by Göknur Akçadağ
How peace can come to the region seems to depend on multi-sided developments these days, as Azerbaijan reiterates her war threats over the Nagorno-Karabakh problem.
The war between Azerbaijan and Armenia for Nagorno-Karabakh has left some 35,000 dead since the 1980s. Still some mention the war. The Azerbaijani Ministry of Defense has created tension by saying: “Diplomacy has solved nothing for 15 years. Azerbaijan cannot wait for another 15 years. It is time for recourse to military action.” The threat of the war option has been constantly published in the Azerbaijani press in recent days, based on statements from Azerbaijani politicians.
Man has coped with his enemy in three ways from the past to the present: by fighting, by running away or by finding a way to like or compromise with the enemy. But the nations and states that have fought each other for centuries were unable to wipe out their enemies. The past art of ruling is out of date today. Past methods of coping with the enemy are useless. It is inevitable that conflicts and enmities must be reduced for the sake of regional and world peace.
It is more and more inevitable that methods which bring peace become favored in implementing solutions instead of exploiting crisis and conflict. We are all obliged to look to the future and end the enmity no matter what kinds of difficulties were suffered in the past. Bequeathing conflicting societies-nations-states to the new generation and our children along with passing on a legacy of revenge would not be useful.
Common aims and emotions and internal and external interests must be given a common sense approach when the top-level international policies of the states are designed. The questions of how peace can come if it will come and how the historical conflict between these two states or nations will end may be answered by clarifying the common aims, their own interests and the feelings and consciences of the parties to make peace. This common aim is regional peace for Turkey, Armenia and Azerbaijan.
Nowadays, global and regional policies do not support the claim “I can survive without others.” Therefore, a solution must be found for Turkey and Azerbaijan-Armenia.
The message of the heavy metal group Megadeth in its song “Peace Sells… But Who’s Buying?” referring to the Cold War is highly important now. Perhaps those who have hope for peace in their hearts cannot understand why others react when closed doors open. Therefore, hundreds of readers express their reaction to the question “Who, in fact, owns Karabakh?” in the readers’ comments part of the news. Different opinions are voiced instead of only one-sided and status quo supporting views. Emotional approaches are cast away while more realistic, objective and audacious comments are submitted to the question of “Where are we now and where must we be in this problem?” The psychologist Dr. Doğan Kökdemir says, “The conviction that ‘peace is wanted by everybody’ is such a strong conviction that bewilderment about those who oppose it is great.”
He talks about peace briefly:
“Peace needs more effort than war. Peace is difficult because human behavior is influenced by several things at the same time and in a complicated way. Peace, unlike war, needs more sacrifice. It wants you to think about not your interests but everyone’s… Peace needs not to be betrayed.”
How much is a realistic prerequisite to finding a solution to the international relations problem that Karabakh has created, a crucial point for two former Soviet Republics, tied to diplomacy in the course of the normalization of Turkish-Armenian relations?
More effort from mediators
Those who understand history, international relations and the attitudes and aims of the parties involved suggest that the mediator countries should exert more effort to solve the conflict and add that this is the way to apply pressure because the place where a solution can be found to the Karabakh question between Armenia and Azerbaijan is Russia. Azerbaijan unfairly pressuring Turkey, warning, “Do not take steps to be friends with my enemy,” as though Turkey were the country where the solution may be found, ruined the steps taken toward regional peace. There are Turks who have a special bond with Azerbaijan and know well the importance of dual relations in friendship and cooperation with Azerbaijanis that, on the other hand, are afraid of revealing their ideas and receiving adverse reactions even though they think the attitude of Azerbaijan toward Turkey is unfair; there are Turks who suggest that we must support Azerbaijan supposing that the conflict can be solved through local solutions without even knowing what the Nagorno-Karabakh problem is; and there are Turks between these two.
Will our historic friendship and required cooperation be dependent on the everlasting normalization of Turkish-Armenian relations? The only way to relieve Azerbaijan must be through diplomacy, not an emotional “we are on your side” approach. Azerbaijan must be reassured that what is trying to be done is a part of finding a solution for the region. Interruptions that minimized the multi-optional regional and global policies stressed by Mr. Ahmet Davutoğlu will bring the hopes and expectations for peace that may ease Turkey in troubled areas in her foreign policy to a halt. But phasing and explaining these policies may accelerate the solutions.
The deadlock in Turkey, Azerbaijan and Armenia results from the fact that all the parties involved want a solution only they like. But on the other hand, the problem is that Russia has not yet given the nod to the two countries for a solution, even though she is able to give real signals for a solution, as she wants to control the situation for the sake of her interests. The option of war brought to the agenda by Azerbaijan is not an option to be supported by any country, particularly Russia.
At the very same time, bringing forward the resolution in the United States has been an action to stop the initiative as well as the possibility of peace and consensus by the Armenian diaspora -- even if it was approved by 23 votes to 22 by the committee. This means nothing other than trying to have Turkey pressured by America. The countries, for the sake of peace, mustn’t surrender the future of their nations to the problems of the past. The US shouldn’t be a country that succumbs to a trivial agenda item of an ethnic diaspora based on prejudice.
The former German Chancellor Gerhard Schroder said in his speech during an award ceremony held by the Turkish-German Academic Platform: “Turkey is a symbol of stability in a region where it is not quiet. The peace initiative between Turkey and Armenia started an initiative to make the region free of conflicts in spite of some difficulties.” This statement puts forward an important external point of view.
In this regard, one must see that the “resolution agendas” devised by the pressure of the Armenian diaspora may impede the progress of normalization with Armenia, which has already been opposed in Turkey. Furthermore, aims for peace will result in a huge disappointment in the South Caucasus, expected to catch the spirit of world peace, as well as externally damaging Turkish-American relations.
*Assistant Professor Göknur Akçadağ is an instructor with Yıldız Technical University, department of humanities and social sciences-İstanbul/ İnönü University department of history, Turkey and a former SUNY Binghamton University Fernand Braudel Center scholar.
Article was published in Todays' Zaman