For those of us living in Turkey, it is an unquestionable fact that the Armenian-Turkish Protocol is a pressing topic on many people’s minds. For weeks, both the academic community and citizens of both countries have been waiting patiently for October 10^th, the possible day of reckoning between the Turkish and Armenian communities. This event has been a long time in the making and it is on a hope and a prayer that both Turkey and Armenia’s Parliaments will pass the protocol.

The long history of what happened between these two historical opponents does not need to be scrutinized in detail any further. The underlying and principle disputes among the Turks and Armenians can be summed up in just a few words: the events of 1915, Turkey’s borders and Nagorno Karabakh. It is amazing how much weight those nine diminutive words can carry.  While some of us were privileged enough not to grow up in a time or place where conflict has ensued and lives were lost, this region of the world has not been so fortunate. A deep rooted resentment which at times has manifested itself into hostility has existed for years between both countries over unresolved issues. The ongoing territorial dispute over Azeri lands between Armenia and Azerbaijan, a close ally of Turkey, has not done anything other than breed more mistrust.

Only recently has a thaw in relations begun to occur.  Soon after Armenia’s independence in 1991, they found themselves at the beginning of a long and lonely path, one they created themselves since their takeover of the Nagorno Karabakh region. It was not until last year’s football diplomacy with Turkey’s President, Abdullah Gul, and his visit to Armenia for a world cup qualifier match that optimism began to evolve from skepticism. Since then, an Armenian-Turkish protocol has been put on the table; if signed it will have the Armenians finally recognizing Turkey’s borders as those that were decided in the Kars Treaty of 1923, and an intergovernmental commission will be established in order to examine the disputed events of 1915.

As for the matter of who gains the most from this slow evaporation of animosity in the Turkish- Armenian relationship, there can be no doubt that it is Armenia.  Most political analysts are laying their bets against ratification by the latter’s parliament; this would clearly not be a wise move for the country due to Armenia’s economic position at present. Sukru Elekdag, the former Turkish Ambassador to the United States and a CHP MP, summed it up best when he declared that the "Economy of Armenia is on the verge of collapse, so the people are leaving the country.” He restated claims that Armenia loses 80 percent of exports and imports due to Turkey and Azerbaijan maintaining the closure of land borders with them. It can be no wonder why Serge Sarkisian, a radical like his predecessor Robert Kocharyan, chose diplomacy over a lack of statesmanship. He realized that the survival of Armenia was much more important than waging a smear campaign against Turkey. If the border eventually opens, Armenia will find itself out of Russia’s suffocating grasp and it can begin to expand its relations and economy into other spheres. Their over dependence and isolation, once relaxed, can offer renewed prosperity in the region. 

Turkey, meanwhile, will see its major gains in the political realm; it will appease EU member states who have criticized Turkey over its continued closure of the Armenian border, despite the fact it was warranted due to Armenia’s occupation in Nagorno Karabakh.

Unfortunately, we are all getting ahead of ourselves when we talk of a future opening.  The fact remains that nothing has been signed or ratified yet.  For the former issue, the signing of the protocols by Turkey’s foreign minister Ahmet Davutoglu and Armenia’s foreign minister Edward Nalbandian, the date has been set for October 10. In regards to the actual ratifications, Armenia is not the only country facing rejection in its Parliament.  The ruling Justice and Development Party, or AKP, might hold the majority in Parliament, yet political speculation has not provided a favorable outcome for ratification unless MPs can see visible signs of progress on Armenia’s part in Nagorno Karabakh.  Armenia has declared its readiness to withdraw forces from five of the seven occupied regions in Azerbaijan, but until such measures are taken, it can be certain that Turkey will not ratify the protocols either.

In the end, this is an uphill battle that both sides are confronting and it is a vain hope for either to believe they should be fully satisfied by these agreements. Turkey’s opposition claims they are not fulfilled; they want further progress in Nagorno Karabakh and they want the original Kars Treaty to be included in the protocols. Radical Dashnaktsutyun – Armenian Revolutionary Federation, or ARF, members are not pleased either and some have even staged a hunger strike to protest the protocols.  They feel the Armenian government is caving into pressure by the Turkish side; if a committee to review the 1915 events comes to fruition, it negates their claims of “genocide.” What people need to stop and realize is that the real losers in all of this are those that have no voice because they are no longer here.  The countless people on both sides who lost their lives long ago in the last days of the Ottoman Empire and those who have lost their home and the life they built around it in Azerbaijan’s occupied territories.  This normalization and restoration of relations should continue for them and for the future.  As many wise men have said before, how are we to move forward if we continually live in our past?

Regrettably, it would be wise to say that none of us should hold our breaths for a resolution. It is a pessimistic view but perhaps it is realistic too. Let’s see what the week brings us.

 
*Stacy Maruskin is a researcher at the International Strategic Research Organization (ISRO/USAK) and can be reached at stacym.maruskin@gmail.com