Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

BAKU: Russian Analyst: Rapprochement With Russia Is Not Beneficial T

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • BAKU: Russian Analyst: Rapprochement With Russia Is Not Beneficial T

    RUSSIAN ANALYST: RAPPROCHEMENT WITH RUSSIA IS NOT BENEFICIAL TO TURKEY
    H. Hamidov Day.Az

    Today
    http://www.today.az/news/politics/64 015.html
    March 15 2010
    Azerbaijan

    Interview with well-known Russian journalist, political expert and
    publicist Leonid Radzikhovsky.

    In your opinion, what is the aim of adoption of the "Armenian genocide"
    resolution by the U.S. House Committee on Foreign Relations- to
    accelerate the process of opening the Armenian-Turkish border or to
    prevent Turkey from excessive recent rapprochement with Russia in
    trade, economic and even military fields, or something else?

    All that you said is quite possible. But we should not forget about
    one more thing, quite typical for American system of governance -
    representative democracy. Congressmen often act against the White
    House interests and even against interests of the administration of
    their party.

    For example, a Congressman may represent interests of a very
    influential Armenian Diaspora in the United States without thinking
    about what implications his decision on the resolution may have in the
    near future. The most important for him is re-election in a few years
    depending on the voters, among whom there are influential individuals
    and sponsors from the Armenian lobby. And the fact that the "genocide"
    has already been recognized by a number of countries is not due to high
    level Armenian foreign policy, but focused actions of the Armenian
    Diaspora. That is, there is pressure from not individual voters,
    but well-organized groups.

    Moreover, it is worth noting that the Armenian Diaspora in the U.S. is
    unlikely to be larger than the Turkish or Azerbaijani Diasporas.

    However, we must admit that it is well organized, and its
    representatives act in concert. Jewish, Ukrainian and Polish Diasporas
    of the U.S. also act in a similar way.

    In your opinion, what will be fate of the Turkey-U.S. relations?

    The United States cannot afford spoiling relations with Turkey
    seriously. In particular, one cannot forget deteriorating relations
    between the U.S. and Iran. In the meantime, Turkey is a NATO member
    and the only key player for Americans in the Middle East for all
    its parameters. The White House has enough resources to stop, or
    at least suspend, recognition of "genocide". So, I do not expect
    conflict between the U.S. and Turkey. Americans perfectly understand
    what implications it might have.

    In addition, internal political situation in Turkey must also be taken
    into account. Internal split prevails in the country. There is very
    strong trend towards development of Islamic fundamentalism. At the same
    time, army and supporters of secular development of the country enjoy
    great influence. In such situation to spoil relations with Turkey,
    in general, means a great favour for the Islamists and weakening of
    pro-Western forces in that country. Why? For the sake of resolution
    on what, something, that happened some 90 years ago?

    Americans will not do this, because it is vital for Washington
    to preserve the secular pro-Western Turkey with all the ensuing
    consequences.

    The paradox is that the country that desired adoption of the resolution
    most of all suffered from the decision of the Congress committee more
    than the rest, since opening of the Turkey-Armenia border fell into
    oblivion for near future at least. Do you share this statement?

    It is worth recall what Hillary Clinton said. She noted that such
    a resolution would complicate the normalization of Armenian-Turkish
    relations ... Yes, this is largely true, but in this case one should
    also understand that the interests of Armenia and the Armenians
    self-esteem are not the same. Armenians of the U.S. have nationalistic
    sentiments, but they do not live in Armenia, and do not feel effects
    of opening or closing the border with Turkey.

    So, recognition of the "genocide" is very important for their national
    pride and identity. So, there is also an internal conflict among
    Armenians in the U.S. What effect it will have on situation back
    in homeland is important, but the recognition of "genocide" is even
    more important. The struggle between national ambitions and pragmatic
    interests is obvious.

    For example, let's cite the Karabakh conflict as an example. Did
    occupation of lands bring happiness to Armenia? Is it not advantageous
    for them to simply return the land and establish normal relations
    with Azerbaijan and Turkey? It is profitable for them. It cannot to
    happen overnight because it is a question of national identity.

    Can we say that Russia is happy at complicated relations between
    Turkey and the U.S.? Because now it can come even closer to Ankara
    and solve problems of the region without intervention of a distant
    America. What can you say about this?

    I agree that the failure of the U.S. is seen as a success in Russia,
    and vice versa. Speaking specifically, I do not think that Russia can
    substitute the United States for Turkey. First, we must not forget
    that Russia has recognized the "Armenian genocide."

    A more significant is the following circumstance - Turkey remains a
    NATO member which is crucial for it. Russia can offer nothing like that
    to Turkey. Turkey's main concern like all developing countries is not
    to get closer to Russia, but only to the EU, Western civilization, etc.

    Therefore, strategically, Russia is not comparable centre of influence
    for Turkey's. The only alternative for Turkey at the moment is to
    build a society oriented either to the West or the Islamic society.

    Russia is not an attractive force here as well.

    Tactically, it is possible to increase military contacts with Russia.

    It is unpleasant for the U.S. and one can speculate on that. Turkey
    also may conduct negotiations with Russia on Nabucco.

    Apart from this, everyone knows that not the U.S., but Russia shapes
    Armenia's policy. Because no matter how influential Armenian diaspora
    in the U.S. is, America is far away while Russia is not. Armenia
    cannot simply exist without Russia's help. Turkey needs to understand
    to what degree relations with Ankara is important for the Kremlin in
    order to put pressure on Armenia about the disputed issues.

    The answer is obvious: today Russia lacks influence (or maybe it does
    not have willingness, but this is another question) to ensure that
    Armenia has changed its position at least on a historical topic of
    "genocide". In the meantime, Russia is a strategic partner for Armenia,
    and will not easily give up this partnership. Russia's politicians
    are well aware that Turkey is a strong country, which will always
    be independent from Russia and will always be in a close touch with
    NATO while Armenia is a country totally dependent on Russia, one of
    the few remaining junior partners. Russia cherishes relations with
    Armenia at least for this reason.

    So, strategically, Turkey will not move from pro-Western and pro-NATO
    position to the pro-Russian position. It will not benefit the country.

    In this situation, the maximum that Russia could do is to organize
    a tripartite conference involving Turkey and Armenia, or even
    Azerbaijan. Such meetings are not usually productive, but nevertheless
    it would be a spectacular move on part of Russia's diplomacy.
Working...
X