Category: Azerbaijan

South Caucasus Presents Tangled Web Of Shifting Allegiances
Turkish soldiers guard a road at Dogu Kapi, on the Turkish-Armenian border, on April 15.

April 24, 2009 By Brian Whitmore Anticipation is in the air in the Armenian village of Margara.

Roads are being repaired. Visitors are inquiring about real estate prices. Talk abounds of new hotels, shops, and restaurants.

A sleepy border hamlet of just 1,500 people, Magara is the site of the only bridge linking Armenia with Turkey — a bridge that has not been used since Ankara closed the border and cut off diplomatic relations with Yerevan in 1993 over the war in Nagorno-Karabakh.

Now, with talk of an impending Armenian-Turkish rapprochement reaching a fever pitch, locals like 70-year-old Demaxia Manukian are hopeful that their isolation is at an end.

“The more consumers there will be, the better it will be for us. Infrastructure will improve — the streets and the water system,” Manukian tells RFE/RL’s Armenian Service, stressing that the town will need to be spruced up in order to impress all the new visitors if the border opens.

“After all, it’s a matter of prestige. That’s why it has to get better.”

The thaw in relations between Ankara and Yerevan, which began shortly after Armenian President Serzh Sarkisian took office a year ago, has picked up steam in recent months with high-level backing from both the United States and Russia.

The issue takes on added relevance this week, as Armenians on April 24 commemorate the 94th anniversary of the onset of mass killings of ethnic Armenians by Ottoman Turks at the end of World War I — a longstanding source of tension between Turkey and Armenia.

Turkey’s Foreign Ministry announced this week that the two sides had agreed to a road map to normalize ties. In testimony before the U.S. House Foreign Affairs Committee, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton praised Ankara and Yerevan for taking “bold steps” toward reconciliation, adding that “normalizing relations and opening their borders will foster a better environment for confronting that shared, tragic history.”

But the complex Turkish-Armenian relationship does not exist in a vacuum. It is but one thread in a tangled web of grievances and mistrust that have long plagued the South Caucasus — and sparked a sometimes fractious race for influence among the international powers drawn by the lure of energy and strategic location.

Historical Animosities

When the Soviet Union dissolved in 1991, Turkey was the first country to recognize Armenia’s independence, but the warm neighborly relations were short-lived.

Turkey and Azerbaijan, both predominantly Muslim countries, are close allies. When Armenia occupied Azerbaijan’s Nagorno-Karabakh region, Ankara broke off relations with Yerevan and closed the border in solidarity with its ally.

Azerbaijan remains deeply suspicious of a Turkish-Armenian reconciliation and has hinted that it would scuttle the regional balance if its interests are not safeguarded.

Moreover, Yerevan’s longstanding claim that the mass killings of Armenians in the Ottoman Empire at the end of World War I constituted genocide infuriates Ankara and has long been a roadblock to normalizing ties.

The Turkey-Armenia road map, brokered by Switzerland, comes as Armenia and Azerbaijan appear to be edging closer to a resolution of the Karabakh standoff, with apparent help from Moscow.

Both the Azerbaijani and Armenian leaders traveled to Russia this week for talks with officials, and both offered carefully worded, but optimistic, assessments of the talks.

Meanwhile, Azerbaijan, which fears it will be the odd man out in a Turkish-Armenian rapprochement, has turned a cold shoulder to its traditional allies in Ankara in recent weeks, with Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev refusing a recent invitation to travel to Turkey.

At the same time, Baku has been cozying up to Moscow.

Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev (right) with Russia’s Dmitry Medvedev in Barbikha on April 17Baku may be seeking to remind Ankara that as the sole energy supplier in the South Caucasus, it is free to choose its friends, and its issues. Analysts say Turkey is trying desperately to persuade Azerbaijan that an opening to Armenia is in everybody’s interests.

“The Turkish strategic perspective and the message that they constantly articulate to Baku is that over the longer term, a normalization with Armenia will actually enhance Turkish leverage and influence in the region — which, from the Turkish point of view is good for Ankara and good for Baku,” says Richard Giragosian, director of the Yerevan-based Center for National and International Studies.

“This is a Turkish strategic agenda based on Turkish national interests. It is not to curry favor with Brussels, nor is it to please Washington. But in the long run from a Turkish perspective, it’s good for the region, it’s good for Azerbaijan, and it’s good for Turkey.”

