Tuesday, March 17 2015 14:38

Turkey’s political gestures
concerning the Gallipoli and the Genocide of Armenia show its endeavors to
bring the world before a dilemma on April 24 – either the tragedy of Armenians
or the victory of Turk. Do you think that such policy of Ankara is promising?

The Armenian Genocide Centennial events do not at all
make the world make a choice. On April 24, 2015, Armenians worldwide are going
to pay a tribute to the 1.5 mln Armenians, who became the victims of the
Genocide. Turkey, in turn, has launched a rampant campaign by doing its best to
overshadow the centennial of the crimes committed by Young Turks.  Ankara resorts to rather dirty methods to do
that. One of such methods is to postpone the date marking the Battle of
Gallipoli from March 18 to April 24.   
Ankara has done this to make the heads of the leading countries of the
world make a moral choice between the festive events in Turkey and the mourning
events in Armenia. most of the countries perceive these Turkish tricks as a
dishonest step.   It is Turkey's business
not to recognize the Armenian Genocide and to hinder its recognition by other
countries.  But making other countries
choose between the events in Armenia and Turkey demonstrates Ankara's attempts
to shift its problems off its own shoulders onto others. No one likes this, as
a matter of fact.  I think the heads of
the states will express their stand by 24 April 2015 and I do hope that they
will not yield to Ankara's dirty tricks.

How would you describe Ankara’s
current efforts towards its denial policy?

Turkish officials responsible for the policy towards
Armenia appear to be in confusion.  At
least look at the latest hasty steps in Turkey's genocide denial policy,
"the Gallipoli undertaking" and the January meeting of Turkish
ambassadors with UNESCO Secretary General Irina Bokova, and the attempts to use
the parliamentary and cultural diplomacy. Those, often contradictory actions in
all fronts bring that confusion to light. 
It appears to me that in Ankara they fear consequences of that policy.
They are well aware what it all may turn into.

 What consequences?

It
is a very serious issue.  As far as I
think Turks fear big losses as a country that not only denies the Genocide but
also acts beyond the present-day world perception, which is fraught with
isolation.

West's
policy to control Turkey has to some extent isolated the country and restricted
its ambitions, hasn’t it?. 

Sure, this shows the West's distrust in Turkey.
Nevertheless, Turkey continues to suffer from its dependence on the United
States, first of all. As a NATO member, Turkey receives weapons from the U.S.
and there is no escaping from that. 
Actually, Turkey's failures in the Middle East make it even more
dependent on the U.S. Neither it can turn to the East unless it has normal
relations with Egypt.

What really holds Turkey from following suit
of Germany and avoiding the consequences of the Genocide committed by the Young
Turks?

It is a very complicate question. There are at least
five reasons why Turkey cannot follow suit of Germany and avoid the
consequences of the Genocide committed by the Young Turks. First, the founders
of the Turkish Republic were historically the people that directly participated
in the Genocide of Armenians, except Ataturk.  
Second, the Armenian people were robbed and in Turkey they increased
their wealth due to those robbed funds. Third, the major goal of the Genocide
was to exterminate the Armenian people in their historical motherland - Western
Armenia, which was an attempt 'to settle' the Armenian Cause. Recognition of
the Armenian Genocide will not only imply Turkey's responsibility for that
crime but also the recognition of the present Eastern Anatolia as the original
Western Armenia.  The fourth reason is
that Turkey fears the consequences of the Genocide recognition i.e. Armenia's
compensation demands.

 

The fifth reason is of moral nature. Given my personal
meetings with Turks of the last 25 years, I have arrived at a conclusion that
they perceive the issue of the Genocide recognition as a national and moral
issue. They think that by recognizing the Genocide, the authorities will label
the Turkish people as a people that committed Genocide. Therefore, at least the
current generation of the Turkish authorities will do their best to avoid that
label.

Irrespective
of the political vector, do you see any need in restoring the relations with Turkey?

