About us | Advertising | Contact | Get Home Delivery | Archive
Mar 19, 2010 Homepage
News
Business
Interviews
Columnists
Op-Ed
Arts & Culture
Expat Zone
Features
Travel
Leisure
Life
Cartoons
Women
Health Briefs
Weird But True
Sports
Turkish Press Review
Today's think tanks
Turkey in Foreign Press

Columnists
BÜLENT KENEŞ b.kenes@todayszaman.com Columnists

Key to Caucasus initiative: Armenia


Turkish President Abdullah Gül's visit to Yerevan for the match between the two countries' national soccer teams has the potential to emerge as an important turning point for relations between Turkey and Armenia.

Today's interactive toolbox
Bookmark and Share
Video Photo Audio
Send to print Send to my friend
Post your comments
Read comments
Also, this visit will definitely have a confidence-building effect on the Caucasus, which is currently host to a very dangerous crisis.

The importance of this visit does not stem, as claimed by those who oppose it, from its being the first contact between Turkish and Armenian authorities. Indeed, Turkish authorities, including ministers and diplomats, have met with their Armenian counterparts many times in the past. We know that Gül, acting as the Turkish foreign minister and deputy prime minister, had talks with his Armenian counterparts on several occasions. For this reason, the approach taken by opposition parties such as the Nationalist Movement Party (MHP) and the Republican People's Party (CHP) -- which not only criticize Gül's visit, but also accuses him of treason out of some internal political considerations -- is not fair.

Moreover, unless a very exceptional situation had arisen attributable to the Armenian side, Gül had no other choice than to go to Yerevan. This is because Armenian President Sarksyan invited Gül to the match in a considerably successful move, giving the international community the very clear message that Armenians cannot be held responsible for the tension between two countries, and without bringing any liability to his country.

The experienced Turkish diplomacy is well aware of the fact any failure by Gül to accept this invitation would be interpreted by the international community as clear proof that it is the Turkish side that resists conciliation and dialogue for settlement of the problems between the two countries, and that it could not respond even to a simple gesture. Thus from the moment this invitation was made, Gül has known that this visit was inevitable. The crisis fueled in Georgia after this invitation was extended further added to the visit's inevitability, adding significance to it as well. Why? I will try to elaborate.

First of all, in the post-Georgian crisis era Turkey has built its Caucasus policy entirely upon the Caucasus Stability and Cooperation Initiative, intending with this initiative to build confidence among the problematic countries in the region and create a positive atmosphere that will aid a peaceful settlement of the Caucasus crisis. One of the five possible participants in the Caucasus initiative is Armenia. It is impossible to construct an environment of security and stability in the Caucasus and exclude Armenia. If Turkey intends to reinforce mutual security and confidence among countries for the success of the initiative, there is nothing more meaningful than Turkey starting with Armenia, with which it has several unresolved problems. Also, no player other than Turkey has the resources and capabilities to halt the dangerous course of events in the Caucasus, where Russia is officially at war with Georgia, and Azerbaijan with Armenia. This becomes clearer as we remember that the Minsk group acting under the roof of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) has failed.

As noted by diplomatic sources, Gül's visit does not contain any new proposal concerning the existing problems between the two countries. Turkey has not waived any prerequisite it has set up for dialogue with Yerevan: namely, an Armenia withdrawal of genocide claims, its halting the occupation of Nagorno-Karabakh and the Lachin corridor, withdrawal of its territorial claims, its cessation of using the Armenian diaspora against Turkey, etc. However, the talks conducted by the foreign undersecretary, Ambassador Ünal Çeviköz, in Yerevan ahead of Gül's visit imply that Turkey, too, expects a new initiative to emerge in the bilateral relations.

This initiative will largely depend upon how the Armenian side welcomes Gül. It is obvious that the Armenians also need to establish a fair dialogue with Turkey in order to get rid of the country's isolation. They may either help two societies to overcome an important psychological threshold by adopting a constructive attitude during the visit, or they may frustrate this initiative, never to be repeated. Turkish diplomatic sources estimate that the signals of good intentions are to be given to the Turkish side during this visit -- progress cannot be made with prerequisites, but through parallel processes.

