Serzh Sargsyan is Committed to Rapprochement with Turkey Despite Strong Opposition

"Today, we are attempting to normalize relations with the country which, under the Osman rule, carried out the policy of expulsion and destruction of our people.  The wound of the Genocide has not healed.  But the memory of our ancestors and our future generations demand that we have a stable and strong statehood, a strong and prospering nation.  We believe that one of the most important steps in this direction is the establishment of normal relations with all of our neighbors, including Turkey. Independence requires the will and determination to make important decisions, demands pragmatism and dedicated work toward the future.  I have chosen this path." (Excerpt from the address to the nation delivered by the President Serzh Sargsyan of Armenia on the signing of the protocols to re-open Armenia's border with Turkey, October 10, 2009).    
 
The agreement to re-open the Armenian-Turkish border, which the two countries signed on October 10, was brokered by Swiss and American diplomats and supported by France and Russia. A constellation of such powerful nations, whose foreign ministers gathered in Zurich, Switzerland for this event, indicates how important this agreement must have been for every country involved. If ratified by parliaments in both countries, it may open a new chapter for Armenia and Turkey, whose relations have been strained by allegations of ethnic cleansing and regional territorial disputes. If the cross-border trade and cooperation between the two countries resume, both Armenia and Turkey stand to gain valuable political and economic benefits. By extension, improved security in this energy-rich region will benefit western powers. 
 
Yet, Armenian president Serzh Sargsyan, who initiated the talks that culminated in the last week's agreement, has taken a lot of flack for these actions from his constituents at home and the mighty Armenian Dispora abroad. For a long time, the Armenian Diaspora has been pressing Turkey to admit that the mass murder of Armenians in the Ottoman Empire in 1915 consitituted genocide, which Turkish authorities have continuously denied. Then, in 1993, Turkey sided with Azerbaijan and shut down its border with Armenia in response to Armenian occupation of Azerbaijani territories.  
 
While Sargsyan assured everyone that the agreement was signed with no preconditions (i.e., Armenia did not take the genocide issue off the table and did not agree to unilateral concessions in the territorial dispute with Azerbaijan), his unconvinced opponents argue that he betrayed Armenia's interests on both issues. Granted, wealthy members of the Armenian Diaspora living in France and the United States are too removed from the realities ordinary Armenians face every day: unemployment, fuel shortages (which became more dire in August 2008 when energy supplies arriving through Georgia were interrupted during Georgia's short-lived war with Russia), and ever-rising prices for imported goods that are a function of high transporation costs. Diversified trade and transportation options and new jobs that will result from the opening of the border would be welcomed by the Armenian workforce and businesses. There may be a grain of truth in Sargsyan's statement (cited above) that practical considerations and concern for the well-being of the nation led him to this controversial decision. 
 
At the same time, I do not rule out ulterior motives on his part. The re-opening of the border with Turkey could be Sargsyan's attempt to deflect western criticism of botched elections that brought him to power last year, despite massive protests and public accusations that the ballot was rigged. He may be thinking that, since he could not salvage his political reputation, the least he can do now is improve Armenia's economy and pave a way for a more favorable public opinion of him in 2013 when the next presidential vote is due.
 
And some of the doubts voiced by the president's detractors might still be valid. Sargsyan's insistence that the border may be opened with no preconditions was challenged by Turkish President, Recep Tayyib Erdogan, immediately after the signing of the accords in Zurich. Erdogan said that Turkish parliament would not ratify the agreement unless Armenia showed real progress in peace talks with Azerbaijan. Sargsyan's critics claim that this has been Turkish requirement all along, but that Sargsyan has denied it in his attempts to "sell" the agreement to the Armenian public. 
 
If this is true, it shows how far Sargsyan has departed from his initial stance on the issue of the occupied lands. Himself born and raised in Nagorno-Karabakh, when the territory was under the Soviet Azerbaijan's control, he led the local armed movement in the late 1980s to separate the province from Azerbaijan and form an independent nation there. His ascendance to power in 2008 was interpreted by many as a sign of Armenia's solidifying resolve to achieve independence for this piece of Azerbaijan's land, where Armenians constituted majority in the years preceeding Nagorno-Karabakh's self-proclaimed independence.
 
Indeed, how much leverage could Sargsyan have had with Turkey if he was the one initiating the talks on the rapprochement? It is true that Ankara also wins some important battles of its own if this agreement is implemented. For instance, Erdogan's cabinet would be able claim improved relations with its neighbor and tick off another item on the European Union's list of requirements for aspiring members. It can also argue that its newly announced efforts to create an intergovernmental commission with Armenians to study the alleged genocide bring Turkey closer to the level of ethnic and religious tolerance expected of an EU member.  
 
Yet, given Armenia's desperate economic situation, it is Sargsyan who appears to be the "beggar who cannot choose." And his putting Armenia in this position has clearly irritated the proud Armenian Diaspora who is likely to continue its campaign for Sargsyan to step down. In the end, though, were he to resign or be ousted, Armenia's economic challenges would not go away, and the next president would be left with the same choice of either advocating for historic justice, or feeding the people and providing jobs.


Marianna Gurtovnik can be contacted at mgurtovnik@gmail.com