Category: Southern Caucasus

PROTOCOLS… BUT AT WHAT COST?

The TRT interview with Sedat Laciner, the Director of International Strategic Research Organization, “Turkey Made The World Remember Karabakh Conflict” published in www.HistoryofTruth.com on 30 September 2009, concerning the protocols that will allegedly be signed on October 10 by Turkey and Armenia, is replete with perceptions and/or predictions that I find hard to accept or support . I decided to share with my readers my responses to that interview on a line-by-line basis.

…

TRT: Why Switzerland?

LACINER: First of all, it is hard to find countries that do not support Armenian allegations.

(EK: There are no countries in the entire continents of Asia or Africa which support Armenian allegations. There are only three countries in Latin America and only two in North America which support Armenian allegations (all because of the Armenian political pressure.) Out of 55 or so countries in Europe, small or large, only 15 support Armenian allegations(also because of the Armenian political intimidation.) In summary, out of some 204 countries which are members of the U.N., only about 20 countries support Armenian allegations—i.e. less than 10 percent. Therefore, to say “it is hard to find countries that do not support Armenian allegations” is incorrect, unfair, and if not based on ignorance or sloppiness, may be even considered malicious. )

LACINER: … Of course it would be better if it would be an objective country like England,

(EK: England? Objective? Really? England is the one party that is most responsible for the continuation of the genocide allegations today which are based on the Blue Book, wartime propaganda material compiled and edited by Toynbee and Bryce. The Turkish parliament in 2005 sent a joint letter/request to the House of Commons and Lords to take back the hearsay and forgeries contained in that book and apologize to Turkey for causing immeasurable suffering by deliberately spreading falsified information. England was at the heart of using Ottoman-Armenians against the Ottoman Empire before, during, and after the WWI. To call England objective would be to ignore history.)

LACINER: …but the mission of mediation is an important factor here. Switzerland was not very ambitious for mediation.

(EK: It is unacceptable, if not also embarrassing, to have to go to Switzerland, hat in hand, and asking for their mediation. Switzerland has passed a law banning questioning a certain characterization of a historic event without the court verdict supporting such ban. Thus, the Swiss have chosen to be a party to the conflict. Who are these Turkish negotiators who ignorantly brought Switzerland into this conflict, much less begged for their mediation? Don’t they have any idea what happened in 1920 in a small town called Sevres just a few kilometers from where they are? Did they forget about spirit of Lausanne 1923? )

LACINER: … On the other hand, it could be an advantage for Turkey that Switzerland previously gave support to the Armenian allegations.

(EK: How can Switzerland’s blatantly pro-Armenian beliefs and policies be an advantage? How can any logical and informed person believe such a naïve suggestion?)

LACINER: … Turkey can make itself understood better and same time it can strengthen its thesis.

(EK: Turkey needs Switzerland to be understood? Or strengthen its thesis? Is it not strong enough now? How can it be stronger by talking to the Swiss? )

TRT: What is the position of Azerbaijan?

LACINER: Turkey is already making all steps with Azerbaijan. Karabakh problem is as important as the issue of so called Armenian genocide for Turkey. Turkey already declared this and Prime Minister several times underlined that fact. In the process, if we count Switzerland, Azerbaijan is like a fourth party. Besides, Turkey and Azerbaijan constantly share information about the processes. Azerbaijan is being informed about developments, other than that Turkey took the approval of Azerbaijan about this issue. Azerbaijan is aware of Turkey’s good will and they trust Turkey.

(EK: Is that why Aliyev hastily went to Russia last May to promise Nabucco-earmarked gas to Russian gas pipeline as soon as news of Turkey-Armenia border opening hit the Turkish media? Because Azerbaijan trusts Turkey? )

LACINER: … The World was unaware of the occupation in Karabakh till now. The land that Armenia keeps under occupation is more than the land that Israel invaded. Turkey made the world realize the occupation in Nagorno-Karabakh.

TRT: What will be the gains of Turkey?

LACINER: Success of protocols is dependent on the process of resolution of Nagorno-Karabakh problem, and that is told to Obama, Russia and France. The next meeting towards resolution of Nagorno-Karabakh conflict will be in a much more serious mood.

