WikiLeaks-Armenia No 58
2007-02-09
C O N F I D E N T I A L YEREVAN 000149
SUBJECT: ARMENIAN REPLY TO TURKEY ON COMMISSIONS STILL IN THE WORKS
Classified By: CDA A.F. Godfrey, Reasons 1.4 (b,d)
¶1. (C) CDA and Pol/Econ chief met February 8 with DFM [Deputy Foreign Minister Arman] Kirakossian to ask whether/when Armenia would respond to the GOT’s [Government of Turkey] latest proposal on bilateral dialogue (i.e. the “commissions” proposal). Kirakossian noted that the recent Erdogan-Saakashvili-Aliyev meeting to celebrate their deal to build the Kars-Alkhakalki-Baku railroad made it “hard” for Armenia to be positive about Turkish dialogue. He noted that that event had gotten lots of local press coverage in Armenia.
¶2. (C) Kirakossian was non-plussed when we questioned him about FM [Vartan] Oskanian’s February 7 Los Angeles Times op-ed entitled “Turkey Misses Its Chance with Armenia.” We asked him if this was, in effect, Armenia’s answer to the GOT, and Kirakossian said it was not. Armenia remained committed to replying to Turkey. Kirakossian had been hard at work on a non-paper response to Turkey, which he had only yesterday submitted to FM Oskanian for discussion with President Kirakossian. Kirakossian said his draft was “very positive” and that it called for establishing diplomatic relations. He also said it included provisions for reviewing historical issues, though seemingly not exactly the commissions proporal that Turkey had advanced.
¶3. (C) We pointed out that Oskanian’s words in the L.A. Times had seemed to suggest that the “window had closed” on any new rapprochement with Turkey in the wake of the Hrant Dink killing in Istanbul. Kirakossian seemed surprised by that, betraying a lack of familiarity with the text of the op-ed. His reaction strongly suggested that Kirakossian had been left out of the loop in the GOAM [Government of Armenia] decision for Oskanian to place the op-ed with the L.A. Times.
¶4. (C) Kirakossian was unable to estimate when his non-paper would be approved and ready for transmission to Turkey. He noted that it required the president’s approval, and that President Kocharian was currently on vacation (in-country), making it hard to predict when he would be able to review the document.
¶5. (C) COMMENT: Oskanian’s op-ed is very disappointing, but unfortunately not entirely surprising. The GOAM still fundamentally believes that the GOT is not serious about true rapprochement with Armenia or about opening the border (absent an N-K settlement), which is pretty much the only thing that Armenia really wants from Ankara. Armenians seem to remain convinced that the Turks are just posturing in a bid to avoid a U.S. Congressional resolution affirming the “genocide” and that once that danger has passed (or come to pass), Turkey will return to its stonewalling ways. How, they reason, could Turkey possibly be serious about rapprochement with Armenia at the same time it is pouring millions of dollars into the Kars-Alkhakalaki-Baku railroad, which is designed to isolate and further impoverish Armenia. With that analysis as a departure point, the GOAM’s goal seems to be to win the propaganda battle with Turkey, with each determined to convince U.S. and European leaders that it is the more reasonable party.
GODFREY
