The article “Turkish-Armenian Protocols: Ant hope left?” by Guner Ozkan published in Turkish Hurriyet daily.
“Since the very beginning of its announcement at the end of August 2009, the reconciliation protocols between Turkey and Armenia have caused an unending fury among many Armenians and Turks. Some Armenians, like the Armenian diaspora and ultranationalist political parties, described them as betrayal for the &‘Armenian cause.’ In Turkey, main opposition political parties and experts spreading similar line of words saw the protocols as one of the worst foreign policy initiatives that Turkey has initiated in recent time. Neither were the external views and policies helpful enough to realize the protocols. They all have overtly or covertly promoted their own interests in the reconciliation process between Ankara and Yerevan. No party seems to be retreat from what they have seen fit for their own interests. Then, what hope, if any, left for the protocols now?” the daily says.
“The cloudy atmosphere was telling all in the evening of the Oct. 10, 2009, when the Turkish-Armenian protocols were signed. Nalbandian was so sullen with what he was signing that his dislike was almost written on his face. He was said to be against about what Davutoglu had to utter about the resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh (NK) dispute in his speech following the signing ceremony. So the compromise with the push of Lavrov was reached between Nalbandian and Davutoglu, no speech was made but just handshakes,” the source reports.
“It was as if the Protocols were signed for the sake of the presence of high level international dignitaries-Clinton, Lavrov, Kouchner and so on, but not for the true conscious of the parties to make it real on the ground. This gloomy disposition of the sides towards the Protocols have never disappeared no matter how many times foreign ministers, prime minister or the presidents between Turkey and Armenia have met in various occasions since last October. Respective domestic and international initiatives and developments have fed the hazy atmosphere on the Protocols in a way that legalization and then application of them have left to miracle. But, as everyone knows well, there is no room for miracle in international relations able to shape inter-state relations,” the daily reads.
“The protocols on paper aimed at initiating relationship between Turkey and Armenia by establishing diplomatic relationships and opening the long-closed borders between the two countries. Beyond that, however, the main sprit behind starting political and economic rapprochement was to remove the emotional burdens over Turkey’s and Armenia’s shoulders caused by the so-called Armenian genocide in 1915 and the Nagorno-Karabakh dispute between Azerbaijan and Armenia,” the daily informs.
“However, there was no consensus between Turkish and Armenian governments on how to address these problems in the Protocols. The way one party understands the problems in the Protocols has occurred to be totally conflicted with that of the other side’s. The Protocols did not make any specific references about what really the &‘History Commission’ would discuss- whether or how the so called Armenian genocide crime was committed. Nor did the Protocols include any words on the Nagorno-Karabakh issue, apart from the joint wish that they would respect international law and work for the establishment of peace and stability in the region. Turkey relying on these did insist that there must be a parallel reconciliation on the Nagorno-Karabakh problem while it was getting ready to opening its border with Armenia. Yerevan interpreted this Turkish position as a precondition and so found unacceptable,” the source says.
“It is true that both sides have still kept the Protocols on the agendas of their respective parliaments and refrained from abandoning them totally. Rather, they have frozen the ratification processes of the documents until an unknown moment in which they felt ready to re-start all over again. But there seems to be no hope in an immediate future that they can unfreeze the Protocols so long as they continue displaying a zero-some-game behavior,” the daily reads.
“Turkey has been adamant on the Armenian withdrawal of some occupied Azerbaijani territories. Any deviation from this policy as shown during the discussions of the protocols would harm Ankara-Baku relationship and seriously disrupt Turkey’s long effort to deepen its political, economic and cultural links with Central Asian states. Nowadays having been more aware of this fact, the Turkish government seems to have increased its call for the resolution of the NK issue in return for legalization of the protocols in the Turkish parliament. As the general election in mid-2011 is nearing, it is highly unlikely that the Turkish government will put the protocols on the agenda of the Parliament if there is not an unexpected breakthrough on the Nagorno-Karabakh issue between Azerbaijan and Armenia during their bilateral talks or within the framework of the Minsk Group,” the source reports.
“Armenian government has on the other hand tied its hands so tight that it has not only left no room for its own maneuver but also provoked Turkey to take a hasher stance on the legalization of the Protocols. Though it could easily leave the so called Armenia genocide issue to the Armenian Diaspora, Sargsyan did choose to be part of their argument by taking the Protocols to the Constitutional Court. It ruled out any effort to make the Nagorno-Karabakh issue on the part of the interpretation and application of the protocols. It further decided that the protocols could no form or shape contradict Armenian state’s official policy of, and long struggle for, the international recognition of the so called Armenian genocide by international community,” the author stresses.
“Sargsyan’s announcement of halting the protocols in the Parliament on April 22 is not coincidence just two days before the U.S. president delivered his annual speech on the Armenian issue. Sargsyan blaming Turkey on their decision aimed to send a message to Obama that he should not hesitate to use word &‘genocide’ for the sake of a frozen, if not yet dead, reconciliation document. Thus the timing of, and reasoning for, Armenia’s halt of the protocols suggests strongly that Armenian government is and still will act the same way as the Armenian diaspora has long been acting and wishing for. Then this means that, in short and medium terms, the Armenian government will likely make no compromise at all on what job the history commission in the protocols is going to do,” the source emphasizes.
“It is true that there still exists a document called the protocols between the two sides, and they have not withdrawn from their parliaments. For developments have shown for last seven months, these protocols can no longer be counted as the documents that both parties agreed on, but rather something over which they bitterly contravened. From this moment on, if they ever come to a point where they start talking about how to utilize terms of the protocols is a question that its answer will be very much provided by the level of will that respectively Turkish and Armenian governments are able to raise in their discussions and/or negotiations with Azerbaijan over the Nagorno-Karabakh issue and Armenian diaspora over the so-called Armenian genocide,” the author concludes.