(EK: We will see soon enough, won’t we? Too much is bet on too few “perceived” gains that are questionable and doubtful. )

LACINER: … First of all, this process (alone) is the gain of Turkey by itself.

(EK: Says who?)

LACINER: … In the opinion of international community, Turkey had an image like Turkey was smothering Armenia and not letting it develop. By this process Turkey proved that it is not aggressive.

(EK: Not a convincing argument. Even if it were true, does the dubious outcome justify the high cost?)

LACINER: … If protocols can be realized Turkey will gain many more advantages. A committee of historians is planned to be established. Such a committee may undermine the genocide allegations of Armenian Diaspora.

Although there are rumours about borders, recognition of borders clearly mentioned in protocols.
Although Armenia does not recognize treaty of Kars now, they will be recognizing it through protocols.
Dashnaks are very uncomfortable that ratifying protocols will mean that Armenia recognizes Turkey’s territorial integrity.

(EK: As you read these lines, Armenia’s constitution still refers to eastern Anatolia as Western Armenia. Armenia’s politicians and Diaspora make no secret of the fact that they want land and reparations fro Turkey. So, what exactly does it mean to say “recognition of borders clearly mentioned in protocols”? At the first opportunity, cannot Armenia easily say “Yes, Turks put that statement in the protocol, but we never agreed to it”? Then what?

LACINER: … What will be the gains of Turkey? We can count three of them. First is recognition of borders,

(EK: Let’s not count the eggs before the chickens lay them. We don’t even have chickens yet…)

LACINER: … second is about genocide allegations, and third is Nagorno-Karabakh problem.

(EK: Protocol before resolution in Karabagh or resolution in Karabagh before protocol? That is the question. It should have been the latter. Now a resolution in Karabagh will be harder. Why would Armenia feel motivated to end its military occupation and allow Azeri refugees to return now that Armenia got what it wanted?)

LACINER: … Normalization of relations would be the fourth gaining for Turkey.

TRT: What kind of developments are expected to happen in Armenia and Caucasus?

LACINER: … Opening of borders will affect Russia.

(EK: After the Georgian war, Russia was trapped in Armenia. Turkey, through its ill-advised protocols with Armenia, not only saved Armenia but also Russia-in-Armenia.)

LACINER: … But the main problem might be the situation of Georgia. Since Armenia and Azerbaijan use Georgia as a route for transportation, the influence of Georgia will decrease. On the other hand, Azerbaijan will have another gate to World and it will be relaxing for Azerbaijan. But we should not be expecting results so soon. Moving in hurry may cause conflicts in Nagorno-Karabakh.

(EK: Diplomacy and international relations are a balancing act of interests, not unlike a trade. The Turkish term describes it bets: “alis-veris” taking-and-giving. What these protocols represent fro Turkey is “veris-veris”, giving-and-giving.)

What if we lose Azerbaijan’s friendship and support because of a murky dealing with Armenia? Who will fill the Baku-Tiflis-Ceyhan pipeline with oil?

Nothing would make me happier that to be proven wrong on all of the above. But I don’t hold out any hope that the upcoming developments will prove me wrong anytime soon…

October 1, 2009
U.S. Expects Quick Results From Turkish-Armenian Talks

Armenia — Foreign Minister Eduard Nalbandian meets U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in New York.

29.09.2009

Emil Danielyan

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton pressed Armenia and Turkey to complete the normalization of bilateral relations within a “reasonable” period of time as she met with the two countries’ foreign ministers late on Monday.

The Turkish-Armenian dialogue was a key focus of her separate talks with Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu and Armenia’s Eduard Nalbandian held on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly in New York.

Clinton praised both governments for their “strong commitment” to pushing forward the process hailed by the international community and United States in particular. “I want to reiterate our very strong support for the normalization process that is going on between Armenia and Turkey, which we have long said should take place without preconditions and within a reasonable timeframe,” she said after meeting Nalbandian.

U.S. — Secretary of State Hillary Clinton (L) meets with Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu (R) during a bilateral meeting in New York, 28Sep2009

Clinton later delivered a similar message to Davutoglu, according to U.S. officials cited by Western news agencies. “When we say reasonable ‘time frame,’ we mean just that, that it’s not just the process that we want to see,” U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Philip Gordon was reported to tell journalists. “We welcome the process, but we also want to see a conclusion to the process and that’s what we’re underscoring when we say that.”

