Civilnet
It’s not hard to understand.
In 2009, Armenia went out of its way to accommodate Turkey’s needs, or demands, or interests, in order to arrive at a document that would be the key to opening the locked border between Armenia and Turkey.
Armenia even signed those protocols on the establishment of diplomatic relations between the Republic of Armenia and the Republic of Turkey, despite many words of caution and admonition that those papers, as they were formulated, would not, could not work.
Indeed, Turkey was not able to go forward with the provisions of those documents. Whether Turkey began the process with the worst of intentions as the Armenian government now claims, or whether they indeed intended for this process to work and were themselves surprised at the immensity of the roadblocks placed before them by Azerbaijan, at the end of the day, as many think, the process did stop. Today it is not a hopeful process.
Even more reason then that the Armenian proponents of what came to be known as football diplomacy – kick first, think later – might want to take the high road, now, today and use the opportunity of the Black Sea Ministerial Meeting. Black Sea Economic Cooperation meetings are those rare forums where Turkey and Armenia are both present, at the highest levels. This year, at this meeting, the opportunity is even greater, since Turkey’s FM Davutoglu is in fact in Yerevan for a few hours for that meeting.
But it looks like this will be an opportunity squandered. Turkish and international journalists are in Armenia to see what the issues are, what is at stake, what is holding the process back, and what can be done.
The Armenian side, however, has decided to not talk to the Turks, about the Turks, with the Turks, or generally talk at all. Nor to allow reporters near the Turkish delegation, apparently.
The thinking must be this: by acknowledging the presence of Davutoglu or the Turkish delegation generally, the Armenian side is somehow legitimizing the Turkish political stance.
What part of this is diplomacy? When you don’t agree, or (perhaps justifiably even) feel that you have not been fairly dealt with, do you refuse to talk? Especially when international perception is that Armenia has the high ground at this point in the process, do you refuse to talk? Are there so very many forums and opportunities when Armenian and Turkish leaders can talk, yell, disagree, even call each other names – if that’s what it takes to move the process forward? In fact, does Armenia now (or ever) have tools other than our words, our speech, our explanations, our ability to present our position?
What about the press – why gag them? Can journalists not be seen as the ‘fourth estate’, in fact asking and pushing for the same things that Armenia’s government wants at the end of the day – improved relations?
Let’s just pretend Davutoglu is not in Armenia, let’s just pretend that somehow things will get better once the extent and degree of our anger is clear.
Ostrich diplomacy has come to replace football diplomacy.
Stories
