Category: Asia and Pacific

  • Svante Cornell on Karabakh, Turkey and Caucasus

    Svante Cornell on Karabakh, Turkey and Caucasus

    Washington. Zaur Hasanov – APA. APA’s interview with Research Director of the Central Asia-Caucasus Institute & Silk Road Studies Program Svante E. Cornell

    – In your most recent article published by the Silk Road Studies, you touched upon a proposal which was offered back in 2002 in the Sadarak meeting of the presidents of Heydar Aliyev and Robert Kocharyan. Could you elaborate on the subject and what this had to do with the occupied territories of Azerbaijan bordering Iran?

    – Of course, there were negotiations that are not entirely public. But what appears is that there was a proposal by the late president Heydar Aliyev that he would be willing to agree to opening of the rail road line to Armenia between Armenia and Azerbaijan in the case if Armenia vacated, liberated the 4 southern occupied territories that are between Karabakh and the Iranian border. The rational of cause is being that these are 4 provinces though which the Soviet time the rail roads used to go and which is to extend to Armenia and all the way to Nakchivan.
    This was very novel approach on the president’s part. Because it was for a first time Azerbaijan removed the linkage between the discussion of the status of Karabakh and the restoration some type of economic relationships between Armenia and Azerbaijan. In that sense, you even can find that many Armenian observers such as Gerard Libaridian who criticized the Armenian government for refusing without any discussion this opening. Because the argument that Libaridian and others make is that this was a positive force for the Armenia side giving to the fact that it would effectively have been able Armenia to come out of its regional isolation and still hang on to its control over Nagorno-Karabakh Autonomous Oblast as well Lachin, Kalbacar and even perhaps Aghdam. I think it was unclear how Aghdam would be affected by this deal. Still it would be able to improve its economic situation.

    Of course, there was an understanding at that point and I think that Turkish government was making it clear that it would at the same time, if should this happen, open its border with Armenia. Because, if Azerbaijan opens its border with Armenia then there will be no rational reason for Turkey to continue to have border be closed. In that sense there was a will to solve the problem in the package deal.

    Recently, there have been a sign that the Turkish government is considering de-linking completely the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict resolution issue with its border with Armenia. That seems to be the premise under which the normalization process is going on for the several months between Turkey and Armenia. However, in the last couple of days, we have had pretty clear statements to the fact that Turkey is backed to the position that it has held for decade.

    – None of the previous governments in Turkey de-linked the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict from the border reopening with Armenia but AKP did it. What has changed since the time when border was closed down and what has changed in the Turkish political establishment that they had an intention to do that?

    – I think that there are several things. First, there is a relationship with Turkish policy and the Armenian genocide issue in the Congress of the USA. And I think very much at the beginning the “football diplomacy” in the summer time, there was a feeling that Turkey should do something in dealing with geopolitical changes in the region because of the Georgia war. Another reality is the way how Turkey was looking at the Obama victory was the presidential election and if you remember how genocide resolution was close to pass last year, I think that general assumption was that this year it would pass very easily. Therefore, in the order to prevent that what you could do. If you have the Congress which is going to pass the resolution, if you have the president which has a clear position then a rapprochement with Armenia was correctly understood to be one of ways in which Turkey could prevent the genocide resolution. I think, in that sense, they succeeded. After Obama’s speech in the Turkish parliament it will be very difficult for him this year say “G” word.

    Second, you have to understand that even in the Turkish Ministry of Foreign Affairs most people are Atlantics, if you want. They are people who are specialists in Europe, EU issue, the USA and so on, but not are people specializing in the Eastern issues like the Caucasus and Central Asia issues. It is still the secondary issue for Turkey. And also in the AK party government there are no people who have a close relationship with the Caucasus. Partly it is because they understand themselves from the Islamic identity rather than Turkic identity, and you also have to see a lot of people were saying in Turkey that: “Look, for the 15 years this policy brought nothing. Let’s bring something new”

    – How it can be that the country which has three neighbors in its eastern border doesn’t have enough specialists dealing with the Caucasus?