The U.S. officials’ message should have been heartening for official Yerevan which has long complained about Turkish linkage between the normalization of Turkish-Armenian ties and a resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict acceptable to Azerbaijan. Armenian leaders fear that Ankara could still avoid implementing two fence-mending agreements with Yerevan if international efforts to settle the dispute yield no breakthrough in the coming months.

The agreements, which envisage the establishment of diplomatic relations and the reopening of the Turkish-Armenian border, are due to be signed by October 14. The documents need to be ratified by the parliaments of both countries before they can take effect.

According to the Armenian Foreign Ministry, Nalbandian thanked Clinton for Washington’s strong support for the ongoing Turkish-Armenian rapprochement that began shortly after President Serzh Sarkisian took office in April 2008. Clinton underscored that support when she telephoned Sarkisian to discuss the process on September 19. It was their second phone conversation in a month.

In Gordon’s words, Washington hopes that Sarkisian will accept Turkish President Abdullah Gul’s invitation to watch with him the return match of the two countries’ national football teams that will be played in the Turkish city of Bursa on October 14. “We think it would be a good thing if he attended it, reciprocating the attendance of the Turkish president of the match when it was in Armenia,” the diplomat said.

“This is a difficult process that faces some political opposition in both places and it’s hard for both governments,” added Gordon. “It shouldn’t wait for other things to get done, or be linked to other things. It should go ahead.”

Nalbandian sounded cautiously optimistic on that score in his speech at the General Assembly earlier on Friday. “The process of the normalization of the Armenian-Turkish relations … promises to bear fruit despite all difficulties,” he said.

https://www.azatutyun.am/a/1839147.html

September 29, 2009
Opening of Turkish-Armenian borders now contradicts Azerbaijan’s national interests: FM

Azerbaijani Foreign Minister Elmar Mammadyarov spoke with Trend News in an exclusive interview.

Trend News: How do you assess your visit to the U.S.? With whom were the meetings held, and what the main issues were discussed?

Elmar Mammadyarov: The UN General Assembly, which is in the focus of the world community and international organizations, provides good opportunities for the various meetings and discussions of bilateral relations. As part of my current visit to New York, besides the events as part of the UN General Assembly, I met with representatives of the United States, Austria, Israel, Lebanon, Turkey, Portugal, Estonia, Kazakhstan, Slovenia, Cuba, Switzerland, the European Commission, Organization of Islamic Conference (OIC), and also took part in events by several organizations such as GUAM, BSEC and the OIC. At the meetings, I discussed the current bilateral relations with these countries, as well as prospects of cooperation.

During the visit, I had an opportunity to meet with Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, and twice with Foreign Minister of this country Ahmet Davutoglu. The meetings focused on the bilateral relations between the two countries in all fields, including the resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.

Q: You were scheduled to meet with representatives of the OSCE Minsk Group so that to organize a meeting between the presidents of Azerbaijan and Armenia in Chisinau. How do you assess this meeting?

A: Right, I met with the representatives of the OSCE Minsk Group to discuss the current state of the Armenian-Azerbaijani Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, as well as to prepare the forthcoming meeting between the Presidents of Azerbaijan and Armenia.

Q: In an interview with Vesti TV channel, Armenian President Serzh Sargsyan said that the refugees from Nagorno-Karabakh have a full legal right to return to their homes, but only after determining the status of Nagorno-Karabakh. Azerbaijan takes the opposite position – definition of the status of Nagorno-Karabakh is possible only after the repatriation of the refugees and internally displaced persons.

A: We have repeatedly expressed our stance on the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. Armenian troops must withdraw from the occupied lands of Azerbaijan. It is necessary to create favorable conditions for repatriation of internally displaced persons to the lands liberated from the occupation, including to Nagorno-Karabakh, as well as to restore communications. Only after this, the issue of status can be considered.

Q: The new U.S. administration has made some changes to regional policy in the South Caucasus and the Middle East. In which manner could it impact strategic relations between Azerbaijan and the United States, as well as the resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict?

A: As part of my visit to New York, I met with U.S. Secretary of State. This was the second meeting with Hillary Clinton this year. Friendly and constructive talks focused on the Azerbaijan-U.S. relations in all directions, and the strategic partnership between the two countries was welcomed.

