LATEST MEETING WITH TURKISH COUNTERPART

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 YEREVAN 001494

SIPDIS

DEPT FOR EUR/CACEN, EUR/SE, EUR/ACE

E.O. 12958: DECL: 08/18/2015
TAGS: PREL PGOV TU AM
SUBJECT: LATEST MEETING WITH TURKISH COUNTERPART
DISAPPOINTS DFM KIRAKOSSIAN

REF: YEREVAN 01492

Classified By: Ambassador John M. Evans for reasons 1.4 (b,d).

--------------
SUMMARY
--------------


1. (C) On August 16, Deputy Foreign Minister Arman
Kirakossian told the Ambassador that his recent meeting in
Vienna with Turkish Deputy Undersecretary Ahmet Uzumcu was
less productive than the GOAM had hoped. According to
Kirakossian, the two sides still cannot agree on the
structure or scope of the proposed inter-governmental
commission on the events of 1914-1915. He said that Uzumcu
"repeatedly focused" on the upcoming Kazan meeting between
the Armenian and Azerbaijani Presidents and suggested the
Turks were "awaiting a breakthrough." He said the Turks
viewed the Kazan meeting as an indicator of how much latitude
they could afford in talks with the Armenians regarding
border opening and the proposed Turkish-Armenian historical
commission. While he emphasized that mid-level bureaucrats
from both sides continued to work on the action plan of
administrative and people-to-people confidence building
measures, Kirakossian expressed his disappointment that
Uzumcu was "unwilling" to set the date for their next meeting
until after the Kazan summit. End Summary.

--------------
NEVER AS GOOD AS THE FIRST TIME
--------------


2. (C) Ambassador Evans met with Deputy Foreign Minister
Arman Kirakossian August 16 to discuss his recent meeting in
Vienna with Turkish MFA Deputy Undersecretary Ahmet Uzumcu.
A disappointed Kirakossian said that the July 29 sessions,
his second with Uzumcu in the past three months, were "just
not as good as the first meeting." He claimed that the
format (4 plus 4) and tone remained positive, but said that
substantive issues hampered tangible headway between the two
sides. As usual, Kirakossian guarded details of the meeting,
but did not hesitate to assert his overall disappointment in
the outcome.

--------------
DISAGREEMENT ON COMMISSION SLOWS PROGRESS
--------------


3. (C) Kirakossian cited differences over the goals and scope
of the proposed inter-governmental commission on the events
of 1915 as the major impediment to progress during the Vienna
meeting. After reading the letters of both Presidents on the
issue, Kirakossian suggested that the GOAM's proposal to
create five sub-commissions (diplomatic relations, opening
the border, academic research, trade and commercial prospects
and public opinion/cultural exchange) went too far for the
Turks. He said that the Turks "seemed focused on the past,
while we want these meetings to talk about the future."
Kirakossian pointed to the timeline and performance measures
in the GOAM proposal as evidence of the Armenians'
willingness to make "significant" progress toward normalizing
relations. Kirakossian said that Uzumcu made it clear to
him, however, that Turkish Foreign Minister Gul was so
opposed to the GOAM approach that he reportedly never took
the Armenian proposal beyond his Ministry to Prime Minister
Erdogan or any others in the GOT. Kirakossian claimed that
Uzumcu emphasized to him privately on the margins of the
talks that establishment of the commission as prescribed by
the Turkish side was an important confidence-building measure
for the GOT.

--------------
KIRAKOSSIAN SAYS TURKS ARE FOCUSED ON KAZAN
--------------


4. (C) Kirakossian said that Uzumcu "repeatedly focused" on