Category: Azerbaijan

  • UN GA Session: Statement of Elmar Mammadyarov, Minister of  Foreign Affairs of Azerbaijan

    UN GA Session: Statement of Elmar Mammadyarov, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Azerbaijan

    General Debate of the 64th Session (2009)

    Azerbaijan
    H.E. Elmar Maharram oglu Mammadyarov, Minister for Foreign Affairs

    25 September 2009

    Statement summaryELMAR MAMMADYAROV, Minister for Foreign Affairs of Azerbaijan, said that, unfortunately, the unlawful use of force had still not been removed from the context of international relations.  Today, civilian populations were still suffering from the manifest failure of individual States to fulfil their most basic responsibilities.  Governments failing to obey the rules of international conduct inevitably infringed upon individual liberties and freedoms at home, thus undermining democratic development.  The most vivid example of misconduct against the norms and principles of international law was the still unresolved Nagorny Karabakh conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan.

    As a result of Armenia’s aggression, almost one fifth of Azerbaijan’s territory had been occupied and some 1 million Azerbaijanis had become refugees and internally displaced persons, he said.  Four Security Council resolutions recognized Nagorny Karabakh as part of Azerbaijan, and called for the immediate and unconditional withdrawal of the occupying forces.  General Assembly resolution 62/243 expressed support for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Azerbaijan, and the advocated a step-by-step approach to settling the conflict.

    He said a number of important steps must be taken, starting with the withdrawal of Armenian forces from all occupied territories and the return of internally displaced persons to their homes.  That would pave the way for durable peace and stability in the region, which would be conducive to the elaboration of the legal status of Nagorny Karabakh within Azerbaijan, taking due account of the wishes of both Azeri and Armenian communities of the region.  Armenia’s acceptance of the step-by-step approach based on the decisions reflected in the Joint Declaration signed in Moscow in 2008 by the Presidents of Azerbaijan, Armenia and the Russian Federation was a positive sign.

    Azerbaijan had minimized the impact of the global economic downturn and managed to sustain its growth, he said, adding that, since 2003, the poverty rate had dropped from 44 to 13 per cent.   The country’s modern energy infrastructure, coupled with vast energy resources, had transformed Azerbaijan into an energy hub of international importance and contributed to the development of neighbouring States.  Today was a time of heightened religious and ethnic awareness, which in certain instances was maliciously exploited to fuel conflicts on ethnic, religious or cultural grounds.  Azerbaijan supported fully the Secretary-General’s recommendations to remove hate messages, distortions, prejudice and negative bias from educational media and to ensure basic knowledge and understanding of the world’s main cultures and religions.  Azerbaijan had been among the first countries to join the Alliance of Civilizations initiative of Turkey and Spain.