The resolution of the Armenian-Azerbaijani Nagorno-Karabakh conflict has become one of key issues of the discussions. Mrs. Clinton re-emphasized the inadmissibility of preserving the status quo in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, noting the importance of resolving this conflict to ensure peace and security throughout the region and reaffirmed the U.S. commitment to the speedy settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.

Q: The world’s leading countries, especially the OSCE Minsk Group co-chairing countries, are showing great interest in the reopening of the Armenian-Turkish border. What do you think, how can opening of the border impact resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict?

A: We have an unambiguous attitude on this issue. Turkey closed its border with Armenia in 1993 after the occupation of Kalbajar by Armenian troops. The Azerbaijani lands have not been liberated so far. Opening of the border under such circumstances is contrary to the national interests of Azerbaijan. The senior Turkish officials have repeatedly made clear that these two issues are inter-related and the border with Armenia will not open until the liberation of the occupied territories of Azerbaijan.

Q: The U.S. co-chair of the OSCE Minsk Group has been replaced. Can one expect any new initiatives by Robert Bradtke?

A: As I have already noted, in New York I met with the OSCE Minsk Group co-chairs. At this meeting, I met with the American Co-Chair, Robert Bradtke. He also took part in my meeting with U.S. Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton.

As I said, at the meeting, the Secretary of State reaffirmed the U.S. commitment to the speedy resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, and noted the inadmissibility of preserving the status quo and the importance of the conflict resolution for peace and stability throughout the region. I believe that Bradtke’s diplomatic experience will contribute to the resolution of the conflict.

Q: During your speech at Columbia University, you spoke about the significance and an important role that Azerbaijan has in the region, as well as the U.S.-Azerbaijan strategic relations. How do you assess the current state of relations between the two countries?

A: There is a strategic partnership between Azerbaijan and the U.S. The U.S.-Azerbaijan cooperation, covering many fields, successfully developed both bilaterally and multilaterally.
Q: Does Azerbaijan have a target to join NATO? If not, why is the defense system being created in accordance with the standards of the alliance?

As the country which shares the European and Euro-Atlantic values, Azerbaijan has become one of the first states joining the NATO Partnership for Peace Program. Currently, we are developing cooperation with NATO through the Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council.

Cooperation with this organization is also continuing under the Individual Partnership Action Plan. This cooperation has contributed greatly to raising the level of training of the Azerbaijani Armed Forces, law enforcement, border guards, the agencies, involved in preventing and eliminating consequences of emergency situations.

http://www.today.az/news/politics/56003.html

September 29, 2009
Turkish-Armenian Diplomatic Ties In The Offing?

A Turkish boy walks along railroad tracks disused since the closure of the Turkish-Armenian border. The new agreement foresees the border reopening.

September 29, 2009

By Antoine Blua

Turkey and Armenia won international applause on August 31, when they agreed on diplomatic protocols aimed at establishing diplomatic ties and reopening their border after almost a century of hostility.

Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan on September 27 said the two countries’ foreign ministers — Armenia’s Eduard Nalbandian and Ahmet Davutoglu of Turkey — will sign the protocols on October 10 in Switzerland.

Richard Giragosian, director of the Armenian Center for National and International Studies, a Yerevan-based think tank, tells RFE/RL there is reason to believe the agreement will proceed as planned.

“We’ve seen a wave of protests and some demonstrations in the Armenian capital, but we’ve also seen some opposition within Turkey itself,” Giragosian said. “The interesting thing is [that] in many ways, the opposition to the normalization has actually been less than expected by many — including by the governments of both sides — which gives ground to some optimism that the protocols will in fact be signed.”

That prospect is being seen by many as an opportunity that could help end hostilities stemming from the World War I mass killings of Armenians by Ottoman Turks.

But even if the protocols were signed, the parliaments of both Armenia and Turkey would have to ratify them before they could take effect. That stands as a significant hurdle, considering the intense positions that have prevented a normalization of relations between the two states.

A main issue of dispute is that Yerevan wants the massacre by Ottoman Turks recognized as genocide, which Turkey strongly rejects.

Armenia scholars say 1.5 million Armenians died at the hands of the Ottoman Turks from 1915-23 in a campaign aimed at eliminating the Armenian population in the Ottoman Empire.

