Turkish-Armenia Protocols Create Concern over Karabakh

Publication: Eurasia Daily Monitor Volume: 6 Issue: 188
October 14, 2009 01:55 PM Age: 118 days
Category: Eurasia Daily Monitor, Home Page, Foreign Policy, Turkey, Armenia, Featured

Foreign Minister of Turkey Ahmet Davutoglu (R) with his Armenian counterpart Edouard Nalbandian

Turkey and Armenia signed twin protocols on October 10 that were in preparation since February of this year (EDM, February 10, March 27, April 9, May 14, May 18, October 7). Under the agreement, Turkey and Armenia will establish diplomatic relations and re-open their border. It also calls for a panel to investigate the contentious issue of the alleged “genocide” in 1915. The process of preparing these protocols was long and drawn out. However, Turkish and Armenian diplomats skillfully negotiated the agreement. A temporary crisis erupted at the last minute, which delayed the signing ceremony for three hours. Apparently Armenian diplomats objected to the text of Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu’s speech in which he stressed that the South Caucasus should become a region of peace and tranquility and that the Karabakh dispute between Azerbaijan and Armenia should be resolved. Yerevan has sought from the very outset of the normalization process to treat the Karabakh issue separately. In return, the Turkish side objected to the text of Armenian Foreign Minister Edward Nalbandian’s speech in which he referred to historical events: implying the Armenian “genocide” (Hurriyet, October 11).

American and Russian officials intervened and supported the Turkish proposal to sign the protocols without delivering speeches. While the Armenians were reluctant to sign the protocol, the Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov wrote a note to his Armenian counterpart: “Edward! Accept the ceremony without statements!” Javier Solana (E.U. High Representative for Common Foreign and Security Policy) and the French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner signed the note and sent it to Nalbandian –which convinced the Armenians to sign the protocols (www.pravda.ru, October 12).

Armenians have long argued that the Karabakh dispute should be a separate issue and that Ankara should not use it as a precondition for Turkish-Armenian rapprochement. Yet the Turkish side, due to the country’s close relationship with Azerbaijan, always links Karabakh to the Turkish-Armenian normalization process. One week before the signing ceremony, Armenian diplomats rejected the Turkish offer to invite the U.S. Russian and French Foreign Ministers as members of the Minsk Group (which was established to find a solution to the Karabakh issue) (Aksam, October 5).

During the ceremony the members of the Minsk Group were behind Davutoglu and Nalbandian, which provided an impression that powerful states supported the Turkish-Armenian rapprochement. Inviting the members of the Minsk Group to the signing ceremony was one of the Turkish diplomatic successes. Yet, in order to link the Karabakh issue with the protocols Turkish neo-nationalists objected to the picture of the Turkish and Armenian foreign ministers signing the protocols in the presence of U.S., E.U., and Russian officials, as if they were under international pressure (Haberturk, October 13).

Nevertheless, there is no direct reference to Karabakh in the protocols. Indeed, the protocols contain only indirect references to it:

    “Referring to their obligations under the Charter of the United Nations, the Helsinki Final Act, the Charter of Paris for a New Europe, reconfirming their commitment, in their bilateral and international relations, to respect and ensure respect for the principles of equality, sovereignty, non-intervention in internal affairs of other states, territorial integrity and inviolability of frontiers, bearing in mind the importance of the creation and maintenance of an atmosphere of trust and confidence between the two countries that will contribute to the strengthening of peace, security and stability of the whole region, as well as being determined to refrain from the threat or the use of force, to promote the peaceful settlement of disputes, and to protect human rights and fundamental freedoms” (Turkish-Armenian Protocol on establishing good neighborly relations and to develop bilateral cooperation in the political, economic, cultural and other fields, October 10).

In response to nationalist criticism, the Turkish government has pointed to the above mentioned indirect reference to the Karabakh dispute, and emphasized this in the ratification process. Although it was revealed that the government will send the protocols to the Turkish parliament on October 21, Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan declared that parliament will await the resolution of the Karabakh dispute and only then ratify the agreement (NTV, October 12). However, it appears that such a strategy is unsatisfactory for Baku, who sent a group of parliamentarians to Ankara to ensure that the Turkish parliament does not ratify the protocols until the dispute between Azerbaijan and Armenia has been resolved (Vatan, October 13).

What makes Turkish nationalists and the Azerbaijani government anxious is whether the international community will pressure Ankara to ratify the protocols before finding a solution to the Karabakh issue. Promises made by the international community before the referendum in Cyprus to unify the island in 2004 and its subsequent failure to keep these promises, has raised fears among the Turkish public concerning Karabakh. In the case of Cyprus, without keeping its promises to end the isolation of the Turkic Cypriots, the E.U. is exerting pressure on Turkey to recognize the Greek Cypriot state as representing the whole island.

