Tweet
Russian Influence on Armenia Favors Turkey
Igor Muradyan, Political Analyst
Comments - 28 September 2014, 09:40
The Turkish policy on the regions of the Near East, the Caucasus,
Central Asia and the Balkans are seen positive by Turkish experts.
They think that currently only Turkey with its dynamic economy and
political innovations can offer stability, security and development to
the countries of the region.
Turkey is carrying out a "revolution" of it relations with regions,
suggesting resolution of disputes, ruling out confrontation. At the
same time, according to their evaluations, most countries of the
regions are dissatisfied and beware the Turkish policy. Not only the
ruling regimes but also different political parties and intellectuals
in the Balkans, especially the Near East, are expressing doubts about
Turkey's positive goals and intentions.
The United States is trying to support different groups in the Near
East which resist to Turkey's policy and question it. These doubts and
counteractions are latent and have not been recognition in public
politics. The Turkish prime minister T. Erdogan prefers a rather tough
rhetoric and wording in conversations and statements, which harms the
Turkish policy but in reality the Turkish policy is, in fact, quite
constructive and peaceful, and once diplomatic wording is used,
opponents will have no arguments against Turkey's intentions, experts
say.
Masses of peoples in Arab states accepted Turkey's statements and
position on Israel with enthusiasm and gratitude but the governments
fear not only Turkey but also its popularity among people and this is
certainly influence on the real positions of ruling regimes in the
Arab states in regard to Turkey.
There is information that Arab leaders have launched consultations on
limiting Turkish influence on the Near East. The leaders of Egypt and
Saudi Arabia are already having consultations with the leaderships of
Syria, Jordan, Lebanon and Iraq, trying to prevent development of
relations of these countries with Turkey.
At one time the United States and the European Union did not support
the efforts of their old ally in NATO in the direction of Central Asia
where the Turkish policy proved less successful than it had been
expected. Something analogical is happening in the Near East where the
United States torpedoes Turkey's attempts to strengthen security and
development. The leading European nations do not conduct such a policy
but, apparently, they support the United States and the U.S. policy.
The United States is conducting a reserved and unconfident policy on
Turkish-Armenian normalization because it is interested in elaborating
the so-called "Armenian issue" as a factor of their policy.
These and other political-ideological settings laid at the basis of
the modern Turkish political science and creation of political texts.
Traditionally, the Turkish school of politics and political science is
divided to two parts, Istanbul and Ankara. Istanbul is more liberal
and less strongly connected with governmental circles, very often it
received financial assistance from Western funds. Ankara enjoys the
support of the government and different pro-government public
foundations or the armed forces.
At the same time, the political scientists and analysts of both trends
disagree on most foreign policy issues, including the genocide of
1915, which is significantly determined by nationalistic moods or fear
of becoming isolated in the Turkish society.
It is noted that the community of political scientists is influencing
the foreign policy of the country, and most political scientists and
analysts are part of the establishment, are connected with the
country's ruling party.
Turkey has created favorable conditions for propaganda abroad, first
of all in the United States and Europe. Meanwhile, experts of Turkish
origin are in line with leading political scientists of the United
States, France and other countries of the West.
In the 1990s and 2000s Turkish politicians caused huge interests in
the West because they proposed not only intellectual but also
financial services in terms of co-participation in research programs.
Now a lot has changed, and the serious government bodies are more
cautious and critical about the activities of Turkish political
scientists.
Despite the diversity of approaches and positions of the society,
Turkish political scientists have failed to offer a more creative
alternative to the doctrine of neo-Ottomanism. The community of
political scientists prefers following the ideas of leaders of the
ruling party, and differences are minor.
The opinions of Turkish political scientists on Armenia and its
foreign policy are interesting. It is said that Armenia is going
through a "childhood period" in policy, and the great powers, like 100
years ago, are actively using the "Armenian issue" to keep Turkey
under control.