    – One of the explanations is the political one. AKP is a kind of strange alliance of Islamists and liberals. Islamists mainly interested in the ties with the Islamic Middle East, not post Soviet Muslims and where liberals are more focused entirely on the European relationship of Turkey. Plus, you have a political reality too. If you look back last five years, EU, US and Cyprus issues where top issues in the Turkish foreign policy. These are such big issues that it can take up so much Turkey time and because so less energy left for other issues.

    – As I understood from your article is that Nagorno-Karabakh conflict is a key element of the security and cooperation in the region. Your other point is that president Obama should appoint a special envoy dealing with the conflict.

    – It is right. What this latest few weeks have shown us that people are trying to put aside NK conflict because it is such difficult issue and say that “let do something else”. For example, let start economic relations. But the realities of the region proved that NK conflict is the biggest problem for the region. Without solving this problem you can’t solve the broader problems in the Caucasus. Therefore, when Turks are realizing now implicitly that they can’t go forward in the normalization with Armenia in the way intended to do, a logical conclusion shouldn’t be “let forget about it” but should be “if the Karabakh issue is really is the central issue let then see if there way how to utilize the positive momentum in Turkish Armenian relations”. Take into account that Obama administration interested in this issue, and getting Obama administration much more actively interested in resolving the Karabakh conflict are the right path to walk.

  • Ex-Ministers Downbeat On Turkish-Armenian Deal

    Ex-Ministers Downbeat On Turkish-Armenian Deal

    7B0939AC 15B0 4EEB 8AF3 3C801DE10A3E w203 s

    Vartan Oskanian

    17.04.2009
    Emil Danielyan

    Two former foreign ministers of Armenia remained pessimistic on Friday about the success of the ongoing Turkish-Armenian dialogue, urging the current authorities in Yerevan to reconsider their diplomatic overtures to Ankara.

    A top U.S. official, meanwhile, visited Armenia in what may have been an attempt to salvage the faltering talks between the two neighboring nations. Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Matthew Bryza met with President Serzh Sarkisian and Foreign Minister Eduard Nalbandian. Official Armenian sources gave no details of the talks, and Bryza was not available for comment.

    The diplomat, who is also the U.S. co-chair of the OSCE Minsk Group, arrived in Yerevan from Baku where he met Azerbaijani Foreign Minister Elmar Mammadyarov. Washington has been trying to neutralize Azerbaijan’s strong resistance to the normalization of Turkish-Armenian relations before a peaceful settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. U.S. President Barack Obama personally discussed the matter with his Azerbaijani counterpart, Ilham Aliev, in a phone call last week.

    The vehement Azerbaijani protests led Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan to publicly state earlier this month that Turkey will not establish diplomatic relations and open its border with Armenia without a Karabakh settlement. Turkish Foreign Minister Ali Babacan appeared to echo that linkage as he flew to Yerevan on Wednesday night.

    “We don’t say, ‘Let’s first solve one problem and solve the other later,’” Babacan was reported to tell Turkish journalists. “We want a similar process to start between Azerbaijan and Armenia. We are closely watching the talks between Azerbaijan and Armenia.”

    Nalbandian insisted on Thursday, however, that Ankara and Yerevan could still hammer out a ground-breaking agreement “soon.” Two of his predecessors are far more pessimistic on that score, pointing to the statements made by Erdogan.

    “I don’t anticipate the signing of a Turkish-Armenian agreement in the near future,” one of them, Raffi Hovannisian, said. He was particularly worried about Erdogan’s calls for the UN Security Council to denounce Armenia as an “occupier” and demand Karabakh’s return under Azerbaijani rule.

