Search

Begin New Search Political Geography Armenia

161. Turkey-Armenia Relations

Author:
Fatih Ozbay
Publication Date:
01-2011
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
BILGESAM (Wise Men Center for Strategic Studies)
Abstract:
Turkey is situated at the crossroads of the regions which are of utmost importance and which pose many problems at the same time. Turkey, as a requirement of continuity in its foreign policy, tries to adopt a multi-dimensional and active approach. Doctrine and discourse-wise, fundamentals of this multi-dimensional and dynamic foreign policy lies under the principle of Atatürk, “Peace at home, peace in the world.” One can see the most concrete implications of Turkey’s multi-dimensional and proactive foreign policy in the Sa’dabat Pact and Balkan Pact, which had been established during the budding years of the Republic of Turkey. Turkey’s foreign policy approach aims at the formation of domestic, regional and global peace, and stability. As the continuation of this foreign policy approach, Turkey, by virtue of its zero problems with neighbors policy, tries to solve its problems through dialogue and plays an active role in the areas with regional conflicts. Turkey also takes steps that will boost economic and cultural rapport among the countries in the region. Turkey has been able to make use of the proper conditions arising from the dynamic structure of the new international system after the Cold War Period. Within this scope, Turkey has been able to put into practice its approach of proactive and multi-dimensional foreign policy over certain subgeographic systems, namely the geopolitics of the Balkans, the Middle East, the Caucasus, and other important parts of the world. In other words, the dynamic structure of the international system, which has undergone a huge change-transformation after the Cold War Period, has also reflected upon the sub-systems. Turkey, as a result of this dynamism, has been able to realize its foreign policy parameters especially in its region due to its unique geopolitical location.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Bilateral Relations, Geopolitics, and Conflict
Political Geography:
Turkey, Middle East, and Armenia

162. Turkish Foreign Policy in 2009: A Year of Pro-activity

Author:
Ufuk Ulutaş
Publication Date:
03-2010
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Insight Turkey
Institution:
SETA Foundation for Political, Economic and Social Research
Abstract:
Since the early 2000s, Turkish foreign policy has experienced a fundamental transformation. Turkey's regional and global position, its relations with the countries in surrounding regions, and its long-lasting disputes with its neighbors were reshaped through the adoption of the "zero-problem with-neighbors" policy. In line with this policy, Turkey has taken a pro-active stance and followed a multi-dimensional foreign policy approach to establish itself, first, as a conciliatory partner for peace with its neighbors, and second, as an agent of mediation between its clashing neighboring countries. 2009 was a year of foreign policy initiatives towards Syria, Armenia, and Iraq, including the Kurdish Regional Government. And it marked the beginning of more positive and constructive relations between Turkey and the United States. Turkey gained substantial ground in becoming a regional hub for energy by undersigning two critical energy deals. Yet, two major issues remain as challenges for Turkish foreign policy: a) the EU accession process, and b) the Cyprus dispute.
Topic:
Foreign Policy and Government
Political Geography:
United States, Iraq, Turkey, Armenia, and Syria

163. NOTE FROM THE EDITOR-IN-CHIEF

Author:
Nasimi Aghayev
Publication Date:
01-2010
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
The Caucasian Review of International Affairs
Institution:
The Caucasian Review of International Affairs
Abstract:
Events in the Caucasus have continued to offer observers choice issues for analysis. On everyone's mind, of course, is the lack of development in the normalization of relations between Turkey and Armenia. The two sticking-points – the “Armenian genocide” issue and that of acknowledging Azerbaijan's call for first making progress toward a resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict – have remained major obstacles in the way forward. The “genocide” obstacle has been strengthened by the statement of the Constitutional Court of Armenia that the application of the protocols signed in October 2009 should comply with the paragraph 11 of the Armenian Declaration of Independence. The said declaration determines for Armenia a goal of achieving the international recognition of the “genocide” on the one hand, and raises territorial claims against Turkey on the other hand. Ankara's reaction to the statement has been quite harsh, since such an understanding on the part of Armenia of the normalization process wouldn't allow for setting up the bilateral “historical commission” envisaged in the protocols – an issue, which has been regarded by Turkey as the major achievement in the whole process.
Political Geography:
America, Turkey, Caucasus, Armenia, and Azerbaijan

164. Puzzles of State Transformation: The Case of Armenia and Georgia

Author:
Nicole Gallina
Publication Date:
01-2010
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
The Caucasian Review of International Affairs
Institution:
The Caucasian Review of International Affairs
Abstract:
The problems of weak state structures, including state territoriality, in the South Caucasus has highly influenced political developments and the building of a democratic state. This paper explains the difficulty of recovering statehood in the cases of Armenia and Georgia, both in the context of post–Soviet state transformation and post–conflict state-rebuilding. It argues that recovering statehood in the South Caucasus meant at once maintaining the status quo within the state structures and managing the highly volatile political and ethnic relations (culminating in armed conflict). In the cases of conflict, elite management impeded conflict solution. In this context, this paper finds that elite power slowed the construction of a democratic and effective state. In particular, elite fragmentation has led to serious impediments for state development and the consolidation of territoriality. In sum, elite-led state development and conflict management hindered the successful consolidation of state territoriality.
Political Geography:
Soviet Union, Armenia, Georgia, and South Caucasus

