimates that the true figure is closer to half a billion
USD in 2012.
Aside from trade, there is also commerce-based movement of people
between the two countries, again mostly via Georgia. Both countries
allow their nationals to travel to each other's countries, and migrants
often enter via multi-entry tourist visas and simply overstay. Turkish
official statistics put the number of Armenian nationals visiting
Turkey at 71,000 and 73,000 in 2012 and 2013 respectively. This
figure stood at only 17,000 a decade earlier when travel restrictions
still existed. The number of Turks visiting Armenia, however, is
negligible. The discrepancy can be partly explained by the large
number of Armenian migrant workers in Turkey.
Although there are no official figures, thousands of Armenian women
come to work as domestic help in middle class families in Istanbul
and some of the other major cities of Turkey. In 2010, Turkish Prime
Minister Erdogan estimated that 170,000 Armenians were living in
Turkey, of which some 100,000 were not Turkish citizens.
Nevertheless, the level of economic and people-to-people contact falls
well short of the level that could be achieved if the border between
the two countries were open. Currently, there are charter flights
between Yerevan and Istanbul and initiatives have been launched to try
to open an air route between Yerevan and Van, in eastern Turkey. This
route that would have been opened in April 2013 unfortunately did not
materialize even though the prospects continue to be explored by both
sides. There are also reports that both Armenian and Turkish tourism
companies, especially from eastern parts of Turkey, are very keen to
see the opening of such a flight and possibly one also to Diyarbakir
in southeastern Turkey. Such flights would help boost economic activity
on both sides of the border.
Armenians around the world see the approaching centenary of the tragic
mass killings as a focal point for concentrating pressure on Turkey
to recognize the genocide. It is also likely that some Armenians will
view the declaration by Erdogan as a ploy to preempt such recognition.
The statement also acknowledges that the new openness regarding the
historic events may be used by some to voice "accusatory, offensive
and even provocative assertions and allegations" but calls upon all
sides to bear these with "empathy and tolerance." In that light,
the declaration can also be seen as an opportunity to revive the
arrested reconciliation process. A less ambitious but pragmatic first
initiative would be to open a single border crossing between Armenia
and Turkey accompanied by regular air service between Istanbul and
Yerevan. The increased economic and people-to-people contacts between
the nations could well become a concrete next step to unlocking the
relationship from its zero-sum logic and deep sense of insecurity,
and to facilitating a more comprehensive reconciliation between
Armenians and Turks ahead of the centenary of the Armenian genocide.
Kemal KiriĆ~_ci is the TUSIAD Senior Fellow in the Foreign Policy
Program at The Brookings Institution, in Washington, DC. Andrew
Moffatt is the Associate Director of the Center on the United States
and Europe at Brookings.
http://nationalinterest.org/feature/turkish-armenian-rapprochement-10351
The National Interest Online
May 6 2014
Kemal KirisciAndrew Moffatt
May 2, 2014
inShare0
Turkish Prime Minister Recep Erdogan's declaration regarding the
1915 Armenian killings was not, in itself, a surprise, coming just
ahead of the April 24 commemoration date. However, the conciliatory
language used in the statement was quite different than previous
Turkish characterizations of the events during which the Armenian
community of the Ottoman Empire underwent deportation and near total
destruction at the hands of a collapsing state. The statement, which
was issued in eight languages other than Turkish, including Eastern
and Western Armenian, recognized the particular significance of the
day for Armenians around the world, described the historic events as
"inhumane" and conveyed condolences to the grandchildren of those
who lost their lives.
While falling short of acknowledging genocide, the declaration marks
a fundamental change in Turkey's approach to dealing with the events
during which up to 1.5 million Armenians perished. Understandably,
the wounds between Armenia and Turkey run very deep. The statement
could help to resuscitate the shelved rapprochement between the two
nations, but reconciliation will need to be backed by a genuine effort
to "better understand historical issues" and to approach the differing
accounts "with empathy and tolerance."