    Vartan Oskanian, who served as foreign minister from 1998-2008, likewise suggested that the Turks have no intention to cut an unconditional deal with Armenia and are instead trying to exploit the talks to keep the United States and other countries from recognizing the 1915 massacres of Armenians as genocide. He said they could also be pressing international mediators to seek more Armenian concessions on Karabakh in return for an open border with Turkey.

    “When you make a Turkish-Armenian dialogue public, the Turks always take advantage of that because they face the genocide issue, the issue of European Union membership and the issue of friendship with Azerbaijan,” Oskanian told a news conference. “So publicity here, if we let it last for long, is not to our benefit. With every day passing without border opening or normalization of Turkish-Armenian relations, Turkey finds itself in a more beneficial position than Armenia.

    “The moment that the border is opened, we too will start to draw dividends. The question is when that will happen.”

    “The Armenian side should set a clear deadline for the Turks — if we sign an agreement and the border is opened on a particular day, it will be fine; if not, let us interrupt the negotiations from that day. Something has to be done,” added Oskanian.

    Oskanian also seemed puzzled by President Sarkisian’s assurances that Armenia will “emerge stronger” from the U.S.-backed talks even if they end in failure. “I hope that there is something that the president knows but we don’t know,” he said.

    The former minister, who founded last year a private think-tank, the Civilitas Foundation, spoke to journalists before an official presentation of a newly published book containing speeches delivered by him throughout his decade-long tenure. Among those attending the event was Kaan Soyak, the Turkish co-chairman of the Turkish-Armenian Business Council (TABC) that has long been lobbying for improved relations and unfettered commerce between the two neighbors.

    Soyak asserted that Erdogan’s remarks were “a little misunderstood” in Armenia and did not wreck the Turkish-Armenian rapprochement. “What the prime minister wanted to say is that the normalization of relations between Armenia and Turkey is very important and within the context of this normalization Turkish diplomats and Turkish foreign policy advisers will be more active in the Caucasus for the settlement between Armenia and Azerbaijan,” he told RFE/RL.

    “He never set a precondition,” said Soyak. “He believes that all the solutions must be in one package, which includes Azerbaijan and Armenia, but not necessarily the Nagorno-Karabakh area.”

    https://www.azatutyun.am/a/1610916.html

  • Armenia, Turkey Announce No Deal After Yerevan Talks

    Armenia, Turkey Announce No Deal After Yerevan Talks

    E7B0ED64 A60E 4F2F B29C 149D01513084 w203 s

    Armenian President Serzh Sarkisian and Turkish Foreign Minister Ali Babacan meet in Yerevan on April 16, 2009

    16.04.2009
    Ruben Meloyan

    Turkish Foreign Minister Ali Babacan gave no indications of an impending breakthrough in his country’s relations with Armenia on Thursday as he visited Yerevan to attend a meeting of the Black Sea Economic Cooperation (BSEC) organization.

    His Armenian counterpart, Eduard Nalbandian, insisted, nonetheless, that Ankara and Yerevan may still normalize their historically strained relations “soon.”

    Babacan refrained from making any public statements during the one-day trip which ended with a meeting with President Serzh Sarkisian. A short statement by Sarkisian’s office gave no details of the talks. Babacan also took part in a separate group meeting between Sarkisian and participants of the BSEC session.

    While in Yerevan, Babacan also met with Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and Azerbaijan’s Deputy Foreign Minister Mahmud Mamedguliev.

    Recent reports in Turkish and Western media said that the two governments could use the BSEC meeting to announce agreement on a gradual normalization of Turkish-Armenian relations. However, Turkey’s Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan has ruled out such possibility, repeatedly stating this month that Ankara will not establish diplomatic relations with Yerevan and reopen the Turkish-Armenian border before a resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh.

    Babacan appeared to reaffirm that linkage as he spoke to CNN-Turk television on his way to Yerevan. According to “Hurriyet Daily News,” he said the Turkish-Armenian dialogue must run parallel with international efforts to settle the Karabakh conflict.

