NYTimes.com
Letter From Europe
Stakes High in Armenia-Turkey Talks
By JUDY DEMPSEY
Published: April 29, 2009
BERLIN For several months, the leaders of Turkey and Armenia have defied the nationalists of both countries by holding secret talks in Switzerland in a bid to end a conflict in a highly volatile region on the fringes of Europe.
Nearly a century after the Ottoman Empires massacre of about one million Armenian Christians in 1915, Turkeys president, Abdullah Gul, and his Armenian counterpart, Serzh Sargsyan, have reached a breakthrough in their immensely delicate negotiations.
Last week, they agreed to a road map that could lead to the resumption of diplomatic relations and the reopening of the borders. If the agreement succeeds, it will have huge significance for the region. The southern Caucasus could finally become stable and attractive for investors, said Suat Kiniklioglu, a Turkish legislator and spokesman for the Parliaments Foreign Affairs Committee.
If so, the powers that will dominate in the region will be neither the United States nor the E.U., which have done little to encourage this peace process.
Instead, it will be Turkey and Russia two former empires that are attempting to re-establish their influence in a region rich in gas and oil and an important transit route to Europe.
The biggest winner could be Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the Turkish prime minister and leader of the pro-Islamist Justice and Development Party. Since coming to power in 2003, Mr. Erdogan has forged ahead with reforms designed to prepare Turkey for E.U. membership.
He has radically curtailed the influence of the military, which had hindered reforms, fearing it would lose its political role. The generals supported a vigorous pro-United States foreign policy at the expense of relations with their neighbors. That undervalued Turkeys strategic role in a region sandwiched between Europe and Central Asia.
Mr. Erdogan changed all that. He devised a Neighborhood Policy in which Turkeys national interests would increasingly be defined by its relations with its neighbors Bulgaria and Syria, Azerbaijan and Georgia, Iraq and Iran. And Armenia, the thorniest of all.
The decision to seek normalization with Armenia is a Turkish initiative, said Richard Giragosian, director of the Armenian Center for National and International Studies, based in Yerevan. It is not a plan to please the U.S. or appease the E.U. It is about Turkeys national interests.
The United States has long called for the resumption of ties between Turkey and Armenia. But successive U.S. presidents have come under pressure from the powerful Armenian diaspora and nationalists who insisted Turkey first recognize that the 1915 massacre of Armenians was a genocide before restoring ties.
But under the influence of the army, successive Turkish governments have made it a focal point of national pride not to admit to genocide, even making it a crime to speak of the Armenian massacre as such. Mr. Erdogan already had to take a very big step to agree to establish a special historical commission with Armenia so that this issue will not derail the diplomatic efforts.
The E.U. has played no constructive role as Turkeys accession talks with Brussels have become bogged down in recriminations. France and Germany are staunchly opposed to Turkey joining the E.U. despite Turkeys strategic role in this part of Europe, and its reforms. As a result, The E.U. is less and less popular here, which is very frustrating for a leadership that is serious about reforms, said Suat Kiniklioglu, a Turkish legislator and spokesman for the Parliaments Foreign Affairs Committee.
So with the United States and the E.U. relegated to the sidelines, Mr. Erdogan has embarked on a strategy that reflects Turkeys national interests but one that carries risks.
Domestically, Mr. Erdogan has to deal with fiery nationalists and a dangerously disgruntled military, which oppose a rapprochement with Armenia.
In the region, Turkey could spoil its relations with Azerbaijan, a country linguistically and economically close to Turkey and rich in oil and gas.
Turkey supported Azerbaijan during the 1992 war in Nagorno-Karabakh an ethnic Armenian enclave within Azerbaijan. Since a cease-fire agreement in 1994, ethnic Armenian forces have occupied at least one-eighth of Azerbaijan while Turkey has sealed its borders with Armenia, making Armenia dependent on Russia for its economic survival.
With Turkeys shift in foreign policy, Azerbaijan is becoming nervous. It fears that Turkey and Armenia would normalize relations without resolving the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.
There is now a great opportunity to link the normalization of relations between Turkey and Armenia to ending the conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh, said Leila Alieva, director of the National Committee on Azerbaijans Integration in Europe. If there is no linkage, the momentum could be lost, and it could change the direction of Azerbaijans foreign policy. Indeed, if Azerbaijan felt betrayed by the Turkish-Armenian rapprochement, it could turn to Russia, said Ms. Alieva.
Russia, which during the Nagorno-Karabakh war had supported Armenia and even now controls Armenias telecommunications, energy and rail networks, has already moved to set itself up as a peacemaker. With Turkeys support, it has begun to negotiate a pullout of Armenian forces from occupied territories of Azerbaijan that could allow the return of Azeri refugees.
The rewards are big. Azerbaijan would regain control of most of its territory and Russia would be in a stronger position to seek an energy deal with Azerbaijan even though Azerbaijan is negotiating with the E.U. to supply gas to Europes Nabucco pipeline. Russia too could become the guarantor of any peace agreement by sending Russian peacekeeping troops to Karabakh, bolstering its influence in the region.
Finally, a normalization of relations between Armenia and Turkey would also weaken Georgia, which Russia invaded last August. Once the borders are reopened, Armenia could become a new transit route for energy and other goods, thus marginalizing Georgia, which is Russias aim, according to Richard Giragosian.
For the United States and Europe, the result of this entire process could be ambiguous. The volatile southern Caucasus, a breeding ground for corruption, drug and human trafficking and miserable governance, could become much more peaceful and prosperous.
But unless Europe and the United States embrace the big changes taking place in Turkey, they could lose much influence, as Turkey and Russia, the new regional superpowers, return to their historic spheres of influence.
|