    Source: GA/10863

    PERMANENT MISSION OF THE REPUBLIC OF AZERBAIJAN
    TO THE UNITED NATIONS
    K66 United Nations Pl»™, Suite 5<M, New York, N,Y. 10017 TYI.: (212)171-2559 Fax: (212)371-2784
    Check against delivery
    Statement
    by H.E. Mr. Elmar Mammadyarov
    Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Azerbaijan
    General Debates
    of the 64th session of the United Nations General Assembly
    25 September 2009, New York
    Excellencies,
    Ladies and gentlemen,
    I would like to join the previous speakers and congratulate H.E. Mr. Ali Abdussalam
    Treki of Libya on his election to the post of the President of the 64th session of the
    United Nations General Assembly and wish him every success, and I thank his
    predecessor Mr. Miguel d’Escoto Brockmann for his work.
    I also express my profound respect and appreciation to the Secretary-General of the
    United Nations H.E. Mr. Ban Ki-moon for his leadership in mobilizing the
    international community to make our world a better place to live.
    Mr. President,
    We all recognise that the security of every State in the world can be better promoted
    and ensured with a multilateral security system. This paradigm was a principal reason
    behind creation of the collective security system with the United Nations
    Organization at its core.
    Yet, after more than 60 years since the United Nations was founded, the question still
    remains valid whether the contemporary international security architecture is
    effectively and timely addressing the multifaceted and interconnected challenges and
    threats confronting our today’s world?
    -1-
    The global character of today’s challenges and threats makes the geographic distance
    irrelevant in security policy formulation, since the threats as we know them today
    transcend the national frontiers and the whole continents. The indirect repercussions
    of the threats may be as much devastating and costly as the direct impact. The
    interconnected and intertwined nature of the threats requires reconsidering the very
    concept of security in broader terms that is not confined to the traditional military
    aspect of security, but comprises also political, economic, energy, cultural,
    information and other dimensions.
    The security of each State, and more broadly, the international peace and security will
    depend on whether States follow the norms and principles of international law and
    use them as a guiding tool for shaping their foreign and security policies. Following
    common set of norms and rules on the international arena contributes to the
    transparency and predictability of State behaviour and hence consolidates
    international peace and security.
    Unfortunately, unlawful use of force is still not removed from the context of
    international relations. Today civilian populations are still suffering in many places
    around the world due to the manifest failure of individual States to fulfil their most
    basic and compelling responsibilities. Armed conflicts, military aggression and
    foreign occupation involving the most serious international crimes are only a few
    vivid examples from our recent history of the bitter consequences of noncompliance
    by individual States with the norms and principles of international law. Governments
    failing to obey the rules of international conduct will inevitably infringe upon the
    individual liberties and freedoms at home, thus undermining the democratic
    development.
    Ladies and gentlemen,
    The most vivid example of misconduct of the norms and principles of international
    law is almost two decades long and still unresolved Armenian-Azerbaijan Nagorno-
    Karabakh conflict which also stands out as a major threat to international and
    regional peace and security. As a result of the aggression conducted by Armenia
    almost one-fifth of the territory of Azerbaijan has been occupied, approximately 1
    million ethnically cleansed Azerbaijani population has become internally displaced
    and refugees, thousands of Azerbaijani historical-cultural heritage devastated and
    looted.
    The United Nations Security Council in its four resolutions on the conflict reaffirmed
    the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Azerbaijan and the inadmissibility of the
    use of force for the acquisition of territory of the other state. It has also recognized
    Nagorno-Karabakh as a part of Azerbaijan and called for immediate, complete and
    unconditional withdrawal of the occupying forces from all occupied territories of
    Azerbaijan. The United Nations General Assembly in its resolution 62/243 of 14 March