165. Armenia and Turkey: Bridging the Gap

Author:
Thomas de Waal
Publication Date:
04-2010
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Abstract:
The historic normalization between Armenia and Turkey has stalled and it is critical to prevent relations from deteriorating further. If Armenia and Turkey eventually succeed in opening their closed border, it will transform the South Caucasus region. But the concerns of Azerbaijan, Turkey's ally and the losing side in the Nagorny Karabakh conflict, need to be taken into account. The international community needs to pay more attention to the conflict and work harder to break the regional deadlock it has generated. The annual debate over the use of the word genocide to describe the fate of the Ottoman Armenians in 1915 has turned into an ugly bargaining process. It is time to take a longer view. President Obama should look ahead to the centenary of the tragedy in 2015 and encourage Turks to take part in commemorating the occasion.
Topic:
Conflict Resolution, International Relations, Diplomacy, Ethnic Conflict, and Bilateral Relations
Political Geography:
United States, Turkey, Armenia, and Azerbaijan

166. The Turkish-Armenian Rapprochement at the Deadlock

Author:
Nona Mikhelidze
Publication Date:
03-2010
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Istituto Affari Internazionali
Abstract:
In October 2009, after intense diplomatic talks and the active involvement of key external actors, Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu and his Armenian counterpart Edward Nalbandian signed two protocols aimed at restoring bilateral relations. The agreements have however remained unratified due to political obstacles closely linked to historic disputes and the geopolitical constellation in the South Caucasus. As a result, even if rapprochement between Ankara and Yerevan has the potential of producing far-reaching changes in the regional political equilibrium, the status quo remains the most likely scenario.
Topic:
Conflict Resolution, Diplomacy, Ethnic Conflict, and Bilateral Relations
Political Geography:
Central Asia, Turkey, Middle East, Armenia, and South Caucasus

167. 1995 was a Good Year for the South Caucasus

Author:
Gerard J. Libaridian
Publication Date:
08-2010
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Uluslararasi Iliskiler
Institution:
Uluslararasi Iliskiler
Abstract:
The article discusses the inter-ethnic conflicts in the South Caucasus while focusing on the policies of the leaders of Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia and offers an illuminating account on the role of leadership in conflict resolution while taking into account domestic, regional and international settings. The author considers 1995 as the first year of stabilized region and discusses the reasons why this rare opportunity for conflict resolution in the South Caucasus offered by 1995 was not realized.
Political Geography:
Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, and South Caucasus

168. Foreign Policies of the States of the Caucasus: Evolution in the Post-Soviet Period

Author:
Brenda Shaffer
Publication Date:
08-2010
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Uluslararasi Iliskiler
Institution:
Uluslararasi Iliskiler
Abstract:
The article examines the development of the foreign policies and strategies of the three states of the Caucasus-Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia—in the post-Soviet period. The article claims that ideology and identity have had little impact on the alliances and foreign policy orientations adopted by the three states. Second, the three states of the Caucasus adopted fundamentally different policies toward Russia. Third, geographic factors have had significant influence on their foreign policy options. Fourth, managing the results of the secessionist conflicts has been a major goal of their foreign policy efforts and the conflicts are a useful lever of neighboring powers. Fifth, the foreign policy making capability of the three states has expanded significantly. Last, the foreign policy options of the three states have been limited by the policies of the major powers in the region.
Political Geography:
Caucasus, Soviet Union, Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Georgia

169. The Azerbaijan-Russia-Turkey Energy Triangle and its Impact on the Future of Nagorno-Karabakh

Author:
Nona Mikhelidze
Publication Date:
09-2010
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Istituto Affari Internazionali
Abstract:
Following the dissolution of the Soviet Union, the Caucasian-Caspian region has become a stage for the collision of opposing foreign security and energy policies. After 16 years of a very fragile ceasefire, the peace process between Azerbaijan and Armenia over the disputed region of Nagorno-Karabakh continues to depend not only on the attitudes of the conflict parties, but also and perhaps even more on the re-organization of the region at the political, security and energy levels. Three main developments can affect the prospects for conflict resolution in Karabakh: the parties' growing frustration with the OSCE Minsk-Group mediation; the US-brokered Turkish-Armenian rapprochement and the deterioration in US-Azeri relations; and finally, Russia's resurgence in the region. These three inter-related factors could result in a new regional scenario marked by the emergence of an energy triangle between Azerbaijan, Russia and Turkey, which in turn could impact on the destiny of Nagorno- Karabakh.
Topic:
Conflict Resolution, Security, Energy Policy, and Regional Cooperation
Political Geography:
Russia, United States, Turkey, Soviet Union, Armenia, and Azerbaijan

170. Armenia and Turkey: Bridging the Gap

Author:
Thomas de Waal
Publication Date:
10-2010
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Abstract:
The historic normalization between Armenia and Turkey has stalled and it is critical to prevent relations from deteriorating further. If Armenia and Turkey eventually succeed in opening their closed border, it will transform the South Caucasus region. But the concerns of Azerbaijan, Turkey's ally and the losing side in the Nagorny Karabakh conflict, need to be taken into account. The international community needs to pay more attention to the conflict and work harder to break the regional deadlock it has generated.
Topic:
Conflict Resolution, Peace Studies, Treaties and Agreements, and Bilateral Relations
Political Geography:
Turkey, Armenia, and Azerbaijan