Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Turkish-Armenian Border Gate - Analysis

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

  • The Turkish-Armenian Border Gate - Analysis

    EurasiaReview
    Jan 5 2015

    The Turkish-Armenian Border Gate - Analysis

    January 5, 2015
    By Kamer Kasim


    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.

    Location and extent of the former Nagorno-Karabakh Autonomous Oblast
    (lighter color)

    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.eurasiareview.com/05012015-turkish-armenian-border-gate-analysis/

Working...
X