    “Today we have no intention to sign any document regarding the normalization of Turkish-Armenian relations,” Nalbandian told journalists after the BSEC meeting. “Negotiations continue. We have made progress and believe that we can really be very close to solving those issues soon.”

    Nalbandian also made clear that Yerevan remains opposed to direct Turkish involvement in international efforts to settle the Karabakh dispute. “Turkey will not play the role of a mediator in the Karabakh peace process,” he said.

    The Armenian minister was speaking at a joint news conference with Mamedguliev, whose country assumed the BSEC’s rotating presidency from Armenia at the Yerevan meeting. Mamedguliev, a rare Azerbaijani official visiting Armenia, reaffirmed Baku’s strong opposition to the normalization of Turkish-Armenian before Karabakh peace. “Our position is the following: the restoration of links between Turkey and Armenia may only be conditional on the resolution of the conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan,” he said.

    By contrast, Lavrov welcomed the Turkish-Armenian rapprochement. “First of all, this is the bilateral affair of Armenia and Turkey,” he said after the talks with Babacan. “We welcome all steps leading to the normalization of relations between any countries of the region.”

    http://www.armenialiberty.org/content/article/1610097.html 
  • ARMENIAN VILLAGE PLANS FOR TURKISH BORDER OPENING

    ARMENIAN VILLAGE PLANS FOR TURKISH BORDER OPENING

    Gayane Abrahamyan 4/16/09

    Amidst rising international expectations of an Armenian-Turkish rapprochement, hopes are rising fast in the Armenian border village of Margara that this hamlet of 1,500 people — site of the only bridge between Armenia and Turkey — will soon become the two countries’ central land link.

    “We are full of hopes,” commented 50-year-old Gagik Avetisian, who lives on the village street leading to Margara’s bridge over the Arax River to Turkey. “They [officials] now come from Yerevan to repair the roads. Maybe this time something will change, and the border will really open up.”

    A spokesperson for the Ministry of Urban Development told EurasiaNet that the repairs are routine and not connected with the border discussions.

    But Yerevan visitors asking about house prices or talking about opening a shop, hotel, restaurant or gas station have fired Margara’s expectations still higher. Avetisian says that he hopes to sell his house and 1,000 square meters of adjacent land for a price several times higher than before talks about reopening the border began.

    Others concentrate on the jobs an opening of the 325-kilometer Armenian-Turkish border could bring. Villagers currently subsist on growing tomatoes, peppers and cucumbers for themselves and markets in Yerevan.

    “We have been waiting for it for so many years! We didn’t care before if it was open or closed, but we want it [to open] now,” said Kolia Piliposian, the 74-year-old owner of the Margara house closest to the border. “The living conditions are very poor here, and the opening of the border will create jobs and will give opportunities to do business here.”

    The government, meanwhile, is also expressing cautious optimism. At an April 10 press conference to mark his first year in office, President Serzh Sargsyan said that he plans to cross the border to attend an October 7 World Cup-qualifying football match between Armenia and Turkey in Istanbul.

    “This can be viewed as an optimistic approach, and my optimism may prove to be groundless, but we won’t be the losers in this move,” Sargsyan affirmed. Turkey closed its border with Armenia in 1993 to support ally Azerbaijan in the war with Armenia over the breakaway Nagorno Karabakh region.

    But despite Sargsyan’s stance, the debate among Yerevan analysts about the pros and cons of an open border with Turkey shows little sign of dying down.

    Economists worry about whether Armenian companies would be able to withstand an influx of cheaper goods from Turkey. Turkish goods currently enter Armenia via Georgia; an open border would mean lower transportation costs and, hence, lower prices.

    Andranik Tevanian, chairman of the Politeconomia Center for Economic Analysis, though, believes “that problem can be solved” by setting high customs duties on Turkish goods. Tevanian estimates that the closed border costs Armenia about $300 million in foreign trade each year.

