It was observed that especially after Barack Obama was elected US president, the digression from the Cold War perception gained major momentum in the Middle East. Although globalization did give many clues and incentives to this end, the Middle East's suspicious view toward the West was not eliminated. Even today, there is still no consensus about whether the West's intentions are sincere. However, the combination of diplomacy's transition from sanctions to dialogue and the reality implicated by the new energy policy has created a new understanding.This potential new world especially appeals to Turkey's new and ambitious bourgeoisie. While they envision Turkey as one of the actors of the globalized world, freeing it from the diplomacy chains of the past has turned into a strong demand. Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu's personal career is an epitome of this change. He was an academic who prepared theoretical works and went beyond the founding of the republic to establish the roots of a broad perspective concerning the future. The integration of the past and future in a way that exceeds the period of the republic complies with the vision of the newly emerging Muslim bourgeoisie. This social movement created the Justice and Development Party (AK Party) and turned an academic theoretician into the bearer and implementer of this vision.
For Turkey to become an “actor” in the future new world, it will first have to develop problem-free relations with its neighbors. Thus, opening the border with Armenia became the main issue on Turkey's secret agenda in recent years. Turkey's own sociological change had the effect of bringing to an end the international rigidity in the region. But prior to that, the Armenia-Turkey-Azerbaijan triangle was entangled in a symmetry that connoted immobility. The balance which consisted of the three countries' reciprocal sanctions and threats signified a risk-free status quo that each country was becoming increasingly used to.
Intertwined subjects were made into such a tangle and described in such an exaggerated way by nationalist discourse that the countries were stripped of any intention to exert effort to change the situation. It seemed a solution was only possible in the far future when cards would be re-dealt and relative powers would be re-determined.
But this status quo state far from satisfied the dreams of Turkey's new bourgeoisie. Although Armenia watched this development with amazement, it did not hesitate to put faith in it. Perhaps the reason for this is that the “Muslim” identity is still met with a positive perception in Armenia while all the negativity has been attached to “Turkishness.”
Considering that Armenians attribute the deaths of their ancestors to nationalist and statist Turkey and feel indebted to Muslim neighbors for their survival, it is only natural that they felt a secret sense of relief to the sociological change in Turkey. What is more interesting, however, is that Azerbaijan was not able to foresee in any way this change in Turkey and was isolated to the extent that that it failed to understand the change. Apparently, they had too much confidence that the state in Turkey had the power to develop an identity and that politics would be conducted in line with this identity. They were not able to fully grasp what the rise of a new middle class that was sensitive to Islamic values meant and what kind of a Caucasus it implied.
With the initial two protocols -- "on the establishment of diplomatic relations" and "on the development of bilateral relations," released on Aug. 31 -- we are going to witness the symmetry around the frozen status quo break. The biggest gain from this process will be that all three countries will make progress toward democracy and integrate with the global system with real ties. At the same time, each country will be under more pressure to abandon the classic nation-state and Cold War diplomacy and learn how to “listen” to one another. The same period will also denote intense counterpropaganda by nationalists in all three countries; however, it is unlikely that their opposition will have much effect. If the process is managed properly, it will normalize both the past and present of these lands. An important potential has been created that can especially end the moral disconnection and hidden hostility between Armenians and Turks. Old politics was shaped by fears. Armenia was afraid of losing Nagorno-Karabakh and the possibility that this could lead to a new genocide. Turkey was afraid of being confined to the shadows of a genocide that happened in the past and failing in the future just because of this.
Turkey's courage to request a better future is actually courage to embrace its past. Armenia's courage to allow Karabakh to be normalized within the frame of international norms is an extension of its desire to protect its future. We are going to witness the reuniting of two people that lived together for centuries without limits and boundaries and the reuniting of two cultures that developed and grew together. No one should be surprised if this results in a huge cultural explosion that no “history commission” will be able to restrain. There is a Turkish saying that says, “The land calls.” Anatolia will call its people back to itself. The people have been waiting for this for a very long time.
