Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

ANKARA: The Turkish-Armenian border gate

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

  • ANKARA: The Turkish-Armenian border gate

    Journal of Turkish Weekly
    Jan 4 2015

    The Turkish-Armenian border gate

    Kamer Kasim
    4 January 2015


    Although the closed Turkish-Armenian border is just one of the issues
    in Turkish-Armenian relations, it has time and time again made its
    appearance on the agenda. Despite Turkey's recognition of the
    independence of Armenia after the disintegration of the Soviet Union,
    normal diplomatic relations could not be established. Armenia's state
    policy regarding genocide allegations and its tentativeness with
    respect to the Kars Treaty, which draws the Turkish-Armenian border,
    have created a rift in the two countries' relations. The Armenian
    Declaration of Independence states that "The Republic of Armenia
    stands in support of the task of achieving international recognition
    of the 1915 Genocide in Ottoman Turkey and Western Armenia." Here, the
    term "Western Armenia" refers to territories within modern Turkey.
    Despite this, the Turkish-Armenian border remained open until the
    Armenian forces' occupation of Kelbecer, which clearly indicated that
    Armenia had no intention of withdrawing from Azerbaijani territories.
    On the contrary, the Armenian forces continued to occupy more ground
    during the Nagorno-Karabakh Conflict. As a result, Turkey closed its
    border with Armenia in order to demonstrate its support for
    Azerbaijan. After a ceasefire to the conflict was arranged, Turkey has
    used diplomatic channels to pursue a permanent solution. However, the
    Nagorno-Karabakh conflict has not been resolved and violations to the
    ceasefire have increased the risk of war.

    Why is there pressure to open the border coming from the US and the EU?

    The US and the EU are not comfortable with Armenia's policy to
    maintain and further strategic ties with Russia. Indeed, Armenia has
    become a country in which Russia has stationed military installments
    without much domestic objection. Even the Armenian diaspora in the US
    is not pleased with the state of Armenia's relations with Russia. Some
    circles in the US and the EU have maintained that if the
    Turkish-Armenian border were to open, then Armenia would integrate
    with the West via Turkey and come to depend less on Russia. The main
    deficiency of this argument is that it ignores the weakness of the
    Armenian economy. The Armenian economy is in such a state that even if
    the Turkish-Armenian border were to open, the trade volume between the
    two countries would not experience a substantial rise and Russian
    domination of the economic sphere in Armenia would persist.
    Additionally, Armenia's membership in the Eurasian Economic Union
    would actually indicate that Russian domination over Armenia would be
    extended into the foreseeable future.

    There is also the argument that if Turkey opens the border with
    Armenia, the pressure coming from third countries for Turkey to
    concede to genocide allegations would lessen. The administrations of
    some countries which do not want their relations with Turkey to be
    upset by the allegations of genocide are particularly prone to employ
    this argument. Nonetheless, this argument lacks substance as the
    Armenian diaspora would continue its activities regarding genocide
    allegations independent from the state of Turkey-Armenia relations.

    Turkey and Armenia have signed protocols with the encouragement of
    various third countries who hoped for a resultant normalization of
    Turkish-Armenian relations. Upon ratification of these protocols the
    Turkish-Armenian border would be opened within two months. Regarding
    the issue of genocide allegations, which is also one of the obstacles
    to the improvement of the two countries' bilateral relations, a
    sub-commission would be established in order to provide an impartial
    scientific examination of the historical records. While Azerbaijan has
    voiced disappointment that the protocols give no mention of the
    Nagorno-Karabakh problem, the Armenian diaspora has also criticized
    the protocols as well as the Armenian administration due to the
    article about the establishment of a historical sub-commission.