    Herbert Hambardzumian, secretary general of the Union of International Cargo Carriers of Armenia, points to lower cargo costs for Armenian exporters — Turkish ferry services across the Black Sea are cheaper than Russian services by $1,000 to $1,500 per ferry, he noted.

    One political analyst, however, worries about how Armenia will cope with an influx of ethnic Armenians from Turkey. “There will be very serious problems of national security and demography,” noted Armen Aivazian, director of the Ararat Center for Strategic Research.

    An open border will give the Turkish government “additional leverage” to use against Armenia on the Nagorno Karabakh dispute, he argued, expressing a fear that Azerbaijanis with Turkish passports would be able to enter Armenia without restriction. “Armenia’s weak system of national security is not prepared to face all these [challenges],” Aivazian said.

    Back in Margara, however, the focus is less on security challenges and more on what life is like on the other side of the border. While the bridge was built in the late 1960s, it was not used until 1993, when it opened for a few days after the start of the Turkish blockade for international organizations to deliver wheat and medicine to Armenia amidst wartime shortages. No cars have since traveled over the bridge.

    Talks on re-opening the border picked up again last summer when President Serzh Sargsyan invited Turkish Prime Minister Abdullah Gul to watch a World Cup-qualifying match in Yerevan between Armenia and Turkey. [For details, see the Eurasia Insight archive]. The Gyumri-Kars railway, the only line running between the two countries, was even repaired for Turkish football fans to travel to Yerevan by train, Gyumri railroad station Deputy Director Valeri Muradian said at the time. Slight repairs were also made to Margara’s bridge and customs control point.

    But while Margara villagers may still not be able to see their Turkish neighbors three kilometers away in the village of Alijan, they can hear them, according to Khachik Asatrian, Margara’s government chairperson. “We can hear the voices in Alijan when there is a wedding there. Judging from the voices and the music, there seem to be lots of Kurds there.”

    The Russian border guards who survey Armenia’s Turkish border issue annual passes for villagers to cross over and farm their land in a neutral zone, but villager Anna Simonian says that many prefer to not bother with “all that fuss with the documents.” Fear also keeps some away, although no attack on an Armenian villager has ever occurred, she added.

    Nonetheless, Armenian villagers in Margara have already found one thing in common with their Turkish neighbors: the chance for a fresh start if the border reopens.

    “Their villages in this part [of the country] are very poor as well, judging from their houses . . . ” observed villager Piliposian, whose house stands at the border. But if the border opens “[t]he villages will revive, they will do business . . .”

     

    Editor’s Note: Gayane Abrahamyan is a reporter for the ArmeniaNow.com weekly in Yerevan.

  • DID PRESIDENT SARGSYAN BLAZE A TRAIL TO THE SEA VIA IRAN?

    DID PRESIDENT SARGSYAN BLAZE A TRAIL TO THE SEA VIA IRAN?

    Haroutiun Khachatrian 4/15/09

    Armenian President Serzh Sargsyan’s two-day visit to Iran produced a potential breakthrough deal that could ease Armenia’s economic isolation.

    Sargsyan and Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad signed eight agreements during the Armenian leader’s two-day stay in Tehran on April 13-14. Two of those pacts stand to give a big boost to Armenian foreign trade. The first provides a blueprint for the construction of a 470-kilometer railroad between the two countries and the second would lower Iranian trade barriers to Armenian exports.

    At present, Armenia’s only viable overland routes to the outside world run through Georgia. That conduit has proven unreliable for Yerevan in recent years, though, given the long-running tension between Russia and Georgia. [For background see the Eurasia Insight archive]. Turkey and Azerbaijan currently maintain an economic blockade against Armenia, and although there has been much talk lately of a re-opening of the Turkish-Armenian frontier, the normalization of Turkish-Armenian ties, as well as a political settlement to the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, do not appear imminent. [For background see the Eurasia Insight archive].

