Question:
Erdogan repeatedly stated that he would not sign an agreement with Armenia to open borders and establish diplomatic relations until Armenia withdrew its army from the occupied Azerbaijani territories in Nagorno-Karabakh. However, on October 10, 2009, Erdogan's government signed an agreement to this effect without making the Armenian withdrawal a prerequisite. Although the signing took place, Erdogan stated on October 11, 2009: "If Armenia does not withdraw from the occupied Azerbaijani territories, Turkey will not take a positive stance." He added: "This withdrawal would also make it easier for the Turkish Parliament to adopt the agreements (signed between Turkey and Armenia)." (Reuters, AFP 11/10/2009). The question is:
What made Erdogan change his mind? Furthermore, since the signing has officially taken place, what is the meaning of Erdogan's recent statement? Does it mean that if Armenia does not withdraw its army, he will cancel the agreement?
Answer:
This agreement was not born overnight; rather, it passed through several steps under American sponsorship from beginning to end, until it was signed on October 11, 2009. We will mention some of the noteworthy steps, and then clarify the reason for the change in Erdogan's stance and the meaning of his recent statement:
During his visit to Turkey on April 6, 2009, Obama called for resolving the dispute between Turkey and Armenia and establishing peace between them. He met with their foreign ministers in the presence of the Swiss Foreign Minister, who was sponsoring the talks between the two parties. An announcement was made regarding the drawing of a roadmap to achieve this. On April 24, 2009, the Turkish newspaper Sabah published the roadmap drawn by America, which included clauses such as Armenia's recognition of the current borders drawn between Turkey and Armenia on October 13, 1921, in the Treaty of Kars signed between the Ottoman State and the Soviet Union, which was confirmed in the Treaty of Lausanne—i.e., the acknowledgment of the current borders between Turkey and Armenia. Other clauses of the American roadmap included establishing a commission to review what is called the Armenian Genocide, another clause related to opening the borders and commercial exchange, and another clause related to restoring diplomatic relations and exchanging ambassadors.
Several months ago, mediated by Switzerland, talks took place between the foreign ministers of both countries, and they reached an agreement on April 22, 2009, on a comprehensive framework for normalizing relations between their countries that would satisfy both parties. Discussions continued until they reached a consensus on September 1, 2009, to sign a comprehensive agreement.
On October 10, 2009, the signing of the comprehensive agreement was announced according to the roadmap previously drawn by America. The Turkish Foreign Minister, Ahmet Davutoğlu, signed it with the Armenian Foreign Minister, Edward Nalbandian, through Swiss mediation in Zurich, under the supervision and implementation of the US Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, who played an active role in this signing. The signing was attended by the other two parties of the Minsk Group: Russia, represented by its Foreign Minister Lavrov, and France, represented by its Foreign Minister Kouchner, in addition to the EU Foreign Policy Representative Solana and the Slovak Foreign Minister, as witnesses to the agreement described as a "historic agreement" to end the Turkish-Armenian conflict. International and Turkish news agencies published the full text of the protocol signed by the foreign ministers of Turkey and Armenia, which includes: (Recognition of the current borders and opening these borders within two months, establishing diplomatic relations and exchanging ambassadors, opening mutual consulates to assist and protect the citizens of both countries according to the 1963 Vienna Convention on Consular Relations, and developing bilateral relations in all political, economic, energy, transport, communications, scientific, technical, cultural, environmental, and tourism fields, etc. They will work together on regional and international cooperation in the UN, the EU, and the OSCE, and work together to achieve regional and international security and stability, develop democracy in the region, fight cross-border organized crime, terrorism, and arms and drug trafficking, and work to resolve regional and international disputes by peaceful means according to international rules and laws, establish regular consultations between them, and create and develop a dialogue for an unbiased scientific examination of historical documents and sources related to their peoples with the aim of establishing mutual trust...). In the context of the scientific examination, it refers to the events of 1915, which Armenia used to call genocide. However, Obama, in preparation for this agreement, gave it another name in his speech on April 24, 2009, on the anniversary of the so-called Armenian Genocide, where he described it as a terrible catastrophe and not as genocide or ethnic cleansing, as a prelude to this agreement.
This agreement covered all fields and resolved all issues between the two countries, but it did not mention a single word regarding the problem of Armenia's occupation of Azerbaijani lands in Nagorno-Karabakh and its surroundings, nor did it address the problem of the displaced Azerbaijanis from these lands. It is worth noting that Turkey cut its relations with Armenia and closed its borders in 1993 in protest against Armenia's occupation of the Nagorno-Karabakh region and seven surrounding districts, which represent between 20% and 24% of Azerbaijan's area, from which about a million Azerbaijanis were displaced. However, Turkey has now abandoned all of that, which angered Azerbaijan and left it as easy prey for the major powers represented by the Minsk Group of the OSCE—namely America, Russia, and France—who have been working since the cessation of the war between Azerbaijan and Armenia in 1993 (which began in late 1987) to find a solution to the Azerbaijani-Armenian problem.
Russia intervened on the side of the Armenians and assisted them during Armenia's aggression against Azerbaijan. However, the rulers of Turkey and Iran—two Muslim countries—did not intervene to support Azerbaijan, a Muslim country neighboring Iran and considered an ally of Turkey! Had it not been for the Russian intervention on the side of the Armenians, and the lack of support from Iran for its neighbor Azerbaijan—Iran did not even cut its relations with Armenia or close its borders—as well as the lack of military intervention by Turkey or the provision of any military aid to Azerbaijan to repel the Armenian aggressors and the Russians behind them; had it not been for this, the Armenians would not have been able to defeat the Azerbaijanis, who resisted the Armenians and Russians alone for more than five years. Thus, the rulers of Turkey and Iran failed the Muslim country of Azerbaijan during the war, allowing Armenia, with Russian help, to occupy Azerbaijani lands.
