SOUTH CAUCASUS: STABILITY PLATFORM AND CONFLICTS

International Analyst Network

05 Oct 2008
NY

RUBEN SAFRASTYAN ON TURKEY’S NEW UNDERTAKING IN SOUTH CAUCASUS

The five day long war in August between Russia and Georgia have
resulted important changes in South Caucasus. It is still early
to speak about the final results; however, it is already known the
main tendency – strengthening of Russia’s geopolitical position in
the region.

Displaying its political will and decisiveness and winning the war
Russia has reestablished its role in South Caucasus as the main power
center which it had lost at the end of the last century. It has not
only succeeded in furthering the establishment of the two new states –
South Ossetia and Abkhazia – in the region, but also in "legitimating"
deployment of its troops in their territories. Georgia, which in the
period of M. Sahakashvili’s presidency has became the main ally of
the west, namely the US, not only suffered irreversible loses in the
region, but also lost fighting capability of its armed forces and
efficiency of the military infrastructures.

Among the closest neighbor states of South Caucasus Turkey was the
first to respond the geopolitical changes in the region. That respond
appeared in the form of establishing South Caucasus Stability and
Cooperation Platform (SCP). The author of the undertaking is Professor,

Racep Tayyip Erdoghan’s closest advisor, chief architect of the Justice
and Development party’s governing circle’s foreign policy course
who is also considered to be one of the leading geopoliticians and
strategists of Turkey. In particular, he is the author of a distinctive
geopolitical conception called "Turkey’s strategic depth" which aims at
theoretically grounding the necessity to develop geostrategy directed
at creating spheres of influence around Turkey so reestablishing
its privileges over its neighbors due to its favorable geography and
magnificent imperial history.

In the beginning stage Turkey’s suggestion was envisaging to include
the US into the structure, besides the three South Caucasian countries,
Turkey and Russia, however, later on, as a result of discussions among
the leaders of Russia and Turkey in Moscow, was elected 3+2 format –
Azerbaijan, Armenia, Georgia and Russia and Turkey.

In this case the situation was quite different: Turkey was responded
positively by all the possible participants of the Platform, besides
Georgia. The later one refused to take part in any undertaking
together with Russia, as Russian troops were on its territory, which
is politically quite perceptible. It is noteworthy that Azerbaijan has
not officially appeared with any suchlike objections in connection with
Armenia. It is clear that it is the result of Turkey’s tough pressure.

However, from the geopolitical standpoint it is much more important
that Turkey’s undertaking is supported by Russia. As a matter of fact,
this circumstance is conditioned by Turkey’s readiness to exclude
the US from the Platform participants. We think that Russia positive
approach to SCP is only of tactical character as it is difficult to
imagine that country’s geostrategic prospective involving another
active player in South Caucasus beside itself. This circumstance
makes a ground to characterize SCP’s plan as hardly realizable.

We suppose that if Turkey and Russia being well aware of that
circumstance, nevertheless actively further preliminary works of
founding SCP, they have an objective to use that process in favor of
their tactic interests. Turkey tries to assure its neighbors and the
world that the foreign policy it carries out is based on active and
multi-polar world order perceptions, just like it befits the successor
state of the Ottoman Empire. At the same time SCP processes provide
a chance for Turkey to have "privilege" in the centuries-old struggle
with its regional and historical rival Iran – wakening its positions
in Caucasus. Russia spares no efforts to hinder the US entrance into
South Caucasus.

As for us, our involvement into SCP processes will raise Armenia’s
geopolitical "value" in the region. Accordingly, Turkey will get
more interested in settling its relations with Armenia which will
further mollifying "enforcement" policy implemented by Turkey. As it
is known, the expression of that "enforcement" policy is the three
preconditions put forward by Turkey and for it settlement of diplomatic
relations and opening of borders are conditioned by realization of
these preconditions. By the way, the visit of Turkey’s president
to Armenian provided a favorable chance to develop dialogues over
normalizing the relations.

"Noravank" Foundation, 29 September 2008

CAUCASUS PLATFORM: REGION TO SHARE EXPERIENCE WITH RUSSIA

Turkey took an initiative to establish Caucasus Platform in the region
and in this regard Turkey is trying to create positive relations
with Armenia, said Ruben Safrastyan, the director of Eastern Studies
Institute of the National Academy of Sciences of Armenia. "Imagine
Armenia refuses to take part in the negotiations held in the frames
of the platform. Georgia has also rejected its participation. Hence
from Southern Caucasus countries only Azerbaijan remains which is not
preferable for Turkey," said Mr. Safrastyan and added that these are
our advantages to create communication with Turkey.