    2008, entitled “The situation in the occupied territories of Azerbaijan”, expressed
    respect and support for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Azerbaijan within its
    internationally recognized borders.
    The approach of the United Nations Security Council and the General Assembly reflected
    in the above-mentioned resolutions is fully consistent with the position of Azerbaijan,
    which from the beginning advocated for a step-by-step approach to the conflict settlement
    as the only viable option. A number of important steps have to be taken, starting with
    the withdrawal of Armenian forces from all the occupied territories, rehabilitation of
    these territories and return of the internally displaced persons to their homes in and
    around the Nagorno-Karabakh region, opening of all communications for the mutual
    use. This will allow removing the consequences of the conflict and will pave the way for
    the establishment of durable peace and stability in the region conducive to the
    elaboration of the legal status of the Nagorno-Karabakh region within Azerbaijan
    with due account of the equally heard voices of the Azerbaijani and Armenian
    communities of the region.
    The current settlement process gives some hopes for breaking the stalemate in the
    resolution of the conflict. The acceptance by Armenia of the step-by-step approach to
    the settlement of the conflict on the basis of the principles and norms of international
    law and the decisions and documents adopted in this framework as reflected in the
    Joint Declaration signed in Moscow in November 2008 by the Presidents of
    Azerbaijan, Armenia and the Russian Federation is a positive sign.
    Azerbaijan is ready to continue talks with Armenia’s leadership for the secure and
    stable South Caucasus region and beyond which will allow using the ample regional
    opportunities for the benefit of all.
    Excellencies,
    Against the background of the above-mentioned negative developments in the region
    let me briefly share positive economic performance of my country. Azerbaijan
    minimized the impact of the global economic downturn on its economy and
    managed to sustain the growth. In 2009 the national economy has retained its
    dynamism and as of today the GDP growth is recorded at almost 4 %. Since 2003 we
    have recorded the drop in the poverty rate to 13 percent from 44 percent. The
    Government of Azerbaijan has substantially improved trade and investment
    conditions in an effort to strengthen national competitiveness and spur private sector
    development, especially in the non-oil segment. Non-oil GDP grew at almost 16%,
    the highest rate in 5 years. In recognition of the results-oriented reforms and thoughtthrough
    economic policy Azerbaijan are qualified by the World Bank as one of the
    world’s top reformers.
    – 3 –
    Strategically located Azerbaijan with young, skilled population, ample resources and
    dynamic economy is inevitably taking a leading role in the region and increasingly
    becomes a pivotal player and credible actor beyond the region.
    The successful implementation of the infrastructure projects such as Baku-Supsa,
    Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan export oil pipelines and Baku-Tbilisi-Erzurum gas pipeline
    boosted not only our economy, but also contributed to the development of
    neighbouring States. The modern energy infrastructure coupled with the vast energy
    resources transformed Azerbaijan into an energy hub of international importance.
    Azerbaijan has proven itself as a reliable partner and indispensable, secure energy
    source for Europe and beyond.
    Location of Azerbaijan at the crossroads of the East-West and North-South major
    transport corridors and rapidly developing national transportation infrastructure
    connected to the regional highway and railroad networks highlights the strategic
    importance of Azerbaijan. Completion of the construction of the Baku-Tbilisi-Kars
    railroad and commissioning of the brand new seaport Alat on the Azerbaijani coast of
    the Caspian Sea will increase the role of Azerbaijan as a communication hub linking
    Europe with Asia.
    Azerbaijan also has put forward an initiative to establish a Trans-Eurasian Super
    Information Highway, which is expected to serve as a major element of the East-
    West transport corridor and facilitate the supply of 20 regional countries with
    internet, telecommunication systems, e-information resources and e-economies.
    Ladies and gentlemen,
    Today, we are living at a time of heightened religious and ethnic awareness, which in
    certain instances takes on exaggerated forms and sometimes is being maliciously
    exploited to fuel conflicts on ethnic, religious or cultural grounds. The broad
    recognition by the Member States of the United Nations of the role of the dialogue
    among civilizations, and specifically of inter-cultural and inter-religious harmony in
    maintaining international peace and security can only be praised.
    We fully support the recommendations of the Secretary-General on the importance of
    increasing educational efforts to remove hate messages, distortions, prejudice, and
    negative bias from textbooks and other educational media, and ensuring the basic
    knowledge and understanding of the world’s main cultures, civilizations and
    religions.
    As a country where long-standing traditions of tolerance and peaceful coexistence of
    different religions and ethnic groups over centuries became an inseparable part of the
    culture, Azerbaijan has repeatedly demonstrated its determination to act as a natural
    bridge bringing together different continents, cultures and civilizations through
    -4-
    promotion of inter-religious and intercultural dialogue based on mutual respect and
    understanding among peoples of different cultures and religions.
    Azerbaijan was among the first countries to join the Alliance of Civilizations
    initiative of Turkey and Spain. With a view to translating the recommendations
    contained in the “Alliance of Civilizations” report of the High-Level Group appointed
    by the U.N. Secretary-General into concrete actions, over the past years Azerbaijan
    hosted a number of important events. Most recently, we held Baku Forum on
    Expanding the Role of Women in Cross-cultural Dialogue, which we believe will
    raise the awareness of the role of women in intercultural dialogue. In December 2008
    we hosted the Conference of Culture Ministers of the Council of Europe Member
    States. For the first time in the history of the Council of Europe the ministers of the
    Member States of ISESCO and ALECSO joined the event. The adopted Baku
    Declaration envisages inter alia intercultural dialogue between European and
    neighbouring States.
    At the Fifth Islamic Conference of Culture Ministers the capital of Azerbaijan Baku
    was declared the Islamic Culture Capital for 2009. This autumn we will be hosting
    the Sixth Conference of Culture Ministers of the Organization of Islamic Conference,
    where we will continue discussions of our future actions in fostering dialogue among
    civilizations.
    Mr. President,
    The multilateral system with the United Nations at its heart undergoes serious
    changes that test its strength, viability and credibility. This requires more dedicated
    efforts aimed at strengthening the United Nations and promoting the effectiveness of
    the Organization through the implementation of its decisions and resolutions.
    Azerbaijan believes that, as the only truly global organization, the United Nations has to
    be stronger and capable in engaging in a range of pressing global issues in every part
    of the world, as well as in addressing aspirations and concerns of each Member State.
    We continue supporting the reform of the Organization, so that it could be renewed,
    revitalized and more responsive.
    Thank you!

  • Azerbaijan sends note to Turkey

    Azerbaijan sends note to Turkey

    25 September 2009 [17:09]

    The Azerbaijani Foreign Ministry has presented a note to the Turkish Embassy in Azerbaijan.

