Tweet
RECKONING WITH TURKEY'S POTENTIAL, THE WEST PUTS OBSTACLES IN ITS WAY TOWARDS NEOOSMANISM GOALS
David Stepanyan
ArmInfo
2010-05-17 16:44:00
Interview of Secretary of the parliamentary faction of Republican
party of Armenia Eduard Sharmazanov with ArmInfo News Agency
Mr. Sharmazanov, what is your party's position regarding the future
of the Armenian-Turkish relations after suspension of the Protocol
ratification process by Armenia?
Republican party of Armenia thinks that establishment of relations
between Armenia and Turkey without preconditions has no alternative.
The world changes rapidly, and the open borders between the
neighbouring countries is a requirement of time. The ball is currently
on Turkey's side of the field and it must be passed sooner or later,
however, Ankara still tries to avoid solution of problems in the
Armenian-Turkish relations. Moreover, Turks do not want to put up with
their own history and keep-on self-deceiving. However, I think that
we shall approach inevitable establishment of diplomatic relations
sooner or later or, at least, understanding of the process necessity by
Turkey. If Turkey actually considers the European values a priority,
it has no other way, and Ankara will turn out to be caught in a
dilemma whether to recognize the way to Europe it declares to be the
only true one or not. I think that Turkey has no alternative. However,
establishment of relations with Turkey at any cost is not a super-goal
for Armenia and RPA. We do not need a Pyrrhic victory, we need just
normal relations with Turkey without preconditions. I think that
those in Ankara must understand that having signed the Protocols one
should not demand from Armenia what these Protocols do not and will
never contain. Armenia's stance in this issue is extremely clear and
we are ready to be liable for that.
Many authoritative political experts think that it is bad manners to
speak about Turkey's European prospects, while RPA does not believe
it as before...
Turkey keeps on speaking about the European integration as its
priority. However, actually Ankara acts in a different way. The
latest steps by Ankara in the Armenian-Turkish process and have once
again demonstrated it. Erdogan-Gul-Davutoglu "triumvirate" keeps on
implementing the policy of neoosmanism which is called to turn Turkey
into a regional leader. Actually, Turks have never refused this policy,
even in early 1990s during Turgut Ozal's times. Moreover, Turks started
making obvious attempts to strengthen their influence in the region
after the August war of 2008 when Erdogan suggested setting up of
the so-called Stability and Security Platform in the region.
After that, problems with Israel appeared, and then Turks suddenly
started protecting Iran. So, it becomes clear that Ankara is not going
to be limited just to the role of an eastern launching ground of the
West, being the greatest NATO country after the USA in a military
aspect. Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmed Davutoglu's conception of
foreign policy "zero problems with neighbours" has already ended in
fiasco, as Turkey not only failed to solve the old problems but also
created new ones both for itself and for the regional neighbours by
its destructive actions.
What is the reason for the world superpowers' desire to see the
Armenian-Turkish border opened?
This desire actually exists, and it is confirmed by the fact that
Turkey is oppressed from all sides. Otherwise it is impossible to
explain appearance of pro-Armenian resolutions in US Congress and
Swedish Riksdag. Some progress appeared even in Israel regarding
introduction of the Armenian Genocide resolution in one of the Knesset
commissions. The hysteria which happened in Ankara in this respect
indicates successfulness of these attempts by the West. It is no mere
chance that Turkey sent a representative delegation to Washington to
prevent achievement of historical truth. The West cannot but treat
Turkey seriously, as the last 300 years of this country's history
speak volumes. Essentially, Turkey is as serious constituent of our
region as Russia and Iran. Therefore, reckoning with Turkey and its
potential, the West puts obstacles in its way towards achievement of
its goals in the vein of neoosmanism. In due time, the Ottoman Empire,
which used to be spread from Balkans to Africa, had already shown
its capacities to the world, so, the West's concern is quite clear.
Lately, Turkey, Iran and Kazakhstan show interest in co-chairmanship
in the Minsk Group. How much expedient does RPA consider changing of
OSCE MG meditative format?
Our party thinks that being a country, presiding in OSCE, Kazakhstan
is quite able to contribute to achievement of peace in our region. At
the same time we think that the Minsk Group has not yet run its
course. Negotiations are going on and, consequently, there is no
need to somehow change its format. As for Iran, the Republican party
of Armenia shares the viewpoint of Armenian Foreign Minister Edward
Nalbandyan, according to which Armenia welcomes any assistance by Iran
towards achievement of comprehensive settlement attaching importance to
this country's role. Moreover, the MP thinks that Iran, unlike Turkey,
has always shown a balanced approach to the Karabakh settlement,
which has been lately displayed by a statement made by this country's
ambassador to Armenia, according to which Iran actually recognized
the NKR sovereignty. I think that a statement by the ambassador of
such a country like Iran could hardly be a slander.
