About us | Advertising | Contact | Get Home Delivery | Archive
Feb 09, 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

istanbul hotels

Columnists
YAVUZ BAYDAR y.baydar@todayszaman.com Columnists

The broader picture with Russia


It was, in terms of soccer, less than an ordinary match. In terms of football diplomacy, it was of high quality, yet another step for normalizing relations between two countries. When I met the two presidents after the game, all I could see was great relief and smiles.

Today's interactive toolbox
Bookmark and Share
Video Photo Audio
Send to print Send to my friend
Post your comments
Read comments
While I was busy conversing with President Abdullah Gül, in through the surrounding crowd came Micheline Calmy-Rey, the foreign minister of Switzerland, who said: “It is so nice to see you together. I hope that this happens regularly.”

But let me leave aside the pleasing social aspect of events and turn to the real subject keeping minds busy. What is the real international background of normalization? What are the reasoning, motives and calculations of all of the actors involved? What is the best-case scenario if normalization proceeds as planned?

I will leave my space to a respected scholar, an outstanding expert on the Caucasus with a vast knowledge on Russia, to seek the response. In a recent conversation, Professor Dennis Papazian analyzed the outcome, and with his kind permission, I will share it with my readers. Note that most of his assessment is certainly based on information.

Some important excerpts from our conversation:  

“With both Russia and the US now pressing strong, the border will be opened within the next year. All there needs to be is ‘movement,' not settlement of NK [Nagorno-Karabakh]. Who can stand up for long against pressure applied by both the US and Russia together?”

 “Russia has already ordered trains from Poland to run on the Russian-controlled railway route in Armenia to Turkey. Russia sees the border opening as a Russian-Turkish opening. Russia wants an open road almost directly to Turkey for Russia's sake, not Armenia's. Turkey understands that. But, of course, Turkey will extract the highest price it can gain for the opening. That is natural. The big trade will be between Russia and Turkey and somewhat between Iran and Turkey; Armenia is small change. Eastern Turkey (historic Armenia) stands to gain from this situation. The railway from Iran to Armenia is now finished as is the oil pipeline, both of which will eventually reach Russia.”

 “Turkey will follow Turkey's interest, not that of Azerbaijan -- open borders and trade with all its neighbors and entry into the European Union. The issue is how to urge Azerbaijan along and placate the Turkish public. That is taking time.”

 “Russia benefits from the conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan, and it has from the beginning. My guess is that Russia must guarantee the security of Nagorno-Karabakh before the Armenians will give up the occupied territories, except for Lachin, which they cannot give up. [İlham] Aliyev recently said Armenia has agreed to give up five of them, one more than the earlier four agreed to. He needs a way to save face. Nagorno-Karabakh has no economic value, but the territories are necessary for transit. Azerbaijan wants the East-West road more secure from its point of view. It want guarantees for transit to Nakhchivan.”

 “I don't mean to be unkind, but Turkey has dug its own hole by basing its foreign policy with Armenia and Azerbaijan for so many years on emotions and not on interests. It is Turkey's responsibility to help dig its way out of its own hole.”

 “Sarksyan now speaks of Turkey not dealing with 3 million Armenians in Armenia but 10 million Armenians. He has decoupled Nagorno-Karabakh and the border opening. He has separated genocide recognition from the border opening. He has agreed to a general commission to solve problems not dedicated to a discussion of genocide but which will inevitably deal with it. It will necessitate Turkey getting rid of Article 301, so Turkish scholars can be involved. He has accepted the present borders. It is a no-brainer. Treaties were signed, and the borders can only be changed by new treaties, acceptable to both sides.”

 “I think it is pretty clear that the ‘occupied territories' are outside Nagorno-Karabakh proper since the real contention is over who occupies Kelbajar and Lachin, although the term is obfuscated for domestic political reasons. Only the legal status of Nagorno-Karabakh is in dispute, not the de facto status. It is a question of what it is to be called, not what it is in reality. It is also a question of the right of Azeri return, although few would want to do it. Even the US quietly admits Nagorno-Karabakh will never again be occupied by Azeri troops but will be governed by Armenians.”

 “There is, of course, much opposition in Turkey because of pride, fear, anger, arrogance, prejudice, tradition, ignorance, etc., but the government is clear-eyed and sees Turkey's self-interest. It is also true that Turkey has a new, highly educated intellectual class that wants Turkey to have universal respectability. After wealth, people want respectability. The new class is strongly represented in foreign policy establishment and, to some extent, the press. The old Kemalists, conservatives and military are slowly losing their grip. So, yes, there is a political struggle within Turkey between the old and the new. We shall see who wins. I think the new will win, but who can be sure?”

16 October 2009, Friday
YAVUZ BAYDAR
Comments on this article

Babeouf , Oct 16 2009 12:32, Friday
National interest and the soul are both complex ideological constructs. Marxists are interested in the former and theolo...

Click to read the details of comments
   
Articles of Today
The reason for disgrace
EKREM DUMANLI
Political means versus military measures
LALE KEMAL
Medine was running with boys
NICOLE POPE
The islands of stability
ANDREW FINKEL
Modernity’s instruments
ALİ BULAÇ
Turkish decision-makers’ perceptions about think tanks
HASAN KANBOLAT
The root causes of Turkey’s Kurdish challenge
ÖMER TAŞPINAR
Herding cats
PAT YALE
Reasons of AK Party-MHP row
FATMA DİŞLİ ZIBAK

Other Articles of the Columnist

  The broader picture with Russia
  A letter six pages too long
  ‘Not the same anymore’
  Open letter to George Papandreou
  Upside down
  Congress of crossroads
  An encounter well attended, well needed
  What the FDP might and might not do
  Gestures without conditions
  Say it like it is
  Pace is of the essence
  Full of promises
  A mayor without a sound reason
  Anxiety, dilemma and old habits
  Unbearable lightness of press freedom
  Threat of the vicious circle
  A good neighbor
  Without much delay
  ‘Process management’ needed, or else…
  MHP’s rage: burning bridges or ‘venting’?
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