ARMENIA NOT PLANNING TO TOLERATE TURKISH PERFORMANCE
VARDAN GRIGORYAN
Hayots Ashkhar Daily
01 Nov 08
Armenia
Two months have already passed after the visit of Turkish President
Abdullah Gyul to Yerevan but no essential progress has been recorded in
Armenian-Turkish relations so far.
In contrast to that the Turkish leadership showers sweet words
regarding the `progress’ of Armenian – Turkish relations and the
`friendship’ between the two countries, by totally misleading the
international community.
Moreover in some European countries they trust Turkey’s false advocacy
so much that they have started to think about making the process of the
integration of our neighbor into the European structures swifter. The
matters took such a turn that the Turkish diplomats have started to
threaten the European counselors regarding the recognition of the
Armenian Genocide, saying that thus they will spoil Armenian-Turkish
`honeymoon’.
So it turns out that the relations between the two countries have
improved by words but far not by actions.
Not only does Turkey continue to put forward its famous preconditions
for the opening of Armenian-Turkish border and the solution of other
issues, but it has also started to make evident efforts to have a hand
in the settlement of Karabakh conflict. But why shouldn’t they do so,
if besides being Azerbaijan’s `elder brother’ they are also our
`sincere friend’.
Moreover, during the recent times Turkey is trying to shift the before
mentioned performance from the European stages to the US.
Prime Minister Erdoghan’s envoys announced in the USA that the
recognition of the Armenian Genocide would allegedly have a bad impact
on Turkey’s efforts to improve relations with Armenia.
It is evident that here we deal with a great example of a performance
of `establishing friendly relations’ which has found its fundamental
groundings in the interview given by the Turkish President Abdullah
Gyul to one of the French TV channels, where he separated `Armenian
Cause’ from `Armenia’s Issue’. But saying `Armenian Cause’ Abdullah
Gyul didn’t mean the autonomy and later the independence of the West
Armenia, which started in 1877, but `the treachery of the Armenians’
during the First World War, to which it turned out that the Turks
responded by `deporting the Armenians to more secure places’ and far
not the Genocide.
The Turkish President believes our compatriots living in Diaspora are
the before mentioned `traitors’ and he doesn’t consider Armenia a
threat or an enemy for Turkey.
Then a question arises here, `In that case what was the sense of the
political hurry-scurry for the improvement of Armenian-Turkish
relations? In our view after the military clash between Russia and
Georgia, Armenia and its leadership didn’t have any chance to avoid the
great regional maneuvers.’
By not joining the actions of its ally against Georgia and meanwhile
appearing in a tough geo-political situation Armenia couldn’t avoid at
least the exhorts to start a dialogue with Turkey. So the whole problem
is that our diplomacy and especially our foreign policy were not very
well prepared for the Turkish performance about `establishing friendly
relations’.
At the moment the situation is changing and our Foreign Minister Edward
Nalbandyan has already announced to the world that, `we are not
interested in continuing the process for the sake of the process, to
meet several times in two, there, four years and to create an
impression that the process is on.
But in our view this quite correct estimation given to the created
situation must be clarified for the international community, by means
of clear messages addressed to the USA and EU member countries. By the
lowest methods Turkey is trying to use the already started
Armenian-Turkish dialogue and the quite sincere expectations of the
international community linked with this process, aimed at hiding their
own crimes and holding the process of the international recognition of
Armenian Genocide, then Armenia must in its turn put forward the
following resolution: `The sooner the Armenian Genocide is recognized,
the sooner Armenian-Turkish relations will be improved.’
Moreover, if in future Turkey keeps his promise given to Azerbaijan and
tries to include Karabakh issue in the agenda of the Security Council,
as a newly elected non-permanent member, then Armenia will have to
immediately appeal to the same organization and estimate this process
as a preparation of a new genocide towards the Armenian inhabitants of
Nagorno Karabakh by the two countries that have committed the Armenian
Genocide.
Armenia can also use Turkey’s possible action and demand clear
guarantees of excluding the repetition of Armenian Genocide, from the
UN Security Council.