Everything is simple in case of Turkey: this country's attitude to the
Nagorno Karabakh conflict is biased, that is expressed in financial,
military and advisory support to Azerbaijan. So, it cannot mediate
in the conflict settlement. In this context, foreign minister of
Russia reflected the situation very clearly when he said that the
format of mediation can be changed just in case of agreement by all
the parties to the conflict. So, it is senseless to speak about it,
taking into account our refusal even to consider such a possibility.
President of Russia is carrying out a visit to Turkey. It is known
that the Karabakh issue will become one of the primary topics at
negotiations. Do you have any concerns or doubts in this regard?
Republican party of Armenia has no special fears and doubts in view of
discussion of the Karabakh problem during Russian president's visit
to Turkey. On the contrary, Russia is Armenia's strategic ally and
partner, and it is very clearly reflected in almost all the fields of
interaction of our countries. Moscow's stances on both Karabakh and
Armenian-Turkish problems are very clear and acceptable for Armenia.
Russia rules out a military way of the Karabakh conflict settlement
and supports peaceful negotiations. As for the Armenian-Turkish
relations, Moscow's stance was perfectly reflected in the statement by
Russia's Prime Minister V. Putin, which he made in Erdogan's presence,
according to which solution of the two problems in one package is
impossible. After that, Russian Ambassador to Turkey complemented
this idea and declared that Moscow is not going to exert pressure
on Armenia and demand withdrawal of Armenian troops from Nagorno
Karabakh. I think there is nothing to add. These countries have many
other interrelated interests to be spoken about during negotiations
between the Russian and Turkish presidents.
Lately, a wave of discussions has suddenly raised in Armenia concerning
the status of Nakhijevan. What is RPA's stance in this regard?
None of the three presidents of Armenia has made territorial claims
to Turkey yet. I do not rule out that this will not happen in future
either. RPA considers our Republic the motherland of Armenians,
but there is also the historical motherland of Armenians occupying a
territory of 300,000sq/m in the Armenian highland. This territory is a
historical motherland of Armenians like the mountains of Middle Asia
and Altay for the Turkish nomadic tribes. In addition, Nakhijevan,
Idgir, Erzrum and others are still our historical motherland where
the Armenian civilization originated.
David Stepanyan
ArmInfo
2010-05-17 16:44:00
Interview of Secretary of the parliamentary faction of Republican
party of Armenia Eduard Sharmazanov with ArmInfo News Agency
Mr. Sharmazanov, what is your party's position regarding the future
of the Armenian-Turkish relations after suspension of the Protocol
ratification process by Armenia?
Republican party of Armenia thinks that establishment of relations
between Armenia and Turkey without preconditions has no alternative.
The world changes rapidly, and the open borders between the
neighbouring countries is a requirement of time. The ball is currently
on Turkey's side of the field and it must be passed sooner or later,
however, Ankara still tries to avoid solution of problems in the
Armenian-Turkish relations. Moreover, Turks do not want to put up with
their own history and keep-on self-deceiving. However, I think that
we shall approach inevitable establishment of diplomatic relations
sooner or later or, at least, understanding of the process necessity by
Turkey. If Turkey actually considers the European values a priority,
it has no other way, and Ankara will turn out to be caught in a
dilemma whether to recognize the way to Europe it declares to be the
only true one or not. I think that Turkey has no alternative. However,
establishment of relations with Turkey at any cost is not a super-goal
for Armenia and RPA. We do not need a Pyrrhic victory, we need just
normal relations with Turkey without preconditions. I think that
those in Ankara must understand that having signed the Protocols one
should not demand from Armenia what these Protocols do not and will
never contain. Armenia's stance in this issue is extremely clear and
we are ready to be liable for that.
Many authoritative political experts think that it is bad manners to
speak about Turkey's European prospects, while RPA does not believe
it as before...
Turkey keeps on speaking about the European integration as its
priority. However, actually Ankara acts in a different way. The
latest steps by Ankara in the Armenian-Turkish process and have once
again demonstrated it. Erdogan-Gul-Davutoglu "triumvirate" keeps on
implementing the policy of neoosmanism which is called to turn Turkey
into a regional leader. Actually, Turks have never refused this policy,
even in early 1990s during Turgut Ozal's times. Moreover, Turks started
making obvious attempts to strengthen their influence in the region
after the August war of 2008 when Erdogan suggested setting up of
the so-called Stability and Security Platform in the region.