It has now been nearly five years since the signing of the diplomatic
accords between Armenia and Turkey, commonly known as the protocols.
The documents were meant to establish relations and open the
borders between the two countries that have been closed since
1993 in response to the Armenian occupation of areas surrounding
Nagorno-Karabakh in Azerbaijan. Meticulously mediated by Swiss and
American diplomats, the protocols aimed to lay the groundwork for
a historic reconciliation process between Armenia and Turkey ahead
of the centenary of the Armenian genocide in 2015. Unfortunately,
both the Armenian and Turkish sides ran into obstacles and domestic
political sensitivities that caused the initiatives to lose traction
and stall before they were ratified by their respective legislatures.
Currently, there are no official relations between Armenia and Turkey.
Yet, informally, there is a great deal of activity taking place. Most
importantly, economic relations continue, mostly in the form of trade
via Georgia. The absence of official relations makes it difficult
to gauge the extent of such ties. Official Turkish statistics show a
trade volume of only half a million USD for 2012 and 2013 in contrast
to Armenian national statistics that show imports from and exports to
Turkey at about $214 million USD in 2012. However, an Armenian civil
society activist familiar with business relations between the two
countries estimates that the true figure is closer to half a billion
USD in 2012.
Aside from trade, there is also commerce-based movement of people
between the two countries, again mostly via Georgia. Both countries
allow their nationals to travel to each other's countries, and migrants
often enter via multi-entry tourist visas and simply overstay. Turkish
official statistics put the number of Armenian nationals visiting
Turkey at 71,000 and 73,000 in 2012 and 2013 respectively. This
figure stood at only 17,000 a decade earlier when travel restrictions
still existed. The number of Turks visiting Armenia, however, is
negligible. The discrepancy can be partly explained by the large
number of Armenian migrant workers in Turkey.
Although there are no official figures, thousands of Armenian women
come to work as domestic help in middle class families in Istanbul
and some of the other major cities of Turkey. In 2010, Turkish Prime
Minister Erdogan estimated that 170,000 Armenians were living in
Turkey, of which some 100,000 were not Turkish citizens.
Nevertheless, the level of economic and people-to-people contact falls
well short of the level that could be achieved if the border between
the two countries were open. Currently, there are charter flights
between Yerevan and Istanbul and initiatives have been launched to try
to open an air route between Yerevan and Van, in eastern Turkey. This
route that would have been opened in April 2013 unfortunately did not
materialize even though the prospects continue to be explored by both
sides. There are also reports that both Armenian and Turkish tourism
companies, especially from eastern parts of Turkey, are very keen to
see the opening of such a flight and possibly one also to Diyarbakir
in southeastern Turkey. Such flights would help boost economic activity
on both sides of the border.
Armenians around the world see the approaching centenary of the tragic
mass killings as a focal point for concentrating pressure on Turkey
to recognize the genocide. It is also likely that some Armenians will
view the declaration by Erdogan as a ploy to preempt such recognition.
The statement also acknowledges that the new openness regarding the
historic events may be used by some to voice "accusatory, offensive
and even provocative assertions and allegations" but calls upon all
sides to bear these with "empathy and tolerance." In that light,
the declaration can also be seen as an opportunity to revive the
arrested reconciliation process. A less ambitious but pragmatic first
initiative would be to open a single border crossing between Armenia
and Turkey accompanied by regular air service between Istanbul and
Yerevan. The increased economic and people-to-people contacts between
the nations could well become a concrete next step to unlocking the
relationship from its zero-sum logic and deep sense of insecurity,
and to facilitating a more comprehensive reconciliation between
Armenians and Turks ahead of the centenary of the Armenian genocide.
Kemal KiriĆ~_ci is the TUSIAD Senior Fellow in the Foreign Policy
Program at The Brookings Institution, in Washington, DC. Andrew
Moffatt is the Associate Director of the Center on the United States
and Europe at Brookings.
http://nationalinterest.org/feature/turkish-armenian-rapprochement-10351