Baku, however, appears unconvinced.

During his visit to Moscow on April 17, Aliyev said he saw no obstacles to cutting a deal to sell natural gas to Russia’s Gazprom. Aliyev added that Baku hoped to diversify its natural gas exports, most of which are currently sent west to Europe via Turkey.

Such a move would be a severe blow to the proposed U.S.- and EU-backed Nabucco pipeline, which would transport gas from Azerbaijan and Turkmenistan to Europe via the South Caucasus, bypassing Russia.

Baku has also warned that an open Turkish-Armenian border “could lead to tensions in the region and would be contradictory to the interests of Azerbaijan.”

Shifting Alliances

Analysts say Aliyev is attempting play the gas card to get the best possible deal in a settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. Specifically, Baku is seeking Russian support for the withdrawal of Armenian troops from regions surrounding Nagorno-Karabakh.

A Karabakh resolution would be a feather in Moscow’s cap as it seeks to reassert itself in its former Soviet territories. But a far greater draw — for Moscow and all the international powers keeping toeholds in the South Caucasus — is energy.

The South Caucasus’ role as a transit hub for oil and gas from the Caspian Sea and Central Asia to Europe is casting a long shadow over the ongoing process as Russia and the West seek to control these crucial energy routes. Ilgar Mammadov, a Baku-based political analyst, says “everybody is playing a sophisticated game.”

After the Armenian-Turkish road map was announced on April 22, the Azerbaijani Foreign Ministry released a statement saying that “the normalization of Turkish-Armenian relations must proceed in parallel with the withdrawal of Armenian troops from the occupied lands of Azerbaijan.”

But Mammadov says Baku’s strategy has risks, as it could push Azerbaijan even “farther into the hands of Russia” and away from the West.

“Baku is trying to use the advantage of its geopolitical location to influence the position of its European and American partners. But if the Russians respond to this policy in a very material way, like pulling Armenian forces back from some of the occupied territories, I think the foreign policy orientation of this regime in Baku may become irreversible,” Mammadov says.

If the Russians respond to this policy in a very material way, like pulling Armenian forces back from some of the occupied territories, I think the foreign policy orientation of this regime in Baku may become irreversible.The moves toward Moscow by Baku, which until now has enjoyed a degree of independence due to its energy wealth, are being watched nervously in Georgia, whose ties with Russia have sunk in recent years, bottoming out during the five-day war over South Ossetia in August.

With no energy resources of its own, and an international partner — the United States — that has grown more accommodating of Moscow in recent months, Georgia may be in the position to suffer most in the event of a resurgence of Russian influence in the region.

Armenia, which has the strongest traditional ties with Moscow despite its relative lack of resources, may prove a more equal partner if the border with Turkey is opened and its commercial isolation ends. In this way, Russia has a vested interest in seeing the Turkish-Armenian rapprochement move forward, and may be using the Karabakh process to help nudge it along.

In a recent interview with RFE/RL, Deputy U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Matthew Bryza — who is one of three co-chairmen of OSCE-sponsored mediation on Karabakh — stressed that Washington sees the Armenian-Turkish reconciliation and a Nagorno-Karabakh settlement as “separate tracks.” He added, however, that negotiations on Karabakh are gaining momentum.

“I honestly can say that I feel more than ever a constructive spirit and that we are actually entering a new phase, I hope, of the negotiations,” Bryza said. “The presidents spent a year getting to know each other a bit and knowing each other’s positions. And now I feel we are moving to a new phase with a deeper more detailed discussion of the remaining elements of the basic principles that need to be resolved.”

Football Diplomacy 2.0

Analysts say, however, that Turkish-Armenian reconciliation will likely precede any settlement on Nagorno-Karabakh.

Sabina Freizer, director of the Brussels-based The International Crisis Group’s Europe program says many Caucasus-watchers are pointing to October, when Sarkisian is due to visit Turkey to watch a World Cup qualifying soccer match between Armenia and Turkey, as a possible date to close the deal.

“I am quite optimistic and I believe that if the border is opened and diplomatic relations are established this will change things fundamentally in the South Caucasus. I personally believe that at this point the two sides seem to be close enough that the border should open quite quickly,” Freizer said. “But of course the timing is very political. One date that people are talking about is during President Sarkisian’s visit to Turkey, if it occurs in October. That might be a good time to open the border.”