    “The note stated that a while ago journalists of the Turkish NTV TV channel, who were issued accreditation in the so-called “Foreign Ministry of the Nagorno-Karabakh”, visited the occupied Nagorno-Karabakh region of Azerbaijan. The fact disappointed Azerbaijan. The Azerbaijani Foreign Ministry strongly opposes such visits to country’s occupied territory and requests the Turkish Foreign Ministry to investigate this fact and take measures,” Foreign Ministry’s Spokesperson Elkhan Polukhov said.

    http://www.today.az/news/politics/55915.html

  • Turkey’s Erdogan Urges Progress On Nagorno-Karabakh

    Turkey’s Erdogan Urges Progress On Nagorno-Karabakh

    AB710225 B18C 45DA 855B 5561C8970F28 w393 s

    Armenian President Serzh Sarkisian (left) with Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan in January

    September 22, 2009

    ANKARA (Reuters) — Turkish Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan has urged international mediators to speed up efforts to resolve a dispute over the Nagorno-Karabakh enclave as Ankara aims to normalize ties with long-time foe Armenia.

    Talks on the future of Nagorno-Karabakh, disputed by Armenia and Azerbaijan after a war in the 1990s, have been dragging on for more than a decade under the auspices of the Minsk Group linking Russia, France, and the United States.

    Turkey has said it hopes to open its border with Armenia by the end of the year under a protocol to establish diplomatic ties, but further progress has been hampered in the past by the frozen Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.

    Turkey closed the frontier in 1993 in solidarity with Muslim ally Azerbaijan, which was fighting Armenian-backed separatists in the breakaway mountain region of Nagorno-Karabakh.

    “Erdogan said the Minsk group that is co-presided by the U.S. has an important role in contributing to the improvement of the relations with Armenia and asked the group to increase their efforts,” Anatolian quoted him as saying on September 22.

    Erdogan made his comments in New York, where he traveled to attend the UN General Assembly. Turkish newspapers have reported that Turkey’s Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu will meet his Armenian counterpart on the sidelines of the gathering.

    Anticipation over an Ankara-Yerevan thaw has been growing ahead of a planned visit by Armenian President Serzh Sarkisian to Turkey on October 14, when he is due to attend the return leg of a World Cup qualifying football match between the two countries.

    Sarkisian has said he will not travel to the game, the first leg of which Turkish President Abdullah Gul watched last year in Yerevan, unless the border has reopened or there are clear signs it is about to open.

    Turkey and Armenia have no diplomatic ties and share a history of animosity stemming from the mass killing of Armenians by Ottoman Turks during World War I.

    Turkey denies the 1915 killings amounted to genocide, but has agreed to set up a commission of international experts on the issue under the protocol it signed with Armenia.

  • Will the real Turkey please stand up?

    Will the real Turkey please stand up?

    Published: Friday September 18, 2009

    The many faces of Turkish diplomacy. Nareh Balian / © 2009 Armenian Reporter LLC. All Rights Reserved.

    The Turkish government this week once again showed that it has no intention of ending Turkey’s 16-year-old blockade of Armenia and establishing diplomatic relations with its eastern neighbor.

    And if it doesn’t mean to go through with the agreements it has initialed and has committed itself to signing in mid-October, then the whole process is a farce. It is a farce intended to extract concessions from Armenia, while demonstrating to the West a nonexistent commitment to good-neighborly sentiments.

    What happened this week is simple. Turkey’s Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu assured the leaders of opposition parties in his country, “We won’t take a step which will sadden our Azerbaijani brothers.” He added, “They are being informed of the entire process imminently and it will go on as before.”

    The promise remains: The entire process “will go on as before.”

    In Istanbul on April 6, President Barack Obama said talks between Armenia and Turkey could “bear fruit very quickly very soon.” In response, Turkey’s President Abdullah Gül said a breakthrough was not imminent, noting that “issues between Armenia and Azerbaijan” must first be resolved.

    On April 19 Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan reiterated that point. He said, “A decision to open the border gate with Armenia will depend on the Nagorno-Karabakh issue being solved. If the Armenian occupation of Azeri territory continues, Turkey will not open its border gate.” He repeated the promise more than once after that.

    So what are we to believe? The officials, who say they won’t open the border, or the protocols initialed by the same officials, which say that Turkey will open the border? The protocols will not come into effect without parliamentary ratification, so the statements and the protocols can be reconciled in one way: if ratification is withheld because Armenia won’t capitulate in Karabakh.

