TURKEY IS MISSING YET ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY WITH ARMENIA
Vartan Oskanian
Daily Star
April 23 2009
Lebanon
The onetime Israeli foreign minister, Abba Eban, used to say of
the Palestinians that they never missed an opportunity to miss an
opportunity. Turkey, sadly, seems to be falling into that same habit
in its relations with Armenia. And, as with Palestine, failure to
act only breeds wider regional instability. In the two weeks before
US President Barack Obama’s recent visit to Turkey, there was almost
universal optimism that Turkey would open its border with Armenia. But
Obama came and went, and the border remained close.
Turkish-Armenian relations remain more about gestures than
substance. Indeed, Turkish President Abdullah Gul and Prime Minister
Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s dismissive recent statements hint that Turkey
may even be backtracking on its plans to establish more normal
bilateral ties.
Those ties have been strained since 1993, when Turkey closed its border
with Armenia in solidarity with Azerbaijan in the Armenian-Azerbaijani
conflict over Nagorno-Karabakh. When Erdogan and Gul came to power
in 2003, nothing changed. The border stayed closed.
In my first meeting with Gul, who was Turkey’s foreign minister
in 2003, he acknowledged that Turkey had not benefited from its
policy of linking Armenia-Turkey relations to a resolution of the
Azerbaijani-Armenian conflict. Turkey, he said, wanted to establish
normal bilateral relations with all neighbors. That was music to my
ears, and I told him so.
But Azerbaijani pressure prevailed, and Turkish policy did not
change. Of course, at that time, Turkey’s own interests were not
what they are today. Accession talks with the European Union had not
begun; Turkey wanted an oil pipeline from Azerbaijan; the resolution
condemning the Armenian genocide had not gathered steam around the
world; Turkey’s economy was not in crisis; and Georgia-Russia tensions
were not in a free-fall.
Today, the world is so different that even Russia and the United States
agree about opening the Turkish-Armenian border. Indeed, in the face
of Russia-Georgia strains, Turkey can benefit from a new role in the
Caucasus. Its proposed "Platform for Cooperation and Security in the
Caucasus" is a first step. And public opinion in Turkey is more ready
than ever for a rapprochement with Armenia.
Such a move would make Europe happy, too. Although Erdogan likes to
call Turkey a natural bridge between East and West, Europe is waiting
for Turkey to assume the function that geography has bestowed upon
it. As for Azerbaijan, now that a pipeline from Baku to the Turkish
port of Ceyhan is operational, Azerbaijan needs Turkey more than
Turkey needs Azerbaijan.
And, this month, Turkey has a deadline. Obama committed himself during
his presidential election campaign to calling the violence against
the Armenians in the Ottoman Empire by its name – genocide. The
anniversary of those events is April 24.
One would think that these developments provide Turkey with a great
opportunity to act in its own best interests and open its border with
Armenia. But Turkey has already missed two such opportunities. The
collapse of the Soviet Union was the right time to establish
diplomatic relations with Armenia. Turkey did not, instead offering
mere recognition of Armenia’s independence. No functioning relationship
could come from that.
Then, in 2004, with the beginning of EU accession talks, Turkey had
ample cause to explain to Azerbaijan why improved relations with
Armenia were inevitable. It did not do so, allowing the opportunity
slip away.
History is now offering Turkey a third chance to play a greater
regional role. By actually opening borders, or at least announcing a
real date and actual modalities, Turkey would open doors to a shared
future. But Gul and Erdogan are signaling that they cannot. Before
Obama made it back to Washington, they forcefully and repeatedly
announced – presumably to appease Azerbaijan – that they would not act
to open the border until the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict was resolved.
But Turkey and Azerbaijan are wrong. Keeping the border closed will not
solve the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. On the contrary, an open border
would facilitate resolution of the conflict – not because it would be a
tradeoff for something else, or come with strings attached, but because
an open border demonstrates evenhandedness towards all neighbors.
An open border between Armenia and Turkey would mean that Azerbaijan
could not shirk negotiations. My grandmother from Marash would have
said that Azerbaijan today believes that, with Turkey, it "has an
uncle in the jury," and thus that it can persist in its petulance
and intransigence.
An environment of compromise requires a regional environment devoid
of threats and blackmail. Without Turkey tipping the scale for the
benefit of one side in this conflict, both sides must become more
accommodating, especially on security issues. The Nagorno-Karabakh
conflict is about security. Armenia, sandwiched between two
hostile states, is unlikely and unable to agree to security
compromises. Closing a border is an act of hostility. Opening that
border would mean creating a normal regional environment.
History is offering Turkey the opportunity to take regional relations
to a new level. Symbols and gestures are insufficient. And waiting
for a Nagorno-Karabakh solution is no solution at all. It is merely
one more missed opportunity.
Vartan Oskanian, president of the board of the Yerevan-based Civilitas
Foundation, was Armenia’s foreign minister from 1998 to 2008. THE
DAILY STAR publishes this commentary in collaboration with Project
Syndicate (c) ().