If an agreement is reached in time for Sarkisian’s visit, it would provide a tidy conclusion to the “football diplomacy” that the Armenian president began in September, when he hosted Turkish President Abdullah Gul to Yerevan to watch the last match between the two national teams.

While the United States has strongly backed Turkey and Armenia normalizing relations, the momentum is also causing some political discomfort for U.S. President Barack Obama.

During a visit to Turkey earlier this month, Obama encouraged the talks between Ankara and Yerevan, saying they “could bear fruit very quickly.”

The recent progress, however, will make it difficult for Obama to make good on a campaign promise to Armenian-Americans to recognize the 90-year-old mass killings as genocide. Such a move now would infuriate Turkey and potentially scuttle any deal to open the Armenian border.

But back in the border village of Margara, residents say they are ready to move beyond painful historical grievances.

Three of Demaxia Manukian’s uncles perished in the mass killings, but he nevertheless says he is ready to move on.

“There are Turks and there are Armenians. The Turks are human beings, too. They rock their children in their cradles just like we do,” Manukian said. “But when politics get injected into this, that is the danger.”

RFE/RL’s Armenian and Azerbaijani services contributed to this report
- Print
- Email
- Comment (4)
Would you like to post to this forum? Name * Enter your name Enter your name Location City City E-mail Enter your email Your email address is invalid Comment *
Your comment is empty or longer than 4000 characters. Your comment is empty or longer than 4000 characters. Disclaimer
Reader comments in no way reflect the views or opinions of RFE/RL correspondents, contributors, or staff.
Before you post a comment, please read the forum rules Are you human? Please enter the numbers below: Comments 1-4 (of 4) by: J from: US April 24, 2009 20:38 To Dasiey “from Canada”- your poor English betrays your IQ

by: Dasiey from: Canada April 24, 2009 17:18 Mr. Whitmore,

Based on the western media reports such as New York Times,Armenian have sculpted women and children in Azerbaijan just 17 years ago!!
As a humanitarian advocate ,I believe we can Not be blind to the facts that Armenian committed genocide in Azerbaijan just 17 years ago in the city of Kojli.
Armenia so far have not respected The latest U.N Resolution( March 14/2008) which asks Armenia to withdraw from %20 of Azerbaijan’s occupied lands.

Further more,Armenian terrorist group(ASALA)was removed from the list of terrorist in North America is still active! This is their media’s website:

The question is Which nation is the victim?

by: Armenian from: US April 24, 2009 13:16 Armenians will never move on until Turkey accepts genocide. There is no nation on the Earth that could forget genocide, and definitely, not Armenians. It is not politics, it is a matter of historical justice. So please stop publishing rubbish.

by: J from: US April 24, 2009 11:44 Why is Azerbaijan constantly mentioned- it is irrelevant to the Armenian-Turkish reconciliation issue. They should know that by now.
April 26, 2009
Armenia Talks Strain Turkey’s Ties With Azerbaijan

Perceived cooling in relationship between Ankara and Baku may have ramifications for the latter’s energy strategy.

By Seymur Kazimov in Baku (CRS No. 490, 24-Apr-09)

The refusal of Azerbaijan’s president to attend an international conference in Istanbul earlier this month has sparked speculation that Baku may be using its energy resources to exert pressure on its old Turkish ally.

Ilham Aliev reportedly declined to attend the meeting of the Alliance of Civilisations initiative on April 6-7, aimed at fostering dialogue between the West and Muslim countries, in protest against Turkey’s perceived new policy on Armenia

While not going to Istanbul, Aliev accepted his Russian counterpart Dmitry Medvedev’s invitation to visit Moscow on April 16 to talk about closer cooperation in the gas field.

That day, the Turkish foreign minister, Ali Babajan, took part in a meeting of the Black Sea Economic Cooperation organisation, BSEC, in Yerevan, Armenia.

Until now, Azerbaijan has been selling gas to its ally Turkey at half the market price of 380-430 US dollars per thousand cubic metres.

This favourable price is now expected to go up, especially as Russia has said it is willing to buy Azeri gas for what it costs in the world market.

Russia and Azerbaijan have been sounding each other out over closer energy ties for some months now.

The chairman of Gazprom, Aleksei Miller, visited Azerbaijan to formalise Russia’s interest in buying natural gas from Azerbaijan last June.