 

The Pan-Armenian Declaration
expressing the people’s united will in achieving the international recognition
of the Armenian Genocide and the recall of the Armenian-Turkish protocols from
the parliament of Armenia almost coincided. What was the political goal of
those steps?

The PanArmenian Declaration is an unprecedented
phenomenon in our reality, for the Armenians from all over the world have
finally reached a consensus. We need to stay strong in the pursuit, we must
show cooperative participation in every single important endeavor. The
consensus of the Armenians can guarantee our future achievements. The
PanArmenian Declaration is a spectacular example of the endeavor's success. I
was expecting the protocols to be recalled before April 24. I think
"dead" protocols could not be of significance in the politics.
Commemorating the Centennial of the Armenian Genocide, we could not have such a
document in the Armenian parliament.  It
is important that Turkey torpedoed the reconciliation process, not Armenia.

The problem of the Armenian Genocide
recognition will hardly be on the first place of Turkey’s foreign policy.
What challenges and problems has Turkey faced?

Turkey is facing serious problems in its foreign
policy (regional, particularly). The problems come from Erdogan's ambitious
goals that do not meet Turkey's potential and true political weight. AKP's
desire to bite more than it can chew is bigger than Turkey's real opportunities
and that desire engenders a number of problems in the country's regional
policy. Besides the problems with Syria, such a policy will bring to the
deterioration in relations with Egypt, and Iran. Erdogan's attempt to lead an
independent foreign policy incurs Turkey's western partners' displeasure.
Remaining a NATO member and tending to access the EU, Ankara does not
coordinate its actions with the western partners, but also acts contrary to
their interests.   

There is a third aspect that is not to be
underestimated. To reach its ambitious goals, Turkey is ready to rely on the
ISIS.

 

 “Islamic State…”

 

And the IS too. To some extent, ISIS is the result of
the Turkish policy. By present the ISIS militia units' commanders keep
receiving medical treatment at hospitals on the Turkish territory. Until quite
recently terrorists were getting arms via Turkey. There are still facts about
it.  Turkey's refusal to join the
U.S.-led anti-ISIS coalition is a hard argument for Turkey's reluctance to
deteriorate relations with ISIS. This comes from Turkey's desire to get rid of
Assad and achieve Syria's non-existence as a state that has a long frontier
with Turkey. First of all, Turkey uses ISIS in its fight against Assad's
regime.  The united and strong Syria
stands on Turkey's way of becoming the regional leader. This is why Ankara
intervened Syria's inner affairs.

Armenian Foreign Minister’s visit to
Israel passed quite unnoticed. Why?

I have no specific information, however, I can say
that three years ago Dr. Cohen, a high-rank member of the Israeli MFA and a
qualified specialist in regional problems, paid a visit to our Institute. He
became the first Israeli official to declare of his country's determination to
recognize the Armenian Genocide. And that despite the fact that there are
people who oppose the recognition.

The truth of the matter is that the Israeli political
elite has not yet agreed a united approach to the issue of the recognition of
the Armenian Genocide. Based on my meetings with the Israeli colleagues, I can
say that even various MFA departments do not have agreed a united approach to
the problem.  Thus, it is all about
political operations and is used by Israel in its anti-Turkish policy in
response to Ankara's anti-Israeli policy. 
However, both countries continue their relations. We got used to the
fact that our tragedy is made use of in foreign countries' policy. I believe,
it is time to speak of our interests as well.

As for Foreign Minister Edward Nalbandian's recent
visit to Israel and his meeting with the President of Israel, it should be
considered as an effort towards Israel's recognition of the Armenian Genocide.

You mean that the Armenian Foreign
Ministry has much to do in Israel, don’t you?

Sure, there is a huge field for Armenian Foreign
Ministry’s activity in Israel. Not only Armenia is interested in the
cooperation, but the Israeli side as well, given its policy in the Southern
Caucasus and despite the relations with Azerbaijan.