After that, problems with Israel appeared, and then Turks suddenly
started protecting Iran. So, it becomes clear that Ankara is not going
to be limited just to the role of an eastern launching ground of the
West, being the greatest NATO country after the USA in a military
aspect. Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmed Davutoglu's conception of
foreign policy "zero problems with neighbours" has already ended in
fiasco, as Turkey not only failed to solve the old problems but also
created new ones both for itself and for the regional neighbours by
its destructive actions.
What is the reason for the world superpowers' desire to see the
Armenian-Turkish border opened?
This desire actually exists, and it is confirmed by the fact that
Turkey is oppressed from all sides. Otherwise it is impossible to
explain appearance of pro-Armenian resolutions in US Congress and
Swedish Riksdag. Some progress appeared even in Israel regarding
introduction of the Armenian Genocide resolution in one of the Knesset
commissions. The hysteria which happened in Ankara in this respect
indicates successfulness of these attempts by the West. It is no mere
chance that Turkey sent a representative delegation to Washington to
prevent achievement of historical truth. The West cannot but treat
Turkey seriously, as the last 300 years of this country's history
speak volumes. Essentially, Turkey is as serious constituent of our
region as Russia and Iran. Therefore, reckoning with Turkey and its
potential, the West puts obstacles in its way towards achievement of
its goals in the vein of neoosmanism. In due time, the Ottoman Empire,
which used to be spread from Balkans to Africa, had already shown
its capacities to the world, so, the West's concern is quite clear.
Lately, Turkey, Iran and Kazakhstan show interest in co-chairmanship
in the Minsk Group. How much expedient does RPA consider changing of
OSCE MG meditative format?
Our party thinks that being a country, presiding in OSCE, Kazakhstan
is quite able to contribute to achievement of peace in our region. At
the same time we think that the Minsk Group has not yet run its
course. Negotiations are going on and, consequently, there is no
need to somehow change its format. As for Iran, the Republican party
of Armenia shares the viewpoint of Armenian Foreign Minister Edward
Nalbandyan, according to which Armenia welcomes any assistance by Iran
towards achievement of comprehensive settlement attaching importance to
this country's role. Moreover, the MP thinks that Iran, unlike Turkey,
has always shown a balanced approach to the Karabakh settlement,
which has been lately displayed by a statement made by this country's
ambassador to Armenia, according to which Iran actually recognized
the NKR sovereignty. I think that a statement by the ambassador of
such a country like Iran could hardly be a slander.
Everything is simple in case of Turkey: this country's attitude to the
Nagorno Karabakh conflict is biased, that is expressed in financial,
military and advisory support to Azerbaijan. So, it cannot mediate
in the conflict settlement. In this context, foreign minister of
Russia reflected the situation very clearly when he said that the
format of mediation can be changed just in case of agreement by all
the parties to the conflict. So, it is senseless to speak about it,
taking into account our refusal even to consider such a possibility.
President of Russia is carrying out a visit to Turkey. It is known
that the Karabakh issue will become one of the primary topics at
negotiations. Do you have any concerns or doubts in this regard?
Republican party of Armenia has no special fears and doubts in view of
discussion of the Karabakh problem during Russian president's visit
to Turkey. On the contrary, Russia is Armenia's strategic ally and
partner, and it is very clearly reflected in almost all the fields of
interaction of our countries. Moscow's stances on both Karabakh and
Armenian-Turkish problems are very clear and acceptable for Armenia.
Russia rules out a military way of the Karabakh conflict settlement
and supports peaceful negotiations. As for the Armenian-Turkish
relations, Moscow's stance was perfectly reflected in the statement by
Russia's Prime Minister V. Putin, which he made in Erdogan's presence,
according to which solution of the two problems in one package is
impossible. After that, Russian Ambassador to Turkey complemented
this idea and declared that Moscow is not going to exert pressure
on Armenia and demand withdrawal of Armenian troops from Nagorno
Karabakh. I think there is nothing to add. These countries have many
other interrelated interests to be spoken about during negotiations
between the Russian and Turkish presidents.
Lately, a wave of discussions has suddenly raised in Armenia concerning
the status of Nakhijevan. What is RPA's stance in this regard?
None of the three presidents of Armenia has made territorial claims
to Turkey yet. I do not rule out that this will not happen in future
either. RPA considers our Republic the motherland of Armenians,
but there is also the historical motherland of Armenians occupying a
territory of 300,000sq/m in the Armenian highland. This territory is a
historical motherland of Armenians like the mountains of Middle Asia
and Altay for the Turkish nomadic tribes. In addition, Nakhijevan,
Idgir, Erzrum and others are still our historical motherland where
the Armenian civilization originated.