On March 27, the State Oil Company of Azerbaijan, SOCAR, and the Russian energy giant signed a memorandum, pursuant to which Azerbaijan is to start supplying gas to Russia from January 2010.

Opinions vary on what has prompted Azerbaijan to seek closer cooperation with Russia in the energy field.

Some experts suggest Aliev is revising his options with Turkey, in response to the prospect of the latter reopening its border with Armenia.

Turkey closed the border with Armenia in 1993 in sympathy with Azerbaijan over the dispute over Nagorny-Karabakh.

Russia has hitherto been seen as an ally of Armenia rather than Azerbaijan in the region.

However, Baku political analyst Ilgar Mamedov downplays talk that Azerbaijan is using its gas wealth to take a form of diplomatic revenge on Turkey.

He believes Aliev is more concerned about Turkey’s stance on selling transited gas than on the possible unsealing of the Turkish-Armenian border, or the Karabakh issue.

“Azerbaijan wants its gas from the Shah-Deniz gas field to reach Europe via Turkey but Turkey wants to [remain able to] buy this gas for 150 dollars and then sell it on to Europe for 400,” he explained.

“That scheme does not sit well with Aliev… That’s where the cause of the tension lies.”

Mamedov said Turkey’s position on reselling the gas was justifiable, however, because it had closed its borders with Armenia for 16 years now, damaging ties with European countries and the US as a result.

“It would be wrong to fault Turkey’s position on the gas issue,” he said. “Aliev has allowed himself to be guided by commercial interests alone and has launched a campaign against Turkey that is absolutely unacceptable.”

The same expert said Aliev might have calculated that by selling gas to Russia he would secure Moscow’s sympathy over the dispute with Armenia, while Turkey would continue to support Azerbaijan over Nagorny Karabakh in any case.

But the expert warned that if Azerbaijan now increased the price of gas for Turkey, the latter might rethink its entire stance on the conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan.

The Turkish newspaper Hurriyet was the first to suggest that Azerbaijan had declared a “gas war” against Turkey, and that Ankara was reviewing its relationship with Baku in consequence.

Sources in Azerbaijan’s industry and energy ministry quickly denied the Turkish media reports, saying the Azeri authorities would have already come up with a response “if the information had been true”.

But another Turkish newspaper, Yenicag, has carried similar information. It also suggested that Turkey’s ruling Justice and Development Party, the AKP, was now also questioning Turkey’s role in the planned Nabucco gas pipeline.

This is intended to pump gas from Azerbaijan and other states in Central Asia to Europe via Georgia and Turkey, circumventing Armenia.

The pipeline has been touted as a much-needed alternative route for natural gas to reach Europe, now increasingly worried about its heavy dependence on Russia for gas.

While freeing Europe from energy dependence on Russia, the pipeline is also seen as a key strategic and economic weapon for Azerbaijan, strengthening its hand against landlocked, energy-poor Armenia.

Azerbaijan’s discovered natural gas reserves are estimated at around 1.5 trillion cubic metres.

Companies participating in the 12.4 billion US dollars’ worth Nabucco project are OMV of Austria, MOL of Hungary, Bulgargaz of Bulgaria, Transgaz of Romania, BOTAS of Turkey and RWE of Germany.

Construction was initially supposed to start in 2009 and be completed by 2013, though the world economic crisis has put a dampener on those plans.

Ilham Shaban, head of the Oil Research Centre in Azerbaijan,
dismisses criticism in the Turkish and western press of Azerbaijan’s energy policies as ungrounded.

He also denies that growing energy ties between Azerbaijan and Russia will come at the expense of Baku’s old ties to Turkey.

The two countries, Shaban says, had long been supplying each other with electricity. “Negotiations are underway between Azerbaijan, Russia and Turkey regarding the gas issue,” he continued.

“I assess the agreement between Azerbaijan and Russia as highly important, because ethnic Azerbaijanis make up 11 per cent of Russia’s population.”

Political analyst Haleddin Ibragimli said he doubted deeper energy ties with Russia would much affect the drive to settle the Karabakh conflict.

Azeri officials, meanwhile, reiterate that Azerbaijan is a sovereign state that pursues an independent policy and needs no advice on what countries it should cooperate with in the field of energy.

In Moscow, Aliev said Azerbaijan and Russia would be protecting their energy security and their interests as producers and exporters of energy.

