WHAT PRICE OPEN BORDERS WITH TURKEY?
by Edmond Y. Azadian
AZG Armenian Daily
04/07/2007
Turkey can eat its cake and still have it, as long as it enjoys
the US support in its drive to join the European Union. The EU has
mandated a number of preconditions for membership, chief among them
being open borders with other member states. In the case of Cyprus,
Ankara dragged its feet until the last moment of the set deadline to
meet the EU condition of opening its seaports to Cypriot shipping
and in the final moments announced that it would open one port,
without specifying which one.
Cyprus is a full-fledged EU member and it can veto Turkey’s
membership. Armenia does not have that kind of leverage over Turkey. It
has only to rely on the international law, which is applied always
in double standards. Right at this moment the US is pressuring the
UN Security Council to vote for Kosovo’s independence over Russia’s
objections, but the rights of Armenians in Karabagh do not enjoy
that kind of support and the principle of territorial integrity of
Azerbaijan has become a given factor, despite all historical and
legal documents against that argument.
The issue of opening the Armenian-Turkish border was again raised in
Istanbul on June 25 by Armenia’s Foreign Minister Vartan Oskanian,
who attended the Black Sea Economic Cooperation Organization
Conference. He underlined that:"Genocide recognition, although it’s
in our political agenda to pursue it, has never been a precondition
to normalize relations".
But to no avail. Even a private meeting with Turkey’s Foreign Minister
Abdullah Gul led nowhere. Because Turkey itself has preconditions
to open its borders and establish normal diplomatic relations with
Armenia.
Those conditions are:
a) The settlement of the Karabagh dispute, preferably to the
satisfaction of its Azeri cousins.
b) Abandonment of the genocide issue by Armenia.
c) The explicit recognition by Armenia of the 1923 Treaty of
Kars between Ankara and Moscow, determining Armenia’s borer with
Turkey. That would indirectly signify that Armenia has no territorial
claims over historic Armenia occupied by Turkey.
The first precondition may be settled down the road, but Turkey knows
that the last two are no-starters.
It is very significant that the international law is extremely flexible
and it can be stretched to fit the arguments of the most powerful.
A case in point is a meeting at the White House, where eleven members
from the Armenian community leaders participated, right after the
election of President George W. Bush. When Karl Rove was asked by
this writer how come the US cannot ask Turkey to open its borders
with Armenia, when Ankara is forced to form a strategic alliance with
Israel, at the cost of turning Turkey into a pariah in the Moslem
world, Mr. Rove, with his characteristic arrogance, decided to leave
the room.
All the preconditions set by Turkey to open its borders with Armenia
are hollow excuses. In world politics governments may make concessions
over counter concessions or rewards, which Armenia is in no position to
offer. Should the EU come up with a carrot for Ankara, all objections
will evaporate overnight.
The closed borders between the two neighboring countries have become
a double-edged sword for both sides. Turkey’s Eastern provinces
have suffered economically more than Armenia. Also, Turkey’s push
to extend its political, economic and strategic influence to the
Central Asian Turkic nations have been blocked by Armenia, although
Christian Georgia has treacherously offered some relief in that sense,
by bypassing Armenia.
Despite the Turkish blockade to punish Armenia, the latter has enjoyed
economic growth better than most former Soviet republics. Also, many
fear that open borders may mean to open the flood gate of influence
of Turkish capital in Armenia, allowing the opportunity for Ankara
to strangulate Armenia over any excuse.
As a general rule open borders may lead towards more civilized
relations between neighboring countries, but in this case there may
also be some inherent dangers for Armenia.
Mr. Oskanian presented the issue at the Black Sea conference because
that is the right thing to do politically. He knows, as well as
anyone else, that the key is in Turkey’s hands and that key will not
be used until the US pressures Ankara or the EU comes up with some
tangible rewards.
In reporting the news about Oskanian’s speech the immorality of the
international news media surfaces once again. Indeed, the Reuters
News agency states that "Turkey closed its border in 1993 to protect
against Armenia’s occupation of territory inside Azerbaijan, Ankara’s
close Turkic ally." Historic documents and international law cut no
ice with these agencies. No one would like to listen that Karabagh
has never been an integral part of Azerbaijan’s territory and that it
has come out of the Soviet Union, under the same laws and conditions
that have defined Azerbaijan’s own independence.
Both Associated Press and Reuters adhere also to the immoral position
in the case of the genocide issue by turning it into a "he said –
you said" controversy, contrary to overwhelming evidence of the
Ottoman Turkish crime.
Oskanian’s above speech is concluded in a positive note, expecting
that July 11 parliamentary elections in Turkey may change Ankara’s
position on the border issue.
Unfortunately, Turkey will not budge from its current position,
unless it is forced by a greater power or unless a reward is offered
to compensate its good behavior.
As a seasoned diplomat, Mr. Oskanian knows better.