International Herald Tribune, France
Aug 24 2008
The Caucasus moment
By Vartan Oskanian
Published: August 24, 2008
YEREVAN, Armenia:
Although we could see the clouds gathering, the recent Georgia-Russia
confrontation shook us all. No one had allowed themselves to believe
that mixed messages and complicated agendas would come to such a head,
causing so much devastation, loss of life and geopolitical chaos.
The South Ossetia conflict should not be viewed solely through the
larger prism of Georgia-Russia relations. This is an ethnic conflict,
after all, and one of several in the Caucasus. It is a warning to the
international community: If pipeline safety is a concern now, then
imagine the very real dangers that an Azerbaijani-Armenian conflict
over Nagorno Karabakh would create.
Therefore, in order to seriously tackle the more difficult conflicts
throughout this region, the comparatively more straightforward
security and stability issues must be resolved first – and quickly.
Conflicts in the region would be viewed in a wholly different, more
reassuring and tolerant context if there were a binding and strong
security pact that assured non-use of force.
These conflicts are not frozen. In the absence of a security pact,
there is an arms build up that is in itself destabilizing, distorting
national budgets and hampering the normal development of civil
society.
Yet in the Caucasus, our countries and peoples have lived under a
common umbrella far more than we have been divided. Today, we share a
common vision of European integration, a vision that is greater and
more enduring than issues that divide us. It is in the broader context
of European integration that our issues should be resolved.
Although integration with Europe is not controversial, NATO expansion
is. Never in history has a grand coalition formed to defeat a
particular enemy survived after the task was completed. Not after the
Napoleonic wars, not after World War I and not after World War II.
After the West’s Cold War victory, two things happened. NATO tried to
reinvent itself by directing its attention and resources to other
regions and addressing other problems. Containing Russia was not a
declared intention. And NATO created the Euro Atlantic Partnership
Council, which invited all Eastern Bloc and former Soviet republics to
participate.
This was visionary and potentially sustainable. After all, the
Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe and the Council of
Europe extended their efficacy in that way by including the remnants
of the USSR. Not only did they remain relevant and viable, they
contributed immeasurably to our own growth and development.
But NATO also planned to continue and even expand in the same form,
even after its stated goal had long been met. Given the changed
security environment and Russia’s great security sensitivities, this
was, it appears, a strategic mistake.
Georgia’s eagerness to get into NATO is understandable. But the
security benefits to Georgia that NATO membership would bring would be
offset by the creation of a dividing line in the Caucasus, and its
attendant security challenges.
Perhaps this is the Caucasus moment: A historic opportunity, in the
context of a new regional security pact, for Brussels, Washington and
Moscow to meet with Tbilisi, Yerevan and Baku and create a nonaligned
Caucasus, free of security memberships and adversarial alliances. Such
positive, engaged, inclusive neutrality will be possible and
beneficial all around.
This would be in the best interest of this highly combustible
region. A U.S.-Russia confrontation at the Georgia-Russia level will
make life very difficult, not just for us here in Armenia but also for
Azerbaijan and Turkey.
It is in the context of these existential security issues that we must
view the recent Turkish proposal for a Caucasus Stability and
Cooperation Platform.
The idea of such a pact was floated already in 1999. The concept found
favor because there were fresh memories of the use of force in our
region, and the urgency of security arrangements was
evident. Opposition to Russian interests was not yet deep and there
were no tensions through proxies. But even during such a honeymoon,
the idea didn’t become reality.
Today, force has been used again, and perhaps for that reason, the
idea has resurfaced. But today, with the threat of a renewed Cold-War
mentality, divisive lines may be drawn through these mountains and all
regional relations will become unimaginably complicated. That is,
where there still are relations.
Turkey’s proposal is therefore interesting and the urgency is not lost
on anyone. But the concept must be developed right and implemented
well. But we’ve been down this road before in this part of the world,
where good intentions were sidetracked by the very political problems
they were meant to resolve.
The Black Sea Economic Cooperation pact, for example, was created
precisely for the purpose of bringing together those who otherwise
shared no common forum for economic cooperation and the resolution of
problems. But it’s effectiveness has been limited because Turkey
lacked the commitment to use the forum as a way to relate with a
country like Armenia, with whom its borders are closed.
The proposal today, in this new tense environment, must be more
serious and sustained. It must marginalize no one. Security issues are
intertwined, and they ought to be addressed in a stability pact with a
comprehensive, strong security component.
During his visit to Baku last week, Turkish Prime Minister Recep
Tayyip Erdogan discussed the Turkish plan and publicly made reference
to Armenia’s inclusion. It is also a fortuitous coincidence that
President Abdullah Gul of Turkey has been invited by President Serzh
Sargsian of Armenia to watch the Turkey-Armenia FIFA World Cup
qualifying match on Sept. 6 together.
This offers an opportunity for these two neighbors to discuss common
security challenges and pave the way for a region of peace.
Vartan Oskanian was foreign minister of Armenia from 1998 to April
2008. He is the founder of the Civilitas Foundation in Yerevan, which
addresses foreign policy, democracy and development issues in the
Caucasus.
/24/opinion/edoskanian.php