Ankara says that up to 600,000 Armenians died during World War I and during deportations out of eastern Anatolia. But it says the deaths were in the context of an Armenian uprising, as Armenians sided with invading Russian troops at the time.

Regional Disputes

Turkey recognized the state of Armenia after its independence in 1991, but failed to establish formal diplomatic relations.

In 1993, Turkey closed its border with its neighbor in solidarity with its Turkic ally Azerbaijan over Yerevan’s support to ethnic Armenians living in Nagorno-Karabakh.

The enclave falls within Azerbaijan’s borders, but has been controlled by ethnic Armenians since they won a three-year war against Azerbaijan in 1994.

Eduard Sharmazanov, a spokesman for the ruling Republican Party of Armenia, told RFE/RL’s Armenian Service that deputies will start debating the protocols on October 1.

“This is a very complicated process,” Sharmazanov said. “It will show whether we take the right way or the wrong one. I think we are going the right way. And after that, we’ll start the process of ratification. I don’t expect it to be done at once.”

Armenian critics to the deal, including the Zharangutyun (Heritage) and Dashnaktsutyun (Armenian Revolutionary Federation) opposition parties, say it would mean the recognition of the two countries’ borders and includes elements that call into question Yerevan’s stance on the genocide issue.

But analyst Giragosian says a difficult passage “or even much of a debate” is not expected at the Armenian parliament, given the overwhelming majority of pro-government deputies.

The real challenge, others suggest, might come from Turkey, where the government faces accusations of making concessions that damage the country’s interests and of selling out Azerbaijan.

“The protocol establishing diplomatic relations has a higher chance of being endorsed by the parliament,” said Barcin Yinanc, a commentator for the “Turkish Daily News.” “But as for the protocol that foresees the opening of the border, I think that the chances are very dim, unless there is improvement toward a solution to Nagorno-Karabakh.”

On September 26, Azerbaijan’s officials news agencies quoted the chairman of the Turkish parliament, Mehmet Ali Shahin, as saying the accords on normalizing ties with Armenia will not be ratified as long as the Armenia-Azerbaijan dispute remains unresolved. He reportedly made the comment during talks with President Ilham Aliyev in Baku.

Giragosian says both the Armenian and Turkish government have done “far too little” to prepare their societies to for a normalization of relation. And in the case of Armenia, he says, there may be a backlash.

“Opening borders, establishing diplomatic relations between Armenia and Turkey is pretty much a shared goal of a large majority of the population of Armenia,” Giragosian said. “The problem is the process of this diplomatic negotiation. There’s overwhelming secrecy, there’s a lack of information that is encouraging only disinformation. And there is also a disconnection or disengagement where the ordinary Armenian citizen and even civil society feel unengaged in this process.”

Armenia’s President Serzh Sarkisian embarks on a world tour October 1 that will take him to France, Lebanon, Russia, and the United States to explain the benefits of the accord to the Armenian diaspora.

RFE/RL’s Armenian and Azeri Services contributed to this report.

https://www.rferl.org/a/Turkish_Armenian_Diplomatic_Ties_In_The_Offing/1839395.html

September 29, 2009
Turkey will never betray Azerbaijan: Turkish PM

Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan spoke with Trend News in an exclusive interview.

Trend News: According to the western media reports, Turkey is getting prepared to rebuild diplomatic ties and open borders with Armenia. There is an opinion that if this happens, an important for Baku factor in negotiations over Nagorno-Karabakh conflict will disappear. Does Turkey take this into consideration?

Recep Tayyip Erdogan: Azerbaijan’s interests are always important for Turkey. We will never betray Azerbaijan. As a head of Turkish government I would like to speak particularly on one issue. In order to rebuild relations with Armenia we expressed our will. The normalization talks between Turkey and Armenia have entered a sensitive phase. The protocols guiding the establishment and development of relations between our countries will be sent to the Turkish Parliament next month for ratification.

We have reached an important stage with the step we have taken with Switzerland’s mediation and I believe we can send the initialed document to Parliament if we do not face any prejudice and if steps are not taken by thinking just about the internal politics.

But especially I would like to explain that: Our efforts are not against our brother Azerbaijan. We will not agree on anything what is against the interest of Azerbaijan. We can approach the agreement but it definitely depends on the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict settlement.