Delaying the ratification process in the Turkish parliament until Azerbaijan and Armenia resolve the Karabakh dispute would be an intelligent policy for Ankara to pursue to avoid any international pressure to open its border with Armenia ending its long standing boycott caused by the Armenian occupation of Azerbaijan’s province of Karabakh. However, since there is no direct reference to Karabakh in the protocols, it might prove counterproductive if international actors, such as Russia, the E.U., or the U.S. change their current positions to put pressure on Ankara to ratify the protocols before a solution to the Karabakh issue is agreed.


Email this article to a friend

Publications

Eurasia Daily Monitor

Eurasisa Daily Monitor

Global Terrorism Analysis

Global Terrorism Analysis

China Brief

China Brief

North Caucasus Analysis

North Caucasus Weekly Recent From Turkey

Donate To Jamestown

Click Here To Donate Now

New From Jamestown

Breaking News:

Britain & the North West Frontier: Strategy, Tactics and Lessons

By:Jules Stewart

December 17, 2009 10:21 AM

The tribal areas of Pakistan’s North-West Frontier Province (NWFP) fully deserve President Barack Obama’s description as “the most dangerous place in the world”. This remote and inhospitable region i...


Cat: Report, Book

The South China Sea Dispute: Increasing Stakes and Rising Tensions

November 20, 2009 11:14 AM

Tensions are on the rise in the South China Sea. Longstanding sovereignty disputes over the profusion of atolls, shoals and reefs that dot the 1.2 million square miles of sea, allied to extensive over...


Cat: Report, Book, China and the Asia-Pacific, Featured, Home Page

Who's Who in the Somali Insurgency: A Reference Guide

September 30, 2009 02:45 PM

The ongoing struggle for control of Somalia is one of the world’s most complicated. With the country already effectively split into three parts, it may be too late to speak of a Somali nation. While t...


Cat: Report, Book, Home Page, Featured

China's Quasi-Superpower Diplomacy: Prospects and Pitfalls

September 2, 2009 11:19 AM

The year 2009 will go down in history as a watershed for the epochal expansion of China’s global influence. With its economy tipped to grow at 8 percent despite the world financial crisis, the People’...


Cat: Book, Report, Featured, Home Page

Beyond the Afghan Trauma: Russia's Return to Afghanistan

By:Marlene Laruelle

August 11, 2009 04:06 PM

Russian authorities are extremely divided about the right position to take as Moscow increasingly concerns itself with the Afghan question. They have continually criticized NATO’s decisions though, at...


Cat: Report, Book
go to Archive ->

Azerbaijan and the West: Strategic Partnership at Eurasia's Crossroads

August 3, 2009

Jamestown presents a complete summary of the May 14, 2009 event entitled Azerbaijan and the West: Strategic Partnership at Eurasia's Crossroads featuring discussions by Senior Fellow Vladimir Socor, Dr. Brenda Shaffer and Daniel...

Category: Report

Russian LNG - The Future Geopolitical Battleground

June 26, 2009

The global natural gas industry is undergoing a historical shift away from overland pipeline deliveries of gas and gradually towards Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG), shipped by seaborne tankers designed to supply distant markets...

Category: Report, Book

The Changing Face of Islamist Militancy in North Africa

March 17, 2009

The Changing Face of Islamist Militancy in North Africa contains the proceedings of a panel from Jamestown's December 2008 conference entitled "The Expanding Geography of Militant Jihad."

Category: Report, Book

The Impact of the Russia-Georgia War on the South Caucasus Transportation Corridor

March 3, 2009

 

*Click here to view the full PDF of this report

Executive SummaryThe August 2008 war in the Caucasus revealed the new strategic realities that have emerged in the Black Sea / Caspian Region in recent years. These realities...

Category: Report, Georgia

Gazprom's European Web

February 18, 2009

For over a decade the proliferation of so-called “Gas Trading” companies in Europe has destabilized the EU energy market and possibly criminalized it as well. The appearance of such companies as RosUkrEnergo, the Centrex group of...

Category: Book, Russia, Energy, Report

The Georgia Crisis and Russia-Turkey Relations

November 26, 2008

*Click here to order a copy of this report online!*

 

The August 2008 Russia-Georgia war has triggered some major shifts in regional geopolitics. The Caucasus crisis also directly affected the relationship between the two main...

Category: Turkey, Russia, Report

Who's Who in the Azerbaijani Opposition

November 3, 2008

On October 15, Azerbaijanis will go to the polls to elect their next president. Seven candidates are running for the most prestigious and powerful position in the country. Who will become Azerbaijan’s president for the upcoming...

Category: Report

Arming for Asymmetric Warfare: Turkey’s Arms Industry in the 21st Century

June 19, 2008

 

Located at the strategic crossroads of Europe, Asia, the Caucasus and the Middle East, Turkey still maintains a vast conscript army of over one million men, the second-largest in NATO and the largest in Europe. Major reforms to...

Category: Report

"Turkey and Northern Iraq: An Overview"

February 29, 2008
Category: Report