Panorama.am, 01/10/2008

Ruben Safrastyan: The Minsk Group remains the best format for
negotiations

During the Georgian conflict the Armenian diplomacy managed to be
on the height, preserving its role of an ally for Russia, the ties
with Georgia, the friendly relations with the UN and Europe. Armenia
did not only manage to formulae its national and state interests,
but also make those understandable for Russia, Georgia and the US,
Director of the Oriental Studies Institute of the National Academy of
Sciences Ruben Safrastyan told a press conference today. According to
him, Armenia proved that it’s committed to the strategic partnership
with Russia, and the Russian Federation does not conceal that the
importance of Armenia is growing.

According to Ruben Safrastyan the recent harsh statements of Turkey’s
President Abdullah Gul on the opening of the Armenian-Turkish border
are Turkey’s diplomatic tricks. For the first time in the recent
years Turkey is somewhat interested in continuing the negotiations,
first of all aspiring to get Armenia’s consent on participation in the
Caucasus Platform. Armenia’s having positive attitude is important
for Turkey. Armenia has two trump cards to resist the demands of
the Turkish diplomacy: Armenia can suspend the talks at any point,
which is not favorable to Turkey and Armenia can disagree with the
platform, thus making Turkey’s initiative senseless.

According to the Turkologist, Turkey will continue posing its
demands to Armenia: refusal from the policy of recognition of the
Armenian Genocide, unilateral concessions on the Karabakh issue and
recognition of territorial integrity with reconfirmation of the Kars
Agreement. However, according to Ruben Safrastyan, Armenia will make no
concessions. Ruben Safrastyan noted also that the Minsk Group maintains
its role as the best format for resolving the Karabakh conflict

Public Radio of Armenia , 01.10.2008

No Future in Turkish Initiative to Mediate Karabakh Conflict, Says
Safrastyan

YEREVAN (Combined Sources)–Turkey’s recent efforts to mediate a
resolution in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict between Armenia and
Azerbaijan outside the Minsk Group format have no future, Armenia’s
top Turkologist, Ruben Safrastyan, told reporters on Wednesday.

The OSCE Minsk Group continues to be the best format for resolving the
Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, according to Safrastyan, who is the director
Oriental Studies Institute at the Armenian National Academy of Science.

Turkey’s recent overtures to Armenia on the opening of borders and
the establishment of relations are "diplomatic tricks," aimed at
consolidating Turkish influence in the Caucasus, he added. Safrastyan
explained that Armenia’s significance to stability in the region
has grown in the wake of the brief but devastating Russian-Georgian
conflict, which cut off the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline and hurt
Turkish energy revenues. This reality, he added, now compels Turkey
to seek Armenia’s participation in its proposed Caucasus Stability
and Cooperation Platform.

Official Ankara announced plans to create a Caucasus Stability and
Cooperation Platform that would include the three South Caucasus
countries plus two regional heavyweights, Turkey and Russia, following
the conflict. The regional framework, if realized, will allow Turkey
to extend its influence into the Caucasus at a level unseen since
the collapse of the Ottoman Empire.

According to Safrastyan, Armenia was able maintain its longstanding
policy of complimentarity, preserving its role as an ally of Russia,
its ties with Georgia, and friendly relations with the UN and Europe.

"Armenia not only managed to conceptualize its national and state
interests, it also l them clear to Russia, Georgia and the US,"
Safrastyan said. "Armenia proved that it is committed to a strategic
partnership with Russia, and the Russian Federation does not conceal
that the importance of Armenia is growing."

It is therefore important for Turkey that Armenia has a positive
attitude toward Ankara’s latest diplomatic initiative, he noted.

Armenia’s significance in the region, however, will not impel Turkey
to drop its longstanding preconditions for establishing relations
with Armenia, Safrastyan said. "Turkey will continue posing its
demands on Armenia: refusal from the policy of recognition of the
Armenian Genocide, unilateral concessions on the Karabakh issue and
recognition of [Turkey’s] territorial integrity with reconfirmation
of the Kars Treaty," he said.

But Armenia will not make concessions, according to
Safrastyan. "Armenia has two trump cards to resist the demands
posed by Turkish diplomacy," he explained. "Armenia can suspend the
talks at any point, which is not favorable to Turkey and Armenia can
disagree with the platform, thus making Turkey’s [Caucasus platform]
initiative senseless.