    The proposed outlet to Iran would not bring immediate economic benefits to Armenia. Under terms of an agreement finalized April 15 by the transport ministers of Armenia and Iran, construction of the railway would take an estimated five years, and cost upwards of $1.8 billion. The first stage of the construction process involves a feasibility study, which is due to be completed by the end of the summer.

    Almost seven-eighths of the railway would lie on Armenian territory, stretching from the northern city of Sevan to Meghri on the Iranian border. The question of financing evidently was not addressed during Sargsyan’s Iran visit.

    In another potentially significant deal, the two countries agreed to cooperation on the construction of a hydropower station on the Arax River.

    One political analyst, Garnik Asatrian, an Iranian studies expert at the Yerevan State University, characterized President Sargsyan’s visit as a “historic step” for Armenia. But other experts were more circumspect. The global economic downturn, they emphasized, makes it impossible to say whether promises made today can be fulfilled tomorrow. Alexander Iskandarian, the director of the Caucasus Institute in Yerevan, pointed out that already some erstwhile financial heavyweights in the Caucasus, especially Russia, are now finding it difficult to come up with the cash to meet assistance obligations. “Some previously adopted programs are now short of money,” he told EurasiaNet.

    Sevak Sarykhanan, an expert with the Noravank Foundation, a Yerevan-based think tank, suggested that the Iranian rail project is, in effect, an insurance policy for Yerevan. If the Turkish-Armenian border reopens in the near future, then Yerevan would have rail access to the Middle East and Gulf regions via the existing Gyumri-Kars rail link. In that case, the Sevan-Meghri-Iran rail route would not make financial sense.

     

    Editor’s Note: Haroutiun Khachatrian is a freelance writer based in Yerevan.

  • When your neighbor and enemy chum up…

    When your neighbor and enemy chum up…

     

     
     

    [ 16 Apr 2009 17:51 ]
    Armenian-Iranian economic partnership: reality or myth

    No sooner had Azerbaijan got out of the tension after notorious tittle-tattle in Turkish circles on the probability of opening borders with Armenia, one more neighbor moved to kiss on the lips of the aggressor country.

    The question is Armenian leader Serzh Sargsyan’s official visit to the Islamic Republic of Iran.

    During the visit from April 13-14, the two Presidents expressed satisfaction with the current level of political dialogue and their willingness to further expand intergovernmental relations.

    At a meeting with Iranian counterpart, Serzh Sargsyan didn’t seem to conceal his country’s emergency need for relations with Iran.

    In this regard, he thanked Iranian President for allowing essential goods through Iran during economically hard times – in the early years of independence and during hostilities between Russia and Georgia in August.

    The parties also focused on major infrastructure programs as the best indication of the further expansion of the Armenian-Iranian relations….

    Under memorandums and documents signed, Export Development Bank of Iran would open a credit line to Armenia, the parties agreed to build a hydropower plant on the Araz River, lay a railroad between the two countries, deliver Iranian gas to Armenia and study the prospects of re-exporting to Europe, create Iran-Armenia-Georgia-Black Sea Highway….

    The bilateral documents appeared to be part of strengthening Iran-Armenia-Russia triangle economically and politically against the backdrop of well-cemented strategic partnership among Turkey, Georgia and Azerbaijan in the region.

    In favor of the formation of Iran-Russian-Armenian alliance, this is a call for Iran to sit as an observer in the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO).

    Another point is that Armenia will get Iranian gasoline and diesel fuel refined in Tabriz, an Azeri-populated city.

    In fact, the expensive joint projects, including a rail link may come online in 3-4 years.
    The railway line is believed to allow Armenia to reach the outside world without Georgia let alone transportation and cargo shipment. Armenia and Iran are lucky this time because this project also interests Russia.

    With Russia uninvolved, it is obvious that progress in any sphere of economic cooperation between Armenia and Iran will willy-nilly “hang in the air”.