    When it comes to the ratification of the protocols in Armenia, the
    approval of the Armenian Constitutional Court is needed. While the
    Armenian Constitutional Court reviewed the compatibility of the
    protocols with the Armenian Constitution, it interpreted the protocols
    in a way that actually clashed with the spirit of the protocols and
    thus created a great debate about the meaning of the protocol's
    articles. For example, the Armenian Constitutional Court stated that
    the provisions of the protocols could not be interpreted or applied in
    the legislative process, and that their implications for the Republic
    of Armenia as well as its interstate relations actually contradicted
    provisions of the preamble to the Constitution of the Republic of
    Armenia and the requirements of Paragraph 11 of the Declaration of
    Independence of Armenia. Since the Armenian Declaration of
    Independence refers to the genocide allegations and mentions "Western
    Armenia", general questions have been raised about the protocols'
    provisions regarding territorial integrity and the formation of the
    historical sub-commission. Turkey expects the protocols to allow
    discussion of the genocide allegations on a scientific platform as
    well as to facilitate Armenia's open recognition of the borders as
    they currently stand. If these expectations are not met, the protocols
    would be meaningless for Turkey, as it would be irrational for Turkey
    to open the border, which was initially closed due to the Armenian
    occupation of Azerbaijani territories, without a solution to the
    Nagorno-Karabakh issue.

    Why Turkey shouldn't open the Border without a Solution to the
    Nagorno-Karabakh Conflict

    Turkey should not open the border without a solution to the issue that
    provoked its closure in the first place. Turkey-Azerbaijan relations
    would be damaged if Turkey acts otherwise. Besides, Turkey's image
    would be negatively affected if it did not show decisive support to
    this strategic partner.
    To open the border without a solution to the Nagorno-Karabakh problem
    would be baseless according to both ethical and realistic rationales.
    >From an ethical point of view, it would be problematic to open the
    border seeing that Armenia has continued its occupation of Azerbaijani
    territories while showing no intention to withdraw. Moreover, there
    are UN resolutions that call for the end of Armenian occupation and
    respect for Azerbaijan's internationally recognized borders and
    territorial integrity. This is not to mention the massacres of
    Azerbaijani populations that have taken place during the
    Nagorno-Karabakh Conflict.

    >From a realistic point of view, the greater importance of Azerbaijan,
    as compared to that of Armenia, with respect to Turkey's regional role
    necessitates that it not open the Armenian border without a solution
    to the Nagorno-Karabakh problem. Azerbaijan has a GDP of 103 billion
    US Dollars and has even invested more than 5 billion US Dollars in one
    single project in Turkey (Star Refinery). There are also crucial
    energy lines between the two countries, namely, the
    Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan oil pipeline and the Baku-Tbilisi-Erzurum natural
    gas pipeline. Moreover, railway lines between the two countries are
    under construction and the contract for TANAP (the Trans-Anatolian
    Natural Gas Pipeline), which envisages an annual transportation
    capacity of 16 billion cubic meters in 2020 and 31 billion cubic
    meters in 2026, has been signed. On the other hand, natural
    resource-poor Armenia, which hosts a small GDP of 20 billion US
    Dollars and relies heavily on Russia, does not hold much economic
    potential for Turkey.

    The arguments and data that have been presented by the circles who
    actively lobbied for the normalization of Turkish-Armenian relations,
    and particularly for the opening of the border, did not take into
    account Armenia's economic realities. The argument that the
    Nagorno-Karabakh problem is independent from Turkish-Armenian
    relations neglects the fact that Turkey closed its border with Armenia
    due to the Nagorno-Karabakh Conflict in the first place. Some Western
    countries which offered financial support to Armenia based upon the
    expectation that it would grow closer to the West, all the while
    ignoring Armenia's occupation of Azerbaijani territories and violation
    of its internationally recognized borders, are now disappointed with
    Armenia's membership to the Eurasian Economic Union. Taxpayers in
    these Western countries should question the financial assistance that
    was given to Armenia knowing the fact that it had shown no indication
    of changing its foreign policy.

    The solution to the Nagorno-Karabakh problem is not only the prime
    condition for sustainable peace and stability in the Caucasus, but
    also for the normalization of Turkish-Armenian relations.


    http://www.turkishweekly.net/columnist/3926/the-turkish-armenian-border-gate.html

Working...
X