    Turkey seeks to get Armenia’s National Assembly unilaterally to ratify an agreement in which Armenia agrees to concessions, while Turkey itself has no intention of ratifying the agreement or opening the illegally closed border.

    The international community should not be credulous enough to take the signature of Turkish officials at face value.

    Related Articles

    Reservations about the Armenia-Turkey agreement

    President consults political parties on Turkey relations

    Strategy, politics, and opportunism

    A dream come true for Turkey

    Getting this wrong will be unforgivable

    In Moscow and Istanbul, Armenians react to protocols with caution and concern (updated)

    Editors in Armenia are split over the newly unveiled Armenia-Turkey protocols

  • Bahar Muradova: “We have not lost our confidence in Turkey”

    Bahar Muradova: “We have not lost our confidence in Turkey”


    [ 17 Sep 2009 15:17 ]

    Baku. Elnur Mammadli – APA. “Our official attitude towards the normalization of Turkey-Armenia relations is obvious. We have stated several times that every state determines relations with its neighbors itself. But at the same time saying “every state” the relations between Azerbaijan and Turkey are beyond this framework,” Vice-Speaker of Azerbaijani Parliament Bahar Muradova said, APA reports. Muradova said Azerbaijan-Turkey relations are quite different and underlined that she does not want to believe that the friendly country will take a step contradicting Azerbaijan’s interests.
    “We want to believe that Turkey will never damage Azerbaijan’s interests while normalizing its relations with Armenia and will take this action within the implementation of the stipulations laid when the borders were closed with Armenia,” she said.

    As regards Azerbaijan’s official protest against Turkey, Bahar Muradova said it is not time to express protest.
    “Though Azerbaijani officials and public are concerned, they have not lost their confidence that Turkey will protect Azerbaijan’s interests in the relations with Armenia. I think they will take our position into consideration. Anyway, our position is obvious,” she said.

    Related News
    25/12/2008 Hulusi Kilic: “Turkey will always support Azerbaijan”
    06/02/2009 Turkish Foreign Minister to visit Azerbaijan
    08/04/2009 Dubai-based Azerbaijani Society appeals to Turkish leadership asking not to reopen borders with Armenia
    04/05/2009 Araz Azimov meets with new Foreign Minister of Turkey
    12/05/2009 Turkish Prime Minister to arrive in Azerbaijan today
    16/06/2009 Istanbul to host conference on Turkey-Azerbaijan relations
    03/09/2009 Hulusi Kilic: We expect Azerbaijan to believe Turkey under these circumstances – EXCLUSIVE
    07/09/2009 ADP: Turkey’s policy of rapprochement with Armenia will result in the release of the occupied Azerbaijani territorie
  • Turkish Opposition Remains Skeptical of Government’s “Armenian Opening”

    Turkish Opposition Remains Skeptical of Government’s “Armenian Opening”

    Turkish Opposition Remains Skeptical of Government’s “Armenian Opening”

    Publication: Eurasia Daily Monitor Volume: 6 Issue: 169

    September 16, 2009

    By: Saban Kardas

    Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu met the leaders of opposition parties as part of his attempt to brief them about recent developments in Turkish foreign policy, and solicit their support for the government’s “Armenian opening.” On August 31, Turkey and Armenia announced the details of a roadmap for the normalization of bilateral relations. The parties initialed two protocols regulating the steps to be taken toward the resolution of contentious issues. To allay concerns among domestic opposition parties and in Azerbaijan, the Turkish government emphasized that the final decision would rest with parliament and that Baku’s views would be taken into account during the parliamentary approval process (EDM, September 8).

    Since accomplishing the objectives of normalization would require bold steps and political determination on the part of the Justice and Development Party (AKP) government, this new initiative is denoted as the “Armenian opening,” echoing the recent Kurdish opening. Given the necessity of parliamentary approval, the focus of the policy on Armenia has shifted to the domestic political processes.

