NOREF - Never mind the gap: Turkish-Armenian relations past the crossroads

Home > Regions > Middle East and North Africa > Never mind the gap: Turkish-Armenian relations past the crossroads

Author

Einar Wigen

Einar Wigen is a research fellow at the Department of International Politics at the Norwegian Institute of International Affairs (NUPI) . He holds an MA in peace and conflict resolution from the European Centre for Peace Studies in Austria, and an MPhil in political science from the University o...
More

Related publications

Arms and democracy: the debate on Syrian militarisation: Mariano Aguirre , Reinoud Leenders , Robert Matthews , 14 May 2012
Demographic challenges and opportunities ahead in Middle East and North Africa: “Arab Spring” or “Islamic winter”?: Youssef Courbage , 11 May 2012
How the West can get on the right side of history in the re-awakening Arab world: David Gardner , 9 May 2012
Youth integration and job creation in the Middle East: Jad Chaaban , 4 May 2012
The “dark side” of the Syrian transition and its potentially dire regional consequences: Philippe Droz-Vincent , 20 April 2012
Regional implications of the conflict in Syria: a view from Israel: Yossi (Joseph) Alpher , 20 April 2012
Islamist mobilisation and prospects for change in the upcoming Algerian parliamentary elections: Jenny Holmsen , 23 March 2012

Download full text

Never mind the gap: Turkish-Armenian relations past the crossroads

Einar Wigen , 10 May 2010

Executive summary:

The Turkish-Armenian protocols signed in October 2009 seemed to represent a historic advance that could help resolve the two countries' dispute over the events of 1915 and change the regional dynamics for the better. But six months on, the implementation of the protocols has stalled, the much vaunted normalisation of Turkish-Armenian state-to-state relations appears all but dead, and the will to revive the process is at a low point.

Each side holds to a different interpretation both of the origins of the protocol process and the reasons why it collapsed; each blames the other for scuppering the deal by introducing preconditions over the resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh question or the recognition of the border between the two countries. Moreover, international conditions are against progress, with the influence of the United States on Turkey having diminished since a congressional committee voted for a resolution calling the 1915 killings “genocide”.

Nevertheless, it appears to be only a matter of time before international pressure to resolve the conflict will be renewed. It is essential that Turkey and Armenia seek to unwind the current process in a cordial manner, so that a new one may be started without too great a legacy of grievance about recent events. The international community could also play a constructive role in the interim by investing more effort into solving the conflict over Nagorno-Karabakh, into preserving the contact points between Turkey and Armenia, and into improving information channels between the two countries.