WikiLeaks – Armenia No 40
C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 YEREVAN 002209
SUBJECT: TOUCHING BASE ON A TOUGH 2005 FOR ARMENIA-TURKEY
Classified By: CDA A.F. Godfrey for reasons 1.4 (b,d).
——-
SUMMARY
——-
¶1. (C) MFA Middle East Department Chief Artem Aznaurian and MFA Turkey Desk Officer Sahak Sargsyan told us December 22 that 2005 had not produced much progress in the Armenia-Turkey rapprochement process, but said the GOAM would continue to engage in working-level meetings with Turkish diplomats during the upcoming year. Aznaurian was anxious to report that Russian diplomat Andrey Kelin, Head of the CIS Department at the Russian MFA, had consulted with the GOAM recently on issues related to Turkey and even traveled to Turkey to discuss the Armenia-Turkey relationship. On prospects of opening the Armenia-Turkey border, Aznaurian said the GoT was “saving face” by listing settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict as a pre-condition but reiterated the MFA’s pessimistic line about prospects for a border opening (in the near-term) absent a breakthrough on N-K. He characterized the relationship as “still caught in the exchange of letters between Kocharian and Erdogan,” which did not produce satisfactory movement for either side.
Comment: Despite a fresh line-up of diplomats working the Turkey portfolio, the last set of disappointing meetings between Deputy FM Kirakossian are still hanging heavily over the GOAM [Government of Armenia]. The news that there is no meeting on the calendar between GOAM and GOT [Government of Turkey] Deputy Foreign Ministers is disquieting and we should encourage the two sides not to let this particular channel of communication go silent. End Summary.
——————————————-
2005: NOT A BANNER YEAR FOR ARMENIA-TURKEY
——————————————-
¶2. (C) MFA Middle East Department Chief Artem Aznaurian and MFA Turkey Desk Officer Sahak Sargsyan told us during a December 22 meeting that 2005 had not produced much progress in the Armenia-Turkey rapprochement process. Aznaurian, who is not prone to gratuitous cheerleading when it comes to Turkish-Armenian relations, was more pessimistic than usual about what, if anything, had been accomplished between the two sides over the past year. Aznaurian said the status of the relationship was “still caught up in the exchange of letters between Kocharian and Erdogan.” He said that the GOAM had hoped more tangible progress would come out of the exchange of letters, which “did not prove satisfactory for either side.” When asked about the status of the somewhat regular meetings between Deputy Foreign Ministers in Vienna, Aznaurian said the latest meetings had not produced anything new in terms of an action plan or confidence building measures (reftel). He said that the GOAM would continue with this format but said there was not a date on the calendar for the next meeting. As during previous meetings, Aznaurian was quick to point to Armenia’s representation at the Black Sea Economic Conference (BSEC) in Istanbul as the GOAM’s main source for information and policy issues related to Turkey.
—————————————-
TATTLING OR TOUTING RUSSIAN INVOLVEMENT?
—————————————-
¶3. (C) Aznaurian pointed to continued engagement by countries like the United States as key to the Armenia-Turkey rapprochement process. He appeared anxious, however, to point to recent conversations with the Russians on the issue as indication of their growing interest on the issue. He said that the two sides discussed prospects for establishing relations with Turkey during their recent bilateral government consultations. According to Aznaurian, Russian diplomat Andrey Kelin (Head of the CIS Department at the Russian MFA) expressed interest in the issue during his latest meeting with the Armenians and even traveled to Turkey to discuss the Armenia-Turkey relationship. Aznaurian noted that it was outside of Kelin’s portfolio to travel to Ankara and asked what the USG [U. S. Government] thought of what might be growing engagement by the Russians on the topic.
————————–
BORDER: STILL TIED TO N-K
————————–
¶4. (C) Aznaurian reported that immediate prospects for opening the Armenia-Turkey border were still slim. He said the issue was undoubtedly linked to settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict but raised doubts about the extent of the GoT’s conviction on this point. Aznaurian predicted that the GoT was merely “saving face” by listing settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict as a pre-condition for opening the border. He said that N-K was always among the Turks’ top three pre-conditions but said that they regularly alternate its place on the list “perhaps as a pretext, but probably just to save face” with the Azeris.
COMMENT
——-
¶5. (C) Despite a fresh line-up of diplomats working the Turkey portfolio, memories from the last set of disappointing meetings between Deputy FM Kirakossian and Turkish Deputy Undersecretary Ahmet Uzumcu are still hanging heavily over the GOAM. The news that there is no meeting on the calendar between GOAM and GOT Deputy Foreign Ministers is disquieting and we should encourage the two sides not to let this particular channel of communication go silent.
GODFREY