At present, the post-Soviet dilettante elite rules in Armenia which
has not managed to do anything political and only reacts to certain
events. At the same time, it is thought that Armenia contains a huge
negative potential, and this will be certainly used in prejudice of
Turkey because it is necessary to follow more attentively what is
happening in Armenia.
But if during the modern history Turkey was trying to cut Armenia from
Russia, now Ankara thinks that Russian control on Armenia is favorable
for Turkey's interests. Turkish political scientists think that the
United States is trying to push Armenia towards the Turkish direction,
and this is one of the foreign threats to Turkey.
The attempts to normalize Turkish-Armenian relations are aimed at
strengthening control over Turkey. There is an opinion that if the
United States and the West are trying to boost Armenia's role in the
region, they must help to change the ruling regime and oust the
business elite because it fully depends on Russia and does not open up
any perspective.
It should be noted that the community of political scientists in
Turkey does not listen to what the Azerbaijani experts are preaching.
Turkey fears integration of the Azerbaijani political circles with the
Turkish community, considering the Azerbaijanis a marginal ethnicity
which is far from the goals of the Anatolian society, incapable of
sacrificing part of its interests for the sake of Turkey's interests
as a senior partner.
In the meantime, the Turkish community of political scientists is
having doubts and does not understand certain perspectives which are
seen by the government. Such lack of confidence is observed in the
entire society and political scientists want to offer new initiatives
and try to influence the government.
Now the main ideas are understood: refrain from use of force in the
regions, focus on geo-economic problems, not set any distance from
NATO and the EU, as well as continue strategic cooperation with the
United States.
Most political scientists think that Turkey must not prefer Islamic
states or China as partners but try to build new relations with the
United States and NATO. Otherwise, more trouble awaits Turkey and
failures in foreign policy and economy will be inevitable.
The majority of Turkish political scientists agrees that the Turkish
foreign policy experienced a failure.
http://www.lragir.am/index/eng/0/comments/view/33030#sthash.7QlWbboe.dpuf
Igor Muradyan, Political Analyst
Comments - 28 September 2014, 09:40
The Turkish policy on the regions of the Near East, the Caucasus,
Central Asia and the Balkans are seen positive by Turkish experts.
They think that currently only Turkey with its dynamic economy and
political innovations can offer stability, security and development to
the countries of the region.
Turkey is carrying out a "revolution" of it relations with regions,
suggesting resolution of disputes, ruling out confrontation. At the
same time, according to their evaluations, most countries of the
regions are dissatisfied and beware the Turkish policy. Not only the
ruling regimes but also different political parties and intellectuals
in the Balkans, especially the Near East, are expressing doubts about
Turkey's positive goals and intentions.
The United States is trying to support different groups in the Near
East which resist to Turkey's policy and question it. These doubts and
counteractions are latent and have not been recognition in public
politics. The Turkish prime minister T. Erdogan prefers a rather tough
rhetoric and wording in conversations and statements, which harms the
Turkish policy but in reality the Turkish policy is, in fact, quite
constructive and peaceful, and once diplomatic wording is used,
opponents will have no arguments against Turkey's intentions, experts
say.
Masses of peoples in Arab states accepted Turkey's statements and
position on Israel with enthusiasm and gratitude but the governments
fear not only Turkey but also its popularity among people and this is
certainly influence on the real positions of ruling regimes in the
Arab states in regard to Turkey.
There is information that Arab leaders have launched consultations on
limiting Turkish influence on the Near East. The leaders of Egypt and
Saudi Arabia are already having consultations with the leaderships of
Syria, Jordan, Lebanon and Iraq, trying to prevent development of
relations of these countries with Turkey.
At one time the United States and the European Union did not support
the efforts of their old ally in NATO in the direction of Central Asia
where the Turkish policy proved less successful than it had been
expected. Something analogical is happening in the Near East where the
United States torpedoes Turkey's attempts to strengthen security and
development. The leading European nations do not conduct such a policy
but, apparently, they support the United States and the U.S. policy.