Answering a question from the Interfax new agency about new agreements on transit and cooperation in the gas field, Aliev cautioned that the whole issue still remained under discussion.

“Gazprom and the State Oil Company of Azerbaijan are busy discussing an agreement,” he said.

“As is known, a memorandum has already been signed that corroborates the existence of mutual interests. For our part, there will be no restrictions to cooperation in the gas field.”

Later, the president said the two countries also planned to work more closely together over oil, increasing the volume being pumped into the pipeline that runs from Baku to Novorossiysk in Russia.

Another potential agreement concerns upgrading the gas pipeline from Baku to Novo-Filya in the near future. This 200 km-long pipeline runs via the capital of Azerbaijan along the Caspian Sea coast to the border with Russia.

Fariz Huseinov of Memphis University says Turkey stands to lose out more than Azerbaijan, if Ankara alienates Baku over Armenia. This is because Turkey’s role as a transit country for Azerbaijan’s gas is negotiable.

According to Huseinov, Azerbaijan had already signed an energy agreement with Ukraine that potentially relieved Azerbaijan from any dependence on Turkey as a transit country.

Huseinov was referring to the one-on-one meeting between Aliev and his Ukraine counterpart Viktor Yushchenko in Baku earlier this month, where a number of protocols were signed for closer cooperation in 2009-10.

“That would mean we could reach Europe otherwise than via Turkey,” he said. “We might use a route linking Georgia the Black Sea and Ukraine, detouring both Russia and Turkey.”

Seymur Kazimov is an IWPR contributor.

April 25, 2009
Armenia Presses On With Courtship of Turkey

While Turkey holds out for concessions over Nagorny- Karabakh, Yerevan remains convinced a restoration of diplomatic ties lies on the horizon.

By Tatul Hakobian in Yerevan (CRS No. 490, 24-Apr-09)

Noyan Soyak, a businessman from Turkey, recalls with a smile that every January 1 he thinks the border with Armenia will open, and almost 12 months later, every December 31, he hopes it will reopen the following year.

“But this year is unique, especially after the visit of Turkish president Abdullah Gul to Yerevan last September,” he said.

“That was a turning point, so we should use this momentum to identify the problems between our two nations and start solving them.”

A businessman with the Istanbul-based chartering and shipping organisation, Alyans, Soyak is also co-vice-chair of the Turkish-Armenian business development council, TABDC.

Established in 1997, TABDC is chaired by representatives from each country; Soyak and his brother Kaan Soyak from Turkey, and Arsen Ghazarian, president of the union of manufacturers and businessmen of Armenia.

“Since 1997 we have been working on a lot of projects, such as cultural events and business meetings,” Soyak continued.

“Our latest project is a documentary movie to be made with the Armenian Marketing Association on the river Araks that separates the two countries.”

The idea is for each country to film its own 30-minute documentary on the river, and later combine them into one film. Each segment will present a separate perspective on a common, shared treasure.

The combined documentary will be translated into English as well as appearing in both Turkish and Armenian, and will help acquaint the inhabitants of both sides with current processes, problems and thoughts, creating links between the countries.

While the Turkish businessman still cannot predict a date when the border between Armenia and Turkey will finally be opened, he is sure it would benefit not only the two countries but the whole region.

For one thing, it would stimulate cultural tourism and create new jobs. As for the commodity turnover between Armenia and Turkey, worth only about 135 million US dollars in 2007, that would soar in a short period.

“The opening of Kars-Gyumri railway would provide a lot of jobs,” Soyak explained. “Turkey, Armenia and Azerbaijan would then form a big market and a transport corridor.”

Armenia is already officially in favour of reopening of the border – provided there are no preconditions on the subject of the disputed Armenian enclave of Nagorny-Karabakh.

But Turkey has until now insisted on concessions over the enclave as the price of reopening the border, which it closed in 1993.

Yerevan continues making optimistic statements on the normalisation of relations, even though Turkish prime minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan repeatedly stated this month that Ankara will not reestablish ties without a resolution of the Nagorny-Karabakh issue.

Recent reports in foreign media, which suggested Armenia and Turkey would sign a protocol to re-establish diplomatic relations in Yerevan on April 16, proved inaccurate.