Turkey does not want to see another crisis caused by crazed steps similar to those taken by Georgian President Mikhail Saakashvili, and is ready to take initiative to this end. The traditional attitude adopted by Armenia and Azerbaijan in the face of common problems consists of just buying time. Armenia thinks that its claims on the lands it has occupied will in time turn into status quo while Azerbaijan still needs more time in order to build a military force using the economic revenues from its energy resources. If no progress is made though a peaceful initiative about the Nagorno-Karabakh issue, a conflict similar to the one among Georgia, South Ossetia and Russia might also emerge in this part of the region. Even if no such conflict erupts, Turkey is still worried about the possibility of polarization caused by a confrontation between the Georgian and Azerbaijani alliance and the Armenian and Russian alliance in the Caucasus, and about this polarization's irreparably damaging regional peace.

05 September 2008, Friday
BÜLENT KENEŞ
   
Articles of Today
All in the family
NICOLE POPE
A new closure case under way?
YAVUZ BAYDAR
Taner Akçam’s letter to the prime minister regarding the Armenian question
ORHAN KEMAL CENGİZ
How many hundreds of thousands of informants are there in Turkey?
HÜSEYİN GÜLERCE
Misled by appearance
ALİ BULAÇ
Saving face
CHARLOTTE MCPHERSON
The Armenian genocide and disgrace
ETYEN MAHÇUPYAN
Erdoğan’s unwelcome remarks
FATMA DİŞLİ ZIBAK

Other Articles of the Columnist

  Key to Caucasus initiative: Armenia
  The Caucasus crisis and Turkey’s constructive role
  Generals’ speeches
  The end of ‘the end of history’
  Is Russia’s ‘Big Power Ideology’ sufficient for a new cold war?
  Politics and prevention of corruption
  Turkish national interests and tiny zigzags
  CHP has finally found a proper manner of opposition
  Limits of relations with Iran
  An attempt to understand the Iran issue
  Possible consequences of the Georgian-Russian conflict
  First round of power struggle in Georgia won by Russia
  The ‘third way’ or the ‘Turkish option’
  What do Obama and McCain promise for global citizens?
  The court’s decision and the duty of the AK Party
  Ergenekon’s Turkey and fake patriots
  The heinous attack at the most critical juncture
  Lack of intellectual intelligentsia as Turkey’s main problem
  Ergenekon mentality
  Language of the squares
Columnists
ABDULHAMİT BİLİCİ
ABDULLAH BOZKURT
ALİ BULAÇ
ALİ H. ASLAN
AMANDA PAUL
ANDREW FINKEL
ASIM ERDİLEK
AYŞE KARABAT
BEJAN MATUR
BERİL DEDEOĞLU
BERK ÇEKTİR
BÜLENT KENEŞ
BÜLENT KORUCU
CHARLOTTE MCPHERSON
DOĞU ERGİL
EKREM DUMANLI
EMRE USLU
ETYEN MAHÇUPYAN
FATMA DİŞLİ ZIBAK
FİKRET ERTAN
GÜRKAN ZENGİN
HASAN KANBOLAT
HÜSEYİN GÜLERCE
İBRAHİM KALIN
İBRAHİM ÖZTÜRK
İHSAN DAĞI
İHSAN YILMAZ
KATHY HAMILTON
KERİM BALCI
KLAUS JURGENS
LALE KEMAL
MEHMET KAMIŞ
MICHAEL KUSER
MUHAMMED ÇETİN
MÜMTAZER TÜRKÖNE
NICOLE POPE
ÖMER TAŞPINAR
ORHAN KEMAL CENGİZ
PAT YALE
ŞAHİN ALPAY
SELÇUK GÜLTAŞLI
SUAT KINIKLIOĞLU
YAVUZ BAYDAR