The Chairman of the Public Council. ‘There are several opportunities in the area of Armenian-Turkish relations for Armenia.’

The interview with the chairman of the Public Council Vazghen Manukyan

After the protocols had been signed, did the position of the Public Council change with regards to them?

I believe that the position has not changed. I say that I believe so since no session has been held to address this issue. If the members of the Public Council changed their attitudes, then they would initiate discussions around this issue. However, it is good that we discuss the developments around the issue in the near future. The reason is that there are some developments there.

After the protocols had been signed, six months passed. Nonetheless, the protocols are not ratified yet. The present situation can be considered as a delay of further progress. How do you assess the steps of the both sides?

When the protocols had been signed, an impression was created in Turkey that Armenia would not hesitate to sacrifice anything in order to open up the roads. Turkey attempted to tie the opening of the border with the Karabakh issue. On the contrary, Armenia’s position on this issue became even more rigid than it had been before.

The process of the international recognition of the Armenian Genocide also continued as it had gone on before. In fact, the intention of Turkey to undertake first steps and thereby to lead Armenia into abandoning the path towards the recognition of the Genocide did not come true. The ‘cunning’ play of Turkey contributed to the loss of certain things in the face of the international community instead of gaining there.

Big states, that are interested in seeing the roads open and the relations between Turkey and Armenia normalized, understand now that the resolution of the issue is hindered by Turkey and not by Armenia.

The Committee of International Affairs of the US Congress adopted the resolution condemning the Armenian Genocide. Can this fact be viewed as a punish act.

The USA does not ever benefit from offending the feelings of its military partner in the region. Turkey considers the question of Genocide as the issue related to its national honor. Even such powerful state as USA does not want to hurt the feelings of the national dignity of its partners. Form this point of view the USA is aware of the fact that the Genocide took place in the past and that its 40 states recognized and condemned it. It, nonetheless, avoids under one or other pretext recognizing the Genocide at the federal level as it fears to lose its ally.

The representatives of the US Congress act not only on the basis of the current state politics but they also act on the basis of humanitarian and democratic values. Different representatives of the Armenian Diaspora presented numerous facts while working with the Committee of International Affairs of the Congress. The members of the Committee have a very clear idea about the Armenian Genocide. They were raising the issue with the Genocide recognition at the Congress for many times in the past. During the presidencies of Clinton and Bush, the Staff of the US government tried not to make enemies with Turkey. Those, who claim that if it were not the Armenian-Turkish protocols, the US would recognize the Armenian genocide, are grossly mistaken.

The US administration now declares that it is against the adoption of the resolution because the adoption may hinder the development of Armenian-Turkish relationship. In my opinion, there is some cunning there. Despites the opposition to the recognition of Armenia Genocide, there seems to be some internal agreement that allows throwing Turkey into a predicament. This is done to compel Turkey to adopt a ‘soft’ position. The Armenian-Turkish relations became the issue of honour for the US Administration irrespective of state interests.

According to you, will the adoption of the resolution influence the process of the ratification of the protocols by Turkey? How likely will Turkey ratify the protocols?

Turkey may announce that the US policies towards the recognition of the Armenian genocide prevented it from ratifying the protocols. It may also demand that the US Congress makes one step backwards in order for Turkey to ratify the protocols. However, Turkey has already found itself under considerable pressures.

I do not think that Turkey will soon go towards the ratification of the protocols since it may appear as if it has been punished and it has consequently complied. This will look unnatural. Sooner or later the protocols will be ratified but I do not think that this may happen in the near future. 

The first rumors, that Armenia and Turkey were about to come to some agreement, had spread out last year before the 24^th of April. It is going to be one year since that event. During that year one very important fact occurred. The ever unchangeable situation around the protocols brought about the outburst of resentment among the Armenians. The resentment also complimented to the development of the opposition among the Diaspora Armenians against the protocols. I cannot recall other timer when the Diaspora Armenians have ever been so active since 1988. I consider as another positive achievement the fact that as a result of the discussions this issue has become one of the most important in the international politics. It is now discussed worldwide. We have also acquired allies both in connection with Karabakh problem and in connection with the recognition of the Genocide.