    Davutoglu, at the urging of Prime Minister of Recep Tayyip Erdogan, has taken time out from his heavy international diplomatic agenda to win over the opposition parties for the normalization policy. Davutoglu met Deniz Baykal, the leader of the main opposition Republican People’s Party (CHP), and the leaders of the Democratic Left Party (DSP) and the Felicity Party (SP) Numan Kurtulmus and Masum Turker respectively. However, the Nationalist Movement Party (MHP) leader Devlet Bahceli, who has been the most outspoken critic of the Armenian opening, refused to meet him. Earlier, Davutoglu met Parliamentary Speaker Mehmet Ali Sahin, and he is scheduled to have additional meetings with the leaders of parties that received at least 1 percent of the popular vote in the July 2007 parliamentary elections. He also met the opposition leaders in May, following his appointment as foreign minister (Today’s Zaman, September 16).

    One common theme emerging from Davutoglu’s contacts is that the opposition leaders unequivocally state that any progress in Turkish-Armenian relations needs to be contingent upon the protection of Azerbaijan’s concerns over Karabakh. In response, Davutoglu sought to reassure them that normalization with Armenia would not come at the expense of harming ties with Azerbaijan, and that Baku was being informed about the progress of Turkish-Armenian talks (Anadolu Ajansi, September 15).

    Another common theme is the skepticism of the opposition parties toward the contents and the form of the Armenian opening, especially the involvement of foreign actors. They continue to view the opening as an agenda imposed upon Turkey by external forces, and believe that the main benefactor of the process will be Armenia.

    For instance, SP’s Kurtulmus maintained that according to popular perceptions, the process seemed to be driven by Armenia, and that Turkey appeared to be only a passive player. He asked Davutoglu to correct this image. He also expressed his reservations about the committee of historians, and maintained that the committee would be unlikely to reach a decision disproving Armenian genocide claims. Kurtulmus also criticized the government’s recognition of Switzerland as the mediator between Turkey and Armenia, arguing that as a country that punishes the denial of the “Armenian genocide” claims, Switzerland could not be considered as impartial in this issue. DSP’s Turker, also shared similar concerns (Cihan, September 15).

    The main opposition leader Baykal raised the most vocal criticisms. During the joint press brief after meeting with Davutoglu, Baykal noted that the CHP considered foreign policy issues as “state policies” that require a national consensus. He added that his party’s decision to meet Davutoglu was meant to make a contribution to state policy, and should not be interpreted as representing “support” for the government’s agenda. He stated his disappointment with the government’s overall approach to this issue, and reiterated his earlier position that the normalization agenda is imposed upon Turkey. “There is a process and a roadmap underway which is beyond the knowledge of the opposition parties. Now, through these contacts, the government is not asking ‘Let us discuss Turkey’s interests, and formulate [the policies] together.’ The government is saying to us. ‘We are given a roadmap. We decided to implement it; come, help us realize this roadmap.’ This is not an effort to formulate a policy. This is an effort to find support for a program that is already formed,” Baykal objected (ANKA, September 15).

    Baykal also characterized the two protocols as “traps.” He argued that although the protocols satisfy Armenian concerns by laying out the details of Turkey’s re-opening of the border, they fall short of meeting Turkish demands regarding Armenia’s recognition of the Kars Treaty on defining the Turkish-Armenian border, or the renunciation of its policy of having its genocide claims recognized worldwide, and ending its occupation of Karabakh. He expressed concern that the protocols offered no safeguards against the possibility that after Turkey opens the border, Armenia might later renege on its promises. Therefore, he demanded that the government must refuse to sign the protocols. Baykal also speculated that the government would sign the protocols with Armenia on October 13 (Hurriyet, September 16).

    Both the Turkish and Armenian governments have to tackle domestic opposition, in addition to the dilemmas of overcoming differences of opinion and building trust in the bilateral talks. Indeed, the Turkish-Armenian declarations recognize the challenges of obtaining broad-based social and political support, and give the parties six weeks to engage in domestic discussions before the protocols are forwarded to parliaments for final ratification.

    Given the strength of nationalistic sentiments in Turkey, one challenge for the AKP government has been to present the Armenian opening as a “national” policy, rather than a parochial agenda promoted by the AKP, or a project externally imposed upon Turkey. The six-week deadline has provided an impetus for each government to stimulate debate on the issue, but as the Turkish case suggests this deadline is too unrealistic to facilitate any meaningful and genuine democratic deliberation on a dispute mired in historical memories and current geopolitical conflicts. Davutoglu’s meetings further show that a new conflict is looming over the AKP’s foreign policy when the Armenian opening comes before parliament.

    https://jamestown.org/program/turkish-opposition-remains-skeptical-of-governments-armenian-opening/