Q: Media reports claim Turkey and Armenia will sign a landmark deal to establish diplomatic ties on October 10. Can you confirm that?

A: The foreign ministers will come together on October 10, or October 11 and sign the draft document. Foreign ministers Ahmet Davutoglu and Eduard Nalbandian will ink two protocols, the texts of which had been agreed earlier and internationally hailed as a major breakthrough.

Q: You met on Friday with US President Barack Obama, on the sidelines of the G 20 summit in Pittsburgh. According to some reports Nagorno-Karabakh was discussed at this meeting. Can you give any more details on that meeting?

A: We discussed problems in the Middle East and Turkey, as well as relations among Turkey, Azerbaijan and Armenia, with Mr. Obama stressing the importance of improved our ties for the region as a whole. I think it would be easier if the OSCE’s Minsk Group – tasked to find a solution to the dispute between Armenia and Azerbaijan over the enclave of Nagorno-Karabakh – took more active measures. The time already has come. The United States as the co-chair of MG must follow its duties. This problem must be solved. I told Mr. Obama that if it is solved that it will turn on the green lights for regional cooperation, including our relationship with Armenia. There was need for dialogue that would bring together regional countries, referring to Turkey’s proposal of a stability and cooperation platform in the Caucasus. Turkey aimed to make the region a basin of peace and wanted to solve Azerbaijan-Armenia, Turkey-Armenia and Russia-Georgia problems through this platform.

Q: As to regional cooperation, what are your estimations about Nabucco pipeline project, in which Turkey is also participating?
A: We already past part of the way for this project. Recently we signed a contract with a number of European countries. As part of my trip to New York I also met with the president of Turkmenistan. To realize this project all the participants should show particularly efforts.

http://www.today.az/news/politics/55962.html

September 28, 2009

Back to the Future: Armenian-Turkish Relations

We invite you to a public discussion on

Back to the Future
Armenian-Turkish Relations

Wedesday, September 30, at 3.30 pm
Golden Tulip Yerevan Rossini Restaurant

Participants:
Turkish and Armenian public intellectuals

Please confirm your attendance

by calling 500119

Dear Subscriber ,

The Armenia-Turkey protocols are quite understandably at the center of public discussion in Armenia. Not so surprisingly, they are also part of the international discourse, this week with both Turkish and Armenian leaders referring to them at the United Nations General Assembly Debate. Less natural is the fact that this international debate continues to link the Armenia-Turkey border issue to a resolution of the Karabakh conflict, which may, or more likely, may not augur well for the Armenian side, which is at the receiving end of the brunt of the pressure. It was with all this in mind that Civilitas hosted a forum earlier this week during which Mr. Vartan Oskanian, chairman of the board of the Civilitas Foundation, and former foreign minister, rejected the formulation of the protocols and the way in which the process is moving forward.

As you read his speech (in English) or watch the video (in Armenian), you will notice new additions to the Civilitas site. In our determination to broaden the scope of debate on our domestic and foreign, political and economic situation, we offer FACTS FOR THOUGHT — statistics and numbers which say volumes about Armenia and the region — and we invite your comments.

Finally, we invite you to participate, if you are in Yerevan, in the first Civilitas Armenia-Turkey Dialogue public forum, to take place on Wednesday, September 30. We believe this is an appropriate way to conclude the very interesting and successful exhibition of postcards documenting Armenian life in Turkey, 100 years ago. Turkish journalist, editor, publisher Osman Koker has been in Yerevan for two weeks, following the responses to the exhibition, offering tours to students and others wanting more detailed information about the life and traditions these postcards illustrate. A gallery of these postcards will be online soon.

We await your comments.

Salpi H. Ghazarian

Director

The Civilitas Foundation

One Northern Avenue, Suite 30,

Yerevan, Armenia
[email protected]

Tel./Fax: (+374 10) 500 119

September 27, 2009

Category: Southern Caucasus

PROTOCOLS… BUT AT WHAT COST?

U.S. Expects Quick Results From Turkish-Armenian Talks

Opening of Turkish-Armenian borders now contradicts Azerbaijan’s national interests: FM

Turkish-Armenian Diplomatic Ties In The Offing?

Turkey will never betray Azerbaijan: Turkish PM

Back to the Future: Armenian-Turkish Relations