But less than a week later, on April 22, the Armenian, Turkish and Swiss foreign ministries issued a joint statement that confirmed that Turkey and Armenia, with Switzerland as mediator, had been “working intensively with a view to normalising their bilateral relations”.

It declared the two parties “had agreed on a comprehensive framework” for doing so and “a road map has been identified”.

The surprise development, coming only two days before the annual April 24 anniversary of the Armenian genocide, provoked as much anger as amazement in some Armenian circles, who deemed it insensitive.

According to Richard Giragosian, director of the Armenian Centre for National and International Studies, ACNIS, Yerevan had “demonstrated an appalling degree of short-sightedness and irresponsibility”, by signing the statement, and had “abdicated its responsibility to both the passing generation of genocide survivors and the present generation of their ancestors”.

Other Armenian officials, politicians and experts have also voiced strong doubts over Turkey’s intentions, albeit less harshly.

Armenia’s former foreign minister, Vardan Oskanian, who has much experience of talks with the Turkish side, says the current situation in Armenian-Turkish relations appears strange.

“Recent statements made by both parties … made me think that there were some real developments in relations… in spite of my continual suspicions based on ten years of experience,” he said.

“But the present situation really puzzled me,” Oskanian added, regarding the Turkish premier’s statements on the Karabakh.

The former foreign minister says the Armenian side should set a precise date for the opening of the borders.

Either a document should be signed between the two countries on opening the border that day, or Yerevan should drop out of talks. The current continuous negotiations were beneficial only to Turkey, he maintained.

Another former foreign minister, Raffi Hovhannisian, now head of the opposition Heritage party in parliament, struck a tougher line. “It was Turkey that closed its borders with Armenia, so let it reopen the border on its own,” he said.

“It’s unacceptable for Armenia to make concessions over the Armenian Genocide or the Karabakh problem in exchange for opening the Turkish border.”

Ara Nranian, of the Armenian Revolutionary Federation parliamentary bloc, also questions the value of discussions on reopening the border.

“We have nothing against the reopening of the border, bearing in mind that it wasn’t Armenia that closed it [but] Turkey’s terms for reopening of the border are simply inadmissible for Armenia,” Nranian told IWPR.

Vladimir Karapetian, who coordinates foreign ties for the opposition Armenian National Congress, ANC, led by former president Levon Ter-Petrosian, also doesn’t expect much progress in Armenian-Turkish relations in the near future.

“The opening of the borders is very important for Armenia. But what is more important is the way we achieve it,” he said.

“The time game started by the Turks from the day President Gul arrived in Yerevan in September 2008 brought Turkey more international dividends than it did to Yerevan.”

Karapetian said Turkey had continued to insist that without the settlement of the Nagorno-Karabagh conflict, or significant progress in Armenia-Azerbaijan dispute, the border would remain closed, he told IWPR.

Even some of the government’s own parliamentary allies are restive over the government’s policy towards Ankara.

On April 22, Hrant Margarian, leader of the Armenian Revolutionary Federation, a member of the ruling coalition, said official policy toward Turkey had harmed Armenia and given Ankara the role it had long sought in the Nagorny-Karabakh peace process.

This party is reportedly mulling leaving the coalition over the issue. “The Armenian side must acknowledge that it has been defeated in this stage of Turkish-Armenian fence-mending negotiations,” Markarian said.

Turkey has sought to become more involved in the Nagorny-Karabakh peace process for several months now.

Last October, for example, a trilateral meeting took place between the foreign ministers of Armenia, Turkey and Azerbaijan in New York.

According to Karapetian, “Turkey’s endeavour to tie the opening of the border with the Nagorno Karabakh conflict has become more visible and, probably, more understandable in the eyes of the international community than it was before.

“The Armenian authorities have allowed Turks to draw a linkage between opening the border and settlement of the Karabakh conflict, which can endanger both – the process of reconciliation and the Karabakh conflict.”

Armenia continues to insist that Turkey is not in fact directly involved in talks over the future of Nagorny-Karabakh.

Questioned on Turkey’s role in any talks, Foreign Minister Edward Nalbandian said negotiations between Armenia, Nagorny-Karabakh and Azerbaijan were taking place within the context of the OSCE Minsk Group, which oversees the Karabakh peace process. “This is the only format of the negotiations. Turkey is not a mediator in the process of the Karabakh conflict resolution,” Nalbandian said.

