Turkey facing a choice or a stalemate?

PanARMENIAN.Net - The most interesting thing is that neither of the countries takes Baku seriously and they need her only as a means to strengthen their role of a regional power. By the way, this role is differently perceived by Tehran and Ankara: Turkey has dressed up in the clothes of a peacemaker, trying to reconcile the irreconcilable in words, while Iran is conducting a tougher policy. It is clearly expressed in the desire of the countries to participate in the Karabakh conflict settlement. Turkey’s position is dependent on Azerbaijan, while Iran is more independent in this issue. But is Ankara really dependent on Baku? It is one thing to issue dramatic statements to one’s audience, and another - the real intentions of Erdogan’s government, for which ratification of the Armenian-Turkish Protocols is more important than settlement of the conflict it is no relation with.

However, it should be noted that declarations of Official Ankara on ratification of Protocols are once again motivated by strange reasons. What was the cost of the Turkish Foreign Ministry’s demarche over the verdict of the Armenian Constitutional Court, incomprehensible for the world powers actively involved in the preparation and signing of the Protocols in Zurich? According to the Turkish daily Milliyet, following the statement by Turkish Foreign Ministry, Ankara seemed to be feeling diplomatically strong. “However, statements of Western diplomats proved that it is not so. None of the interested parties recognize the link between the Zurich protocols and the Karabakh issue. It was quite toughly and clearly told by Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov. The interested parties also agree with US Assistant Secretary of State Philip Gordon, who assessed the RA Constitutional Court’s decision as positive”.

And what can Prime Minister Erdogan do? Only accuse Armenia of breaking down the talks. This is not a new policy for Turkey; it has a history of more than 200 years and is periodically applied with smaller or greater success. But everything has an end, no matter how reluctant Ankara is to presently notice it, hoping that international community may once again go under Turkey’s thumb. There is a grain of truth in this confidence, though there has been no precedent for this yet.

Currently Ankara does not look back at the USA and may at any moment cease to be its true strategic ally, especially since there is almost a replacement in the form of Russia. The question is whether Moscow would like to play the very reprehensible role of advancing Turkey’s interests in the region, especially taking into consideration the fact that the Great Turan will be passing precisely through the territory of Russia. Perhaps this is the reason why the U.S. is so active in ratification of the Protocols. However, both Moscow and Washington are well aware that Yerevan will take up no action until Ankara ratifies the Protocols. Roughly speaking, no pressure is exerted on Armenia yet, giving her an opportunity to sit and wait. By and large there is almost no leverage to use against Armenia: surrender of any territory or renunciation of international recognition of the Armenian Genocide is out of the question. And the U.S. can once again threaten to finally recognize the Armenian Genocide committed in the Ottoman Empire, especially since there is an excellent occasion - the 95th anniversary. In such cases no moral considerations are taken into account: in politics there is no room for sentimentality. And if the U.S. recognizes this fact, the chain reaction will go through the world, and it would be difficult for Turkey to object to anything both morally and materially. The fact that Armenia says she requires no compensation, changes nothing in international laws: the country responsible for genocide must pay compensation to the victims and their descendants. In any case, we must acknowledge that Turkey is playing with fire that could any moment burn down the State, so painstakingly built by Ataturk.