The United States is conducting a reserved and unconfident policy on
Turkish-Armenian normalization because it is interested in elaborating
the so-called "Armenian issue" as a factor of their policy.
These and other political-ideological settings laid at the basis of
the modern Turkish political science and creation of political texts.
Traditionally, the Turkish school of politics and political science is
divided to two parts, Istanbul and Ankara. Istanbul is more liberal
and less strongly connected with governmental circles, very often it
received financial assistance from Western funds. Ankara enjoys the
support of the government and different pro-government public
foundations or the armed forces.
At the same time, the political scientists and analysts of both trends
disagree on most foreign policy issues, including the genocide of
1915, which is significantly determined by nationalistic moods or fear
of becoming isolated in the Turkish society.
It is noted that the community of political scientists is influencing
the foreign policy of the country, and most political scientists and
analysts are part of the establishment, are connected with the
country's ruling party.
Turkey has created favorable conditions for propaganda abroad, first
of all in the United States and Europe. Meanwhile, experts of Turkish
origin are in line with leading political scientists of the United
States, France and other countries of the West.
In the 1990s and 2000s Turkish politicians caused huge interests in
the West because they proposed not only intellectual but also
financial services in terms of co-participation in research programs.
Now a lot has changed, and the serious government bodies are more
cautious and critical about the activities of Turkish political
scientists.
Despite the diversity of approaches and positions of the society,
Turkish political scientists have failed to offer a more creative
alternative to the doctrine of neo-Ottomanism. The community of
political scientists prefers following the ideas of leaders of the
ruling party, and differences are minor.
The opinions of Turkish political scientists on Armenia and its
foreign policy are interesting. It is said that Armenia is going
through a "childhood period" in policy, and the great powers, like 100
years ago, are actively using the "Armenian issue" to keep Turkey
under control.
At present, the post-Soviet dilettante elite rules in Armenia which
has not managed to do anything political and only reacts to certain
events. At the same time, it is thought that Armenia contains a huge
negative potential, and this will be certainly used in prejudice of
Turkey because it is necessary to follow more attentively what is
happening in Armenia.
But if during the modern history Turkey was trying to cut Armenia from
Russia, now Ankara thinks that Russian control on Armenia is favorable
for Turkey's interests. Turkish political scientists think that the
United States is trying to push Armenia towards the Turkish direction,
and this is one of the foreign threats to Turkey.
The attempts to normalize Turkish-Armenian relations are aimed at
strengthening control over Turkey. There is an opinion that if the
United States and the West are trying to boost Armenia's role in the
region, they must help to change the ruling regime and oust the
business elite because it fully depends on Russia and does not open up
any perspective.
It should be noted that the community of political scientists in
Turkey does not listen to what the Azerbaijani experts are preaching.
Turkey fears integration of the Azerbaijani political circles with the
Turkish community, considering the Azerbaijanis a marginal ethnicity
which is far from the goals of the Anatolian society, incapable of
sacrificing part of its interests for the sake of Turkey's interests
as a senior partner.
In the meantime, the Turkish community of political scientists is
having doubts and does not understand certain perspectives which are
seen by the government. Such lack of confidence is observed in the
entire society and political scientists want to offer new initiatives
and try to influence the government.
Now the main ideas are understood: refrain from use of force in the
regions, focus on geo-economic problems, not set any distance from
NATO and the EU, as well as continue strategic cooperation with the
United States.
Most political scientists think that Turkey must not prefer Islamic
states or China as partners but try to build new relations with the
United States and NATO. Otherwise, more trouble awaits Turkey and
failures in foreign policy and economy will be inevitable.
The majority of Turkish political scientists agrees that the Turkish
foreign policy experienced a failure.
http://www.lragir.am/index/eng/0/comments/view/33030#sthash.7QlWbboe.dpuf