TURKEY AND ARMENIA AT LOGGERHEADS
Huffington Post
March 26 2013
by David L. Phillips, Director, Program on Peace-building and Rights,
Columbia University Institute for the Study of Human Rights
Turkey and Armenia missed an historic opportunity to improve ties
when Turkey refused to ratify the Protocols on the Establishment
of Diplomatic and Bilateral Relations signed on October 10,
2009. Rather than rapprochement, Armenians are now fully mobilized
to organize worldwide activities commemorating the one hundred year
anniversary of the Armenian Genocide on April 24, 2015. Armenia would
never sacrifice gaining greater global recognition of genocide for
cross-border cooperation with Turks. However, trade can still play
a helpful role reducing tensions and creating positive momentum in
Turkish-Armenian relations.
More than a closed border, Turks and Armenians are divided by
different perceptions of history. More than one million Armenians
perished during the final years of the Ottoman Empire between 1915
and 1923. Turkey disputes these facts, referring to the events as
“shared suffering.” Turkey demands a joint historical commission
to address the “Armenian question.” The political impasse between
Turkey and Armenia is compounded by Ankara’s linking of relations
with Armenia to resolution of the conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh where
Armenians and Azerbaijanis fought a brutal war displacing 600,000
people in the early 1990s.
The governments of Turkey and Armenia may be at loggerheads,
but Turks and Armenians are still engaging in economic diplomacy,
working on cross-border activities beneath the radar. Commercial
contact involves mostly “suitcase trade” involving consumer goods
transported from Turkey through Georgia to Armenia.
But bigger business is possible. Armenia could sell surplus electricity
to Turkey which needs energy to power its economic boom.
Armenia could also tap into Turkey’s state-of-the-art fiber optic
cable to meet its growing demand for Internet. Railway service between
Kars in Turkey and Gyumri in Armenia could resume when Turkey opens
its border gate. In anticipation, Armenia could begin conforming the
country’s Soviet-era railway gauge to Turkish and European standards.
In addition, Qualifying Industrial Zone (QIZ) could be established
to catalyze joint enterprises between Turks and Armenians. A QIZ
is an industrial park and a free-trade zone, which is linked to
a free-trade agreement with the United States. Goods qualify when
partners contribute raw material, labor, or manufacturing. Kazan, an
area in Armenia on the Turkish border, would be a suitable destination
for joint ventures in textile and piece goods manufacturing.
The QIZ should proceed with steps to relax restrictions on the
surface transport of commercial goods. Armenian trucks are allowed
to use Turkey as a transit country, but can’t off-load on Turkish
soil. The same holds true for Turkish trucks transiting through
Armenia. Trucks should be allowed to transfer goods destined for
markets in the neighboring countries, with Turkey and Armenia
identified as destinations in the export registry.
Normalized travel and trade would also stimulate the tourist industry.
Many Armenians are coming from Russia to cultural sites in Eastern
Turkey. Allowing Armenian tourist buses to cross the Turkish-Armenian
border would be a windfall for local business. Charter flights between
the eastern Turkish city of Van and Yerevan would enhance commercial
contact and a Turkish Airlines office in Yerevan would boost travel.
The Ani Bridge across the Akhurian River, which symbolized the
connection between Armenian civilization and the Anatolian plain,
should be restored.
A useful database is being prepared by the Turkish-Armenian Business
Development Council profiling opportunities and connecting potential
business partners. Linkages could also be established between
local chambers of commerce and mayors with the goal of establishing
sister-city relationships and fostering trade and investment.
Such civil society and private sector initiatives have intrinsic
value. Moreover, they can also incentivize official diplomacy or
serve as a safety net when diplomacy stalls. They are not, however,
a substitute for official diplomacy.
There is currently no contact between Turkish and Armenian officials.
While the Turkey-Armenia protocols called for a “dialogue on the
historical dimension,” Armenians balked when Turkey demanded a
commission to determine whether the events of 1915 met the definition
of genocide.
Instead of trying to reinvent history, Turkey’s Prime Minister Erdogan
can make history through an executive order to open the border and
normalize travel and trade as a step toward diplomatic relations.
Bolder yet, he could submit the protocols on normalization and
diplomatic relations to the Turkish parliament with his personal
endorsement for ratification.
With an eye on his legacy, Erdogan could also call for parliament
to repeal Article 301 of the penal code, which makes it a crime to
“denigrate Turkishness” and is used to repress free the freedom of
expression. Repealing regressive legislation would make Turks more
free, and also benefit Turkey’s EU aspirations.
Turkey’s moral authority is undermined by the government’s denial of
the Armenian Genocide. On Remembrance Day, April 24, Erdogan should
apologize for what happened to Armenians during the waning days of
the Ottoman Empire. Reconciling with Armenia would help consolidate
Turkey’s role as a regional power, as well as a force for good in
the world.
Mr. Phillips is Director of the Program on Peace-building and Rights
at Columbia University’s Institute for the Study of Human Rights
From: A. Papazian
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-l-phillips/turkey-and-armenia-at-log_b_2957700.html?utm_hp_ref=fb&src=sp&comm_ref=false