Azerbaijan is following the recent flurry of high-level talks between Yerevan and Ankara with a mixture of interest and irritation.

While officially welcoming steps towards solving regional problems, Baku opposes reopening the Armenian-Turkish border and the restoration of the ties between the two countries without concessions over the enclave.

Azerbaijan’s deputy foreign minister, Mahmoud Mamedkuliev, attending the Black Sea Economic Cooperation council in Yerevan on April 16 – the first senior Azeri diplomat to visit Armenia in years – said Baku considered any talks between Armenia and Turkey an affair of these two countries.

But he added, “Our position is that the restoration of the ties between Armenia and Turkey can be only connected with the resolution of Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict.

“Armenia and Turkey broke off relations once and the main reason for this was the occupation of Azerbaijani territories. We think the relations between Armenia and Turkey… should be connected with the resolution of this conflict.”

Mamedkuliev added that Turkey’s role in this process was indispensible. “Turkey is a member of the Minsk Group and is one of the most significant players in the region,” he said.

Meanwhile, Armenia’s president has continued to say that following his February 6 meeting with the Turkish prime minister in Switzerland, the latter half of 2009 could see a new level in Armenian-Turkish relations.

On April 10, he said he still hoped to cross the already reopened border to arrive in Turkey for the Turkey-Armenia World Cup Qualifier match.

Sticking to the sporting metaphor, he said, “Now the ball is on the Turkish side of the field and while speaking about football diplomacy, it must be noted that the ball can’t remain in one part of the field for a long time and that every football game has certain limits.”

Yerevan-based political scientist Giragosian agrees there is a likely time limit for the Turkish-Armenian reconciliation process to bear fruit.

He sees a window of opportunity over the coming months, lasting roughly until the end of the year, “but after that, if the process drags on into next year, there is a much larger danger that something else will go wrong and more complications will arise”.

Meanwhile, Armenian are preparing to commemorate the 94th anniversary the Armenian genocide on April 24 – an occasion for mourning the tragic events of 1915 and a day on which the Armenian head of state traditionally delivers a speech.

But this year Armenians are more interested in another presidential speech on the subject of the bloodshed in 1915 – that of United States president Barack Obama.

During his presidential campaign, Obama told the Armenian diaspora in the US he would not shrink from using the term “genocide” in his speech on April 24.

But many Armenians suspect Obama is unlikely to honour that pledge, as such a step would not only undermine US-Turkey relations but might harm the warming process in Armenian-Turkish relations as well.

Tatul Hakobian is a commentator with the English-language Armenian Reporter newspaper, published in the United States.

April 25, 2009
Yerevan Tight-Lipped On Turkish-Armenian ‘Roadmap’

Football fans at Yerevan’s Hrazdan stadium pictured during the Armenia-Turkey match on September 6, 2008.

24.04.2009

Emil Danielyan, Tatevik Lazarian

Armenia’s leadership remained tight-lipped on Friday about details of a potentially ground-breaking agreement with Turkey despite growing pressure from the domestic opposition concerned about its possible implications.

The Armenian government stopped short of explicitly denying the purported specifics of the “roadmap” for the normalization of Turkish-Armenian relations that were reported by Turkish newspapers.

According to the “Sabah” daily, Armenia will formally recognize its existing border with Turkey and agree to the formation of a joint commission of historians tasked with studying the mass killings of Armenians in the Ottoman Empire. It said historians from other countries could also join the commission. Turkey will in return gradually establish full diplomatic relations with Armenia and reopen the Turkish-Armenian frontier closed it 1993, reported “Sabah.”

Another paper, “Hurriyet,” claimed that the lifting of the Turkish blockade will be contingent on a breakthrough in the Nagorno-Karabakh peace process. “It would be up to Turkey to decide whether to open the gate,” it wrote on Friday.

Commenting on the “Sabah” report, Armenian Foreign Ministry spokesman Tigran Balayan said: “One should trust information about such serious issues only if it comes from official sources.” He did not elaborate.

Armenia’s two main opposition forces demanded, meanwhile, the immediate disclosure of the “roadmap” which the two countries’ foreign ministries announced in a joint statement on Wednesday night. The statement said Ankara and Yerevan have agreed on a “comprehensive framework for the normalization of their bilateral relations” but did not give any details.

