TURKEY’S CAUCASUS POLICY STILL CENTRAL DESPITE RECENT ACTIVISM IN MIDDLE EAST
Today’s Zaman, Turkey
June 9 2013
Director of the Center for Strategic Studies Farhad Mammadov (Photo:
Today’s Zaman)
Turkey’s foreign policy agenda is dominated by the pursuit of security
as well as strengthening political and economic ties with the countries
in the South Caucasus despite the remarkable burst of recent Turkish
activism in the Middle East, says an Azerbaijani expert, also pointing
out that the Caucasus as a whole region continues to play a large
role in Turkish foreign policy.
“We are closely following Turkey’s foreign policy activities in the
Middle East, which have taken a striking turn in recent years, but
it has not changed Turkey’s attitude towards the South Caucasus in
any way,” said Farhad Mammadov, director of the Center for Strategic
Studies (SAM), adding, “Turkey has been undertaking joint projects
in the region with Georgia and Azerbaijan and regular high-level
visits and meetings each year confirm increasing Turkish interest in
the region.”
Commenting on Ankara’s active role in the South Caucasus in an
interview with Today’s Zaman, Mammadov labeled Turkey a dynamic and
constructive actor in the region, especially since 2008 when Turkey’s
role became more active.
In 2008, when a crisis erupted in August between Russia and Georgia
over South Ossetia and Abkhazia, Georgia’s separatist republics,
Turkey tried hard to pacify the war-torn South Caucasus, using its
common history and its role as a trade and energy partner. While
Western powers were contemplating diplomatic ways to achieve a
meaningful breakthrough between Russia and Georgia, Prime Minister
Recep Tayyip Erdogan worked to establish the Caucasus Stability and
Cooperation Pact that would include Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia
as well as the two regional powers in the South Caucasus, Russia and
Turkey. However, the complicated atmosphere in the region, including
the long-standing territorial conflicts, brought the project to a dead
end. Mammadov stressed that the idea of a Caucasus Stability Pact was
first initiated by the presidents of Azerbaijan and Georgia under the
Tbilisi Declaration in 1996. The initiative was then later prompted
to a large extent by a series of statements made by the presidents of
Azerbaijan, Georgia and Turkey at the Organization for Security and
Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) Ä°stanbul Summit held in November 1999.
Mammadov said of the Turkish stability pact effort, “Of course,
the clauses of the pact were not made public, but it was an idea to
formulate regulations and limit conflicts so that regional countries
could come together to fight the threats that exist not only inside
the region but also those that outside the region that are a challenge
to regional peace and stability.” He added that diverse conflicts
and disputes have consistently prevented the initiatives from being
realized.
Tension was at a peak in the South Caucasus at the time and the
countries of the region did not welcome the initiative. Georgia turned
the project down at first sight, demanding that Russia, which was
considered the principal party responsible for the August aggression,
withdraw its forces from Georgia. Armenia and Azerbaijan were also
cautious about the project, since the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict that
had been stuck in a deadlock for more than two decades had yet to
be solved.
Commenting on the diminished chance to actualize the pact, despite
Turkey’s determination and significant efforts to move ahead,
Mammadov praised Turkey’s position in the region, especially with
respect to Azerbaijan, since Ankara has maintained a sealed border
with neighboring Armenia.
“Turkish officials have always stated that the opening of the border
gates between Turkey and Armenia will be possible only after the
occupation of the Azerbaijani territories end; a fact that promotes
Turkey as a role model for those countries that recognize Armenia as
an aggressive state but which do not take any proper steps against its
aggression that might be helpful to liberate Azerbaijani territories,”
Mammadov noted, adding, “Of course, the main reason for the closed
borders [between Turkey and Armenia] is the status quo of the
Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.”
Turkey closed its border and severed diplomatic ties with Armenia in
1993 in a show of solidarity with Azerbaijan after Armenian forces
invaded the Nagorno-Karabakh region and seven surrounding territories
during a war between the two countries launched in 1988.
However, Turkish-Armenian rapprochement and the reconciliation of
the alienated neighbors has met with fierce resistance from Azerbaijan.
The “soccer diplomacy” effort in September 2008, when President
Abdullah Gul visited Yerevan to watch the Turkey-Armenia World Cup
match at the invitation of his Armenian counterpart, President Serzh
Sarksyan and came up with an agreement on two protocols signed by
Armenia and Turkey in October to establish diplomatic ties and
re-open their borders met with harsh reactions from Azerbaijan,
Turkey’s strategic ally in the region.
Despite Prime Minister Erdogan’s eloquent speech to Azerbaijani
deputies on May 13, 2009, which somehow silenced the voices criticizing
Turkey over the Armenian initiative, relations worsened after August
when the two countries started internal political consultations. The
item that angered Azerbaijan the most in the protocols was the opening
of the border with Armenia, as the conflict over Nagorno-Karabakh had
not been solved and Azeri refugees and internally displaced persons
could not return to their native lands.
“By keeping its borders with Armenia closed and not renewing its
diplomatic ties, Turkey kept to what it had publicly vowed to do in
different international platforms. The aggressor [Armenia] should be
punished,” Mammadov said, adding: “We got the result. Azerbaijan has
always stated that Armenia’s low level of economic growth is due to
the closed borders in the region, which is the consequence of Armenian
aggression toward the Azerbaijani territories.”
“The economy of Armenia is gradually collapsing. What kind of future
can there be for a state whose economy is collapsing? Due to the
Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, Armenia has been isolated from the largest
international projects implemented in the South Caucasus. The lack
of jobs and the weakening economy have led to the migration of the
population, and especially of the youth,” Mammadov noted.
He also added that Armenia should rethink its aggressive policy
towards its neighbors, learn to respect international law and four
resolutions passed by the UN Security Council that sent a clear
message for Armenian armed forces to withdraw from the occupied
Azerbaijani territories.
Currently, together with Baku, Ankara has attempted to economically
isolate Armenia by omitting Yerevan from regional economic projects,
considering it a major incentive to peacefully resolve the two-decade
long deadlock on the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.
http://www.todayszaman.com/news-317841-turkeys-caucasus-policy-still-central-despite-recent-activism-in-middle-east.html