Foreign

Home page

Foreign

American analyst: The French Senateâ€™s legislation of the past in the present has dire consequences for the future

06 February 2012 12:02 (UTC +04:00)

Washington. Isabel Levine - APA. â€œAzerbaijanâ€™s approach to the French Senateâ€™s passing of the â€˜Armenian genocideâ€™ bill has been constructive though it is difficult when Azerbaijan is still at war with Armenia for it to play much more of a positive roleâ€, Dr. Joshua W. Walker, a Transatlantic Fellow at the German Marshall Fund of the United States, where he runs the Turkey Program, told in an interview with APAâ€™s correspondent.

â€œObviously Turkey and Azerbaijan must coordinate and work together, but there are different interests in Ankara and Baku when it comes to Yerevan, yet ironically the Armenian lobby brings them closer together which is in direct contradiction to Yerevanâ€™s interestâ€, he said.

The analyst believes that the French Senateâ€™s legislation of the past in the present "has dire consequences for the futureâ€. â€œEvery democracy has its pitfalls and in particular the narrow interests of lobbies everywhere have negative consequences as we are seeing in the case of French-Turkish relations. Rather than focusing on the similarities and convergence of interest between France and Turkey fellow Minsk Group, NATO, and G-20 allies the French Senate passing the bill penalizing denial of the â€œArmenian genocideâ€ has hurt everyoneâ€™s interests rather than gaining anythingâ€.

Speaking about the possible affect of the French â€œgenocide billâ€ to the Nagorno-Karabakh adjustment process, Mr. Walker mentioned that Nagorno-Karabakh unfortunately is a deeply frozen conflict that will be unaffected by the French bill precisely because this conflict is not just a problem from the past, but of present realities. Ankaraâ€™s own internal calculations vice-a-vie Baku and Yerevan and competing international and regional interests will ultimately have far more impact than anything Paris can legislate.

The analyst also considers that Armenian-Turkish rapprochement has been stillborn almost from the beginning of the 2009 protocol signing because of the domestic and regional political realities in Ankara, Baku, and Yerevan.

â€œRather than focusing on a positive agenda in an environment of trust, we have seen nothing but negatively and insincerity unfortunately. I think Armenian-Turkish rapprochement is in everyoneâ€™s long-term interest, but the short term ramifications and the ongoing history issues with Turkey and present day frozen conflict with Azerbaijan make me pessimistic about the possibilities of genuine reconciliationâ€, he added.

According to him, the US has done all it can do and quite frankly needs to focus on being a more fair and balanced broker given its own domestic components.

â€œArmeniaâ€™s President got more severely criticized when he came to Los Angeles and Boston than in his own country for the reconciliation process which shows how skewed this entire process has been. Ultimately it is in Americaâ€™s long-term interest to help Armenia and Turkey reconcile so they can work out their differences directly rather than indirectlyâ€.

He also underscored that Turkey as a candidate country for the EU has never been treated the same as any other country, yet Albania as another Muslim country that has integrated into European structure offers some hope particularly for a country like Azerbaijan that has a more relaxed understanding of religion.

â€œTurkey is a deeply conservative and religious country that has a role to play as a leader and spokesman for Muslims around the world, where as Azerbaijan has less of a role, yet as seen from Europe they will very much be put in the same category. So how ever far Turkey can go with Europe is a win for Azerbaijan and vice-versa, so whether it is in Eurovision or the European Union their destinies will be forever linkedâ€, he said.