“The Armenian authorities do not have the public mandate to make such statements and have in effect put Armenian national interests at risk by abusing the principle of confidentiality [of the talks,]” the opposition Zharangutyun (Heritage) said in a statement. It condemned the fact that the agreement was announced on the eve of the annual commemoration of the Armenian genocide.

A similar statement was issued by the larger Armenian National Congress (HAK). “We demand that the authorities immediately disclose that document,” Levon Zurabian, a top HAK representative, told RFE/RL on Friday.

“I am concerned that this statement could stop more countries recognizing the genocide,” said Stepan Demirchian, another HAK leader. “We support the normalization of Turkish-Armenian relations but not at the expense of our national dignity.”

The HAK and its top leader, former President Levon Ter-Petrosian, are strongly opposed to the idea of Turkish and Armenian scholars jointly determining whether the 1915-1918 mass killings constituted a genocide. “If there is such a thing in that document, it is unacceptable to us,” said Zurabian.

That Yerevan agreed to the establishment of a Turkish-Armenian body dealing with historic disputes was seemingly admitted by President Serzh Sarkisian in an interview with “The Wall Street Journal” earlier this week. “You are asking what questions can be addressed by that historical sub-commission,” he said. “I can give you one example. The historic Armenian monuments in the Ottoman Empire and today. There are thousands of such monuments. I am sure that Turkey would have many questions to raise with us.”

When asked whether that can include the genocide issue, Sarkisian replied: “We cannot prohibit Turkey from raising any issue in any of the sub-commissions, just as they cannot limit us in raising any issue.”

The Armenian leader also hit out at Turkish Prime Minister Recep for repeatedly stating this month that Ankara will not normalize ties with Yerevan before a solution is found to the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. “I think already now the motivation of Turkey has decreased, because as you said Prime Minister Erdogan is now offering preconditions,” he said, speaking two days before the announcement of the “roadmap.”

Sarkisian further made clear that he will not visit Turkey this October for the return match of the two countries’ national soccer teams if the Turkish-Armenian border is not reopened or about to be reopened by then. “I was not supposed to travel to Turkey as a simple tourist or as a football fan,” he said.

The prospect of a breakthrough in Turkish-Armenian relations prompted renewed concerns from Azerbaijan, which maintains that their unconditional normalization would deal a heavy blow to its positions in the Karabakh conflict. Turkish President Abdullah Gul phoned his Azerbaijani counterpart Ilham Aliev late Thursday in a bid to address those concerns.

“There is no misunderstanding in our relations,” Gul told journalists on Friday. “We are in agreement that everything that is being done is of advantage to both our countries, Azerbaijan and Turkey,” he said, according to news agencies.

Erdogan, for his part, appeared to downplay the significance of the Turkish-Armenian understandings. “We will not take any steps that will hurt our [Azeri] brothers,” “Hurriyet Daily News” quoted him as saying. “There is nothing that is signed but a finalized protocol.”

https://www.azatutyun.am/a/1615483.html

April 24, 2009
Opening of Armenia-Turkish border weakening Russian influence

By Messenger Staff

Thursday, April 23

Alexander Skakov from the Russian Institute of Strategic Research thinks that opening the Turkish and Armenian border will hamper Russian attempts to bring Armenia under its influence.

Today Armenia is under the Russian sphere of influence because it is confronting Azerbaijan and Turkey. Its connection to the rest of the world through Georgia is partly blocked and therefore the basis of its communications is Iran.

The Americans think they can offer Armenia better options and thus attract it into the US sphere of interest. Skakov says that if Armenia receives direct access to the Turkish coast, Black Sea and Mediterranean it will engage in more direct trade with the West, bypassing Russia. The West will also guarantee Armenia’s sovereignty. Skakov thinks that after opening the border with Turkey Armenia will become less dependent on Russia and more on NATO and the EU.

Source: www.messenger.com.ge, 23 April 2009

April 24, 2009
Turkish army chief welcomes Azeri defense minister

Defense Minister Abiyev of Azerbaijan met with Turkish Chief of General Staff Basbug in Ankara.

Defense Minister Col. Gen. Safar Abiyev of Azerbaijan met with Turkish Chief of General Staff Gen. Ilker Basbug in Ankara on Friday.

Abiyev, who is currently paying an official visit to Ankara, will be received by Parliament Speaker Koksal Toptan and Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan later in the day.

AA

Source: www.worldbulletin.net, 24 April 2009

April 24, 2009