Turkish-Armenian traumas
 
 
  |  
  |  
  |  
  |  
RSS
  |  
  |  
  |  
21 May 2013 Tuesday
 
 
 
 
 
 
Columnists 12 October 2009, Monday 0 0 0 0
ÖMER TAŞPINAR
o.taspinar@todayszaman.com

Turkish-Armenian traumas

As we have once again witnessed over the weekend, Turkey and Armenia are two traumatized nations. Reconciliation between these two nations will be much more difficult than a crisis-prone signature ceremony.
To be sure, liberal intellectuals from Turkey and Armenia will continue to communicate in English and manage to distance themselves from ethnic nationalism. But ordinary Turks and Armenians do not have such luxury. There is also the crucial factor of the Armenian diaspora. The diaspora will always be more intransigent than Armenia itself.

In order to fully understand the roots of the drama that unfolded in Zurich, we need to understand the Turkish and Armenian psyche. We also need to ask what brings these two peoples to the negotiating table. Let's start with the Turkish psyche. Turks have lost an empire in an agonizingly slow fashion. For 200 years, Ottomans lost war after war to more modern Western enemies. The unraveling was even more traumatizing inside the empire. Unable to understand the power of ethnic nationalism, the ruling elite came to hate and distrust ethnic minorities. The empire was at a loss as internal nationalisms led to separatism. Finally, Turkish nationalism emerged as the last nationalism of the empire, in reaction to all previous nationalisms. And it emerged with a vengeance. Its main objective was to save what was left of the empire.

Armenians, like Turks, were also latecomers to nationalism. They wanted their own state just like the Greeks, Serbs and Bulgarians. But they were a century too late. It was only a matter of time before Turkish nationalism and such Armenian national aspirations were to confront each other. What followed is tragic. Armenian nationalism begot Turkish wrath. More than a million Armenians were wiped out from their territories. The majority were massacred during deportations.

Once the empire was gone, Turkey embarked on the most radical Westernization program the Islamic world ever witnessed. Yet, a century later, Turks are still not accepted as European by the Europeans. They suffer from an inferiority complex vis-à-vis the West and a superiority complex vis-à-vis the Arab world. They are torn between Islam and secularism, tradition and modernity, Europe and the Middle East. Turks are still traumatized by their identity and history. They still fear minorities and distrust the West they want to emulate.

And Armenians are of course still angry. Millions of Armenians across the world have their origins in Anatolia. They compare their tragedy to the Holocaust. They want justice. Some want revenge. To make things worse, there is also an Azeri dimension to this trauma, centered in Nagorno-Karabakh. Any potential Turkish-Armenian rapprochement, which would be complicated enough with the ghosts of the past, is now shadowed by the politics of Azerbaijan, itself a traumatized nation because of defeat in Karabakh.

Let's now try to understand what drives the rapprochement between Armenia and Turkey. What fuels the reconciliation process despite such mutual traumas? As far as Turkey is concerned, the real reason seems to be the need to avoid a major crisis with the United States. Yes, it is certainly true that the Justice and Development Party (AKP) has been pursuing a “zero problem” policy with neighbors. That helps. But it is not a coincidence that there is a new sense of urgency to the talks this year, after the arrival of Barack Obama to the White House. Obama, no ordinary politician, has committed himself to recognize the events of 1915 as genocide. Turks don't want a new crisis with Washington. They are doing their best with these talks to give Obama a face-saving reward to keep genocide recognition at bay.

What about Armenia? Why are they willing to come to the table ? Most surprisingly, why are they willing to accept the Turkish terms for a history commission to investigate what happened in 1915? The current leadership of the Armenian state is from Karabakh. They are Eastern Armenians who are less traumatized than the Western Armenians wiped out in 1915. They have also won the war in Karabakh and thus can afford to be more pragmatic. But perhaps most important is the fact that Armenia wants to have options other than Russia. The Russian invasion of Georgia in 2008 changed regional dynamics in the Caucasus. Armenia now wants to have Western options. And this Western option requires a degree of normalization with Turkey in order to open the western borders of the country. At the end of the day, the Armenian and Turkish trauma will probably endure. But external conditions will help to alleviate the weight of history.