One is year coming to completion and Armenia has several possibilities at hand. If Turkey does not ratify the protocols, Armenia may recall its signature and declare that all deadlines are missed. In future if there are again other opportunities for normalizing the relations between Armenia and Turkey, everything will have to start afresh. The second possibility is that Armenia can wait for some time until Turkey ratifies those protocols.

I cannot exclude that if Turkey fails to undertake any steps in relation to the ratification of the protocols prior to the 24^th of April, the recognition of the Armenian Genocide will take place at the federal level in the US one way or other.

This year has been beneficial for the advancement our national interests. Despite both certain natural and artificial disagreements between Armenia and Diaspora Armenians, the united approach to the national interests has been evident throughout the year.

When the Public Council gave its approval to the protocols, was such a development anticipated?

The fact that there was a need of change in the area of traditional Armenian-Turkish relations was beyond doubt for everyone. It was expected to launch a dialogue and to start the process of opening roads while other national interests such as resolving Karabakh problem and advancing the cause of the recognition of the Armenian genocide were to be upheld too. Some people believed that the process of the dialogue would bring about the resolution to the long heated questions. Others were more farseeing and they consequently expected a more protracted process.

What did the past months prove? Were the Karabakh problem and the protocols in fact entwined?

In actuality both the recognition of the Genocide and the opening of the roads as well as the resolution of the Karabakh problem are all interconnected. In these protocols, the important fact was that the recognition of the Genocide and the resolution of the Karabakh problem were not formally present. That did not mean there was no connection between the issues. In the verbal presentations these three issues are always interconnected. It was possible to view the diplomatic victory of the Armenian side due to the fact that those three issues were separated from each other in the protocols. The three problems could not be resolved simultaneously but each of them could be resolved separately. Turkey started to raise the questions that were not reflected in the protocols. It had already been late then. The international communities started to disappove of Turkey pointing out that those issues were not incorporated into the protocols. Turkey meanwhile continued to present those issues as a precondition for the ratification.

Given the present situation what will be the future of the resolution of the Karabakh problem, in your opinion?

The most important feature of the resolution of the Karabakh conflict is the fact that it will never be a part of Azerbaijan. When Azerbaijan accepts this idea, all our negotiations will quickly yield solutions. If Azerbaijan is not reconciled with the mentioned idea, the negotiations will last endlessly. In that instance Azerbaijan will continue to resort to threats of resolving the conflict via military means. Armenia’s tough stance is justified under these circumstances. Azerbaijan understands that a lot of time has passed and that de facto nearly all the world has recognized Karabakh.

The entire world is interested in opening up the roads. When Turkey advanced the idea of resolving the Karabakh conflict in favor of Azerbaijan as a precondition, the number of our allies increased too. At present Aliev’s attempt to launch a war will be more strongly disapproved by the international community. Azerbaijan will find itself in more difficult situation to start a war under such circumstances.

Did the state policy on the promotion of the recognition of Armenian Genocide change in any way during the last year?

Many people are concerned that the situation will lead to abandoning the policy of international recognition of the Genocide. The doubts, that Armenia would withdraw from the policy of the recognition of the Armenian Genocide when the protocols are signed, were refuted.

Time showed that during the last ten years the question of the Armenian Genocide was not discussed so intensely in the media and internationally as it took place during this short period. The ratification or non-ratification of the protocols goes ahead hand in hand with the issue of recognition of the Armenian Genocide. From that point of view both the advocacy of the Armenian Diaspora and the position of the government of Armenia make sense.

Both Armenian and Armenian Diaspora struggled side by side for the cause of recognizing the Armenian Genocide. Armenia sent its delegation to the US when the crucial voting on the resolution recognizing the Armenian Genocide commenced at the Committee of International Affairs of the US Congress. Thus, the importance of this issue for Armenia was demonstrated at the state level. The Armenian lobby was very active during this year which is also the result of the discussions around the ratification of the protocols.

To what extent is Armenia ready to the opening of the borders today? What steps were undertaken during the past 5 months in the unresolved areas?

Serious preparations were not carried out. The domestic policy of Armenia and the country’s legislation will undergo meaningful changes when the borders are opened up. I do not see that these months are made good use of.

When time is ripe, life will compel to undertake necessary steps. It is good if we are prepared to these steps before then. When the borders are opened, many problems will come to surface. It is easier to solve some of the problems today so that later on we have more breathing space. Despite all problems that turn up in front of us, the opening of the borders will be favorable to the development of Armenia.