The rulers of Turkey were not satisfied with failing Azerbaijan during the war; they are failing it today as well by signing this agreement before the Azerbaijani lands are returned to their owners and the displaced people return to them. The Azerbaijani reaction was angry toward Turkey and considered the move to be against its interests. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Azerbaijan issued a statement saying: "The normalization of relations between Turkey and Armenia before the withdrawal of Armenian forces from the occupied Azerbaijani territory directly contradicts Azerbaijan’s interests and casts a shadow over the brotherly relations between Azerbaijan and Turkey based on deep roots." The statement added: "Azerbaijan believes that opening the borders threatens peace and stability in the region." The Azerbaijani Ministry of Foreign Affairs said in its statement: "Baku expects Ankara to adhere to the promises made by Turkish officials not to open the borders until Armenian forces withdraw from the disputed Nagorno-Karabakh region." The statement said: "Azerbaijan's position on this issue is unequivocal." (AFP and Iranian Al-Alam 11/10/2009).
As for the reasons that prompted Erdogan to change his mind and for his government to sign this agreement with Armenia in Zurich, they are American orders. This is because this agreement serves America significantly; America intends to win both Armenia and Azerbaijan to its side and distance Russian influence from them, thereby expanding the sphere of American influence in the South Caucasus:
As for Armenia, after America took Georgia—which borders Armenia to the north—from Russian influence via a "colored revolution," it looked toward Armenia to weaken Russian influence in its old and traditional sphere. Signing this Turkish-Armenian agreement is a great opportunity for America to take Armenia from Russia and bring it under its control, a victory for America over Russia that will be directly reinforced through Turkey. This was evident from the statement of the US Secretary of State as she left Zurich, flying with joy; she stated that: "Her country will work with all its capabilities for the success of the protocol signed between Turkey and Armenia." (Anadolu Agency 11/10/2009). Therefore, the Americans will put all their weight into having the Turkish Parliament sign this agreement, and their man, Erdogan, will work with all his methods and deception to make the members of his party in Parliament sign it. It appears that things are moving toward signing that agreement, as no serious opposition has emerged from the Republican People's Party (CHP) in Turkey, whose members consider themselves brothers to the Armenians rather than enemies. With the votes of these two parties, the agreement will be approved in the Turkish Parliament. On the Armenian side, there is no serious opposition either; the situation has been prepared there for months, and it was not linked to the withdrawal of Armenians from the occupied Azerbaijani territories, so its approval there will also be easy...
As for Azerbaijan, it hesitates in its relationship between Russia and America, accommodating both countries by opening the door for them to invest in the oil and gas sector. Therefore, it accepted the extension of the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline to the Mediterranean and allowed American companies to invest in the oil sector, led by Chevron, alongside Russian companies. It also allows Russia to maintain military bases on its territory; Russia has the Gabala base in Azerbaijan, where powerful radars are installed. The Russians have used the base since 1984, and the agreement for its use was renewed by the Russians in 2002 for another ten years. This shows the extent of Russian influence in Azerbaijan. Azerbaijan's connection with Russia remains strong. Nevertheless, Russia previously offered America the chance to deploy its radars next to Russian radars at the Gabala base in exchange for America abandoning its plans to place radars in the Czech Republic and missiles in Poland, and Azerbaijan did not oppose that proposal. In other words, Azerbaijan tries to please both Russia and America. However, America wants its influence to be effectively present in Azerbaijan and saw the Turkish-Armenian agreement as a strong means of pressure on Azerbaijan to accept American influence completely, after which America would intervene to solve the Armenian-Azerbaijani problem away from Russia.
Although the agreement constituted a strong blow to Azerbaijan, which controls the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan oil line and could close it as a reaction, America relies on Turkey to tame Azerbaijan. Thus, Azerbaijan cannot adopt a state of hostility toward Turkey or dare to close the line or take drastic reactions, such as harassing American companies investing in oil and gas. In other words, America is confident in Erdogan's deceptive and cunning actions toward Azerbaijan, as he places American interests at the top of his value scale, indifferent to the occupied lands of Azerbaijan or its displaced people. If he cared, he would have stood up and helped Azerbaijan back then, providing it with military strength and contributing militarily to returning the occupied lands to Azerbaijan. His government would not have signed this recent agreement, in which the Azerbaijani brothers were failed, despite the constant boastful claims that "the brotherly relationship between Turkey and Azerbaijan is deep-rooted!"
- As for Erdogan's statement on October 11, 2009, the day after the signing of the agreement, which stated: "If Armenia does not withdraw from the occupied Azerbaijani territories, Turkey will not take a positive stance," and said: "We want the problem of Nagorno-Karabakh and the occupied territories to be resolved in the same way, and if the problems between Azerbaijan and Armenia are resolved, then it will be easier for the Turkish society to support the normalization of relations between Turkey and Armenia. It will also make it easier for the Turkish Parliament to adopt the agreements (signed between Turkey and Armenia)." (Reuters, AFP 11/10/2009); this is an outright lie, a form of charlatanism and deception. Would any sane person believe that Erdogan's government signs all these agreements with the Armenians under American sponsorship and in the presence of international figures, and then Erdogan declares that Turkey will not take a positive stance toward the agreement and that normalization will not be easy? This is nothing but a move to deceive public opinion in Turkey and an attempt to deceive the Azerbaijanis, who have realized the reality of his false promises!
This statement and its like are merely a twisting of words and manipulation that will not hold up for long!