ARMENIA WILL FIND ITSELF IN AN ADVANTAGEOUS SITUATION IN CASE OF DISRUPTION OF ARMENIAN-TURKISH PROCESS BECAUSE OF TURKEY
ArmInfo
2010-03-17 12:14:00
Interview of Professor Rouben Safrastyan, Director of the Oriental
Studies Institute of Armenian National Academy of Sciences,
turcologist, with ArmInfo news agency
Mr. Safrastyan, what will the American-Turkish political intrigues
around the H.Res.252 lead to?
Actually, the political intrigues around the H.Res.252 affirmed by
the US House Committee on Foreign Affairs, as well as the severe games
between Ankara and Washington are still going on. I think Turkey will
exert all efforts to hinder the passage of H.Res.252 by the Congress;
moreover, Turks are striving to Obama’s refusal to pronounce the word
"genocide" in his annual traditional speech. For its part, the USA
is striving to make Turkey continue the process of normalization of
relations with Armenia. Moreover, Washington has other goals connected
with the launch of the process of withdrawing the US troops from Iraq.
These processes are connected with the growing tension around Iran.
That is to say, the USA and Turkey are currently bargaining on these
issues. In these conditions, it is unreasonable to make any forecasts
about the destiny of H.Res.252, as the decision may be taken at the
very last moment, literally before April 24.
Don’t you think Washington is unlikely to promote the H.Res.252,
thereby losing the stick it is constantly using to threaten Ankara?
One should take into account several factors here. First of all,
even if H.Res.252 becomes a part of the Congress agenda, it will not
mean that the USA has lost that stick, since it is still a question
if the Congress will adopt it. In addition, there is another process
around the annual message by Obama to the Armenian community. So,
manipulating on these two processes, the USA exerts pressure on Turkey
permanently maneuvering.
Do you think the US Administration had a hand in the initiative of
pro-Armenian congressmen, particularly, H.Res. 252?
I think that both Armenian lobby and US Administration that used it
as a stick for Turkey had their own role in this process. In general,
for its part the Administration uses the Armenian lobby’s actions as
a stick, that is to say, quite a big game is played.
What domestic political reasons made the Swedish Parliament recognize
the Armenian Genocide?
Specific domestic political reasons really played their own part in the
given decision. In particular, I suppose that the Social Democratic
Party of Sweden had a big part in this. Unlike the previous years,
it supported the pro-Armenian resolution. That is to say, certain
domestic political developments probably had their impact on the
process. At the same time, recognition of the Armenian Genocide by the
Swedish parliament, as well as by parliaments of many other states
is mostly connected with understanding of the evil of Genocide. In
the first half of the 21st century the humanity will realize this
fact of absolute evil better. The Genocide against Armenian people
was committed almost 100 years ago but it has not been condemned by
the legal successor of the Ottoman Empire, Turkey. When condemning
the Genocide, the countries show their willingness to prevent this
crime in the future.
Speaker of Armenian Parliament Hovik Abrahamyan has recently said
once again that Armenia will ratify the Armenian-Turkish Protocols
only after their ratification by Turkey. What is such position
conditioned by?
The reason is that at present it is getting more and more obvious
that Ankara delays the ratification of Protocols trying to use them
as the means of bargain with the USA and pressure on Armenia in the
Karabakh peace process. At the same time, it is also obvious that
these tricks will have no effect on the final results of the Karabakh
peace process and Armenian-Turkish normalization process.
How much advantageous may Armenia’s position be considered in case
of disruption of the Armenian-Turkish process?
It is Turkey that led the Armenian-Turkish normalization to deadlock.
This is evident. In such a situation, the process may be terminated
and Armenia may withdraw from it. We should take into account several
circumstances when analyzing the way it has passed. In particular,
it is important for all the leading countries to understand Armenia’s
approach, saying that the Armenian-Turkish and the Karabakh processes
must not be linked. Turkey’s attempts to link these processes received
no positive response and proved that all the leading players in
the world share our stance. Secondly, Armenia has shown that unlike
Turkey, it displays more responsibility towards the signed documents
and deviates from them not a jot. As regards Turks, they signed one
thing and spoke about another thing constantly, which undermined
the confidence in them. Moreover, it is also important that if the
process is suspended and Armenia withdraws from it, for which all the
necessary legal premises as amendments to the Law "On international
agreements" have been already created by the Armenian parliament,
we’ll find ourselves in an advantageous situation. Having signed
the Protocols, Turkey signed documents containing no preconditions
or dictate with respect to Armenia that it has held since 1991
when advancing preconditions to establish diplomatic relations and
unblock the border. Thus, actually, Ankara has given up this policy
of pressure and dictate, and if some time later a new normalization
process starts, which is inevitable, we can start it from these
documents, in which Turkey gave up the preconditions.
Why is this process inevitable?
The reason is simple. There should be no artificial barriers between
countries in the 21st century and a state cannot exert pressure on
another state demanding to change the political course using the
factor of the closed border. It is simply inadmissible.
what is really taking place in the Karabakh process within the frames
of the Madrid principles?
Having no Madrid document coordinated by the parties, we have only to
guess about its content. If in case of the Armenian-Turkish process we
have such a document in the form of the signed Protocols, we cannot
say the same in case of the Karabakh process. Anyway, we should make
the Minsk Group intermediaries and Azerbaijan understand strictly
that the problem of the NKR status must not be discussed, as Karabakh
residents gained it independently by their own forces. As for returning
of the territories around Nagornyy Karabakh or some of their part,
this issue should be discussed by residents of Karabakh themselves,
that is to say, the NKR itself should decide what territories it needs
to ensure its security. The Armenian party has all the grounds for
this as it won the Karabakh war and settled the Karabakh conflict in
favor of itself. Moreover, over the whole period of Karabakh settlement
Armenian diplomacy proved that it was a more constructive partner of
Minsk Group than the Azerbaijani one.
Interviewed by David Stepanyan, 15 March 2010. ArmInfo