Columnists Previous articles of the columnist
19 May 2013
Turkey-US: trading places
12 May 2013
Who is behind Reyhanlı ?
5 May 2013
Iraq is the real problem in Turkish-American relations
28 April 2013
Root causes of terrorism in Boston
21 April 2013
The timing of Turkey's Kurdish strategy
14 April 2013
The urgent versus the important in the Middle East
7 April 2013
The AKP paradox and the Kurdish question
31 March 2013
A new American approach to Syria?
24 March 2013
A good week for Turkey
17 March 2013
Turkey and the transatlantic alliance
10 March 2013
Iraq: 10 years after
3 March 2013
Anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism
24 February 2013
Better coordination needed between US, EU, Turkey
17 February 2013
America's self-inflicted economic problem
10 February 2013
Syria and the Congo in the eyes of Obama
3 February 2013
Turkish perceptions of the United States (2)
27 January 2013
Turkish perceptions of the United States (1)
20 January 2013
Turkey and Britain: privileged partners in the EU?
13 January 2013
Israeli elections, Iran and the US reaction
6 January 2013
From fiscal to political cliff
30 December 2012
America's China policy (II)
23 December 2012
America's China policy (1)
16 December 2012
Can Turkey be multicultural?
9 December 2012
America's Syria dilemma
2 December 2012
Turkey and Saudi Arabia: strange bedfellows in Syria
25 November 2012
A war with no winners
18 November 2012
The Middle East will not wait for Obama
11 November 2012
New Washington, old problems
4 November 2012
The Day After Scenarios in Washington
28 October 2012
No good option in Syria
21 October 2012
Final stretch in US elections
14 October 2012
The Syrian crisis and Turkey's credibility gap
7 October 2012
Washington's Syria policy viewed from Ankara
30 September 2012
US election and Turkey
23 September 2012
Turkey's image in the Western media
16 September 2012
The American public and the Islamic world
9 September 2012
Foreign policy in US elections
2 September 2012
The Arab Spring and the Kurdish Awakening
26 August 2012
Israel, Iran and the US elections
12 August 2012
Syria and US options
5 August 2012
Syrian lessons for Turkey
29 July 2012
The future of Turkish-Israeli relations
22 July 2012
Post-Assad Syria: civil war or harmony?
15 July 2012
Armenia-Turkey and 2015
8 July 2012
Washington’s Syria policy
1 July 2012
No good options with Syria and Iran
24 June 2012
Turkey’s Syria policy: What’s next?
17 June 2012
Understanding relative deprivation
10 June 2012
The root causes of Turkish anti-Americanism
4 June 2012
Syria, Europe and inaction
27 May 2012
A new phase in Syria?
20 May 2012
The story behind the story and US lobbies
13 May 2012
Austerity versus growth: a false debate
6 May 2012
Explaining Turkey's inaction in Syria
29 April 2012
Turkey’s strategic visions and Syria
22 April 2012
Turkey's Kurdish predicament
15 April 2012
Playing for time in Iran and Syria
8 April 2012
Turkish economy: between hard and soft landing
1 April 2012
Turkish-Iranian relations: engagement and rivalry
25 March 2012
The West and military tutelage in Egypt
18 March 2012
Syria and Iraq: Disturbing similarities
11 March 2012
Obama’s Iran dilemma
4 March 2012
Turkey’s options in Syria (II)
26 February 2012
Turkey’s options in Syria (I)
19 February 2012
The future of China (II)
12 February 2012
Time for Turkey to match words with deeds
5 February 2012
Turkey’s Syria dilemma
29 January 2012
The future of China (1)
22 January 2012
Double standards in dealing with deep state
15 January 2012
Will Turkey support sanctions against Iran?
8 January 2012
Turkish-Iranian solidarity in the Middle East?
1 January 2012
Europe's reaction to the Arab awakening
25 December 2011
Iraq and Syria are unraveling
19 December 2011
Taking stock in Iraq
11 December 2011
What’s next for Egypt?
4 December 2011
The zigzag in Turkish-American relations
27 November 2011
Turkey's illiberal democratization
21 November 2011
America's return to the Pacific
13 November 2011
The anatomy of the European debt crisis
30 October 2011
Turkey’s cyclical appeal as a model
23 October 2011
The PKK and the Kurds
16 October 2011
Is the EU still relevant for Turkey?
9 October 2011
The US-Pakistan crisis
2 October 2011
Obama and the democratic base
25 September 2011
A successful visit to New York
18 September 2011
Turkey and Israel: Divergence because of resemblance?
11 September 2011
Time to focus on the Kurdish question
5 September 2011
Deciphering Israel’s behavior
21 August 2011
Darkening clouds over Turkey
14 August 2011
The Saudi reaction to Syria
7 August 2011
The Arab Spring and the duality of the Turkish model
31 July 2011
Civil military relations and the roots of the Kurdish problem (2)
24 July 2011
The roots of Turkey’s Kurdish challenge (1)
17 July 2011
The Kurdish question and the AKP
10 July 2011
The Turkish model and the Arab world (2)
3 July 2011
The Turkish model and the Arab world (1)
26 June 2011
Foreign policy challenges after AKP’s victory (2)
19 June 2011
Foreign policy challenges after AKP’s victory (1)
12 June 2011
Post-election Turkey and the Kurdish challenge
5 June 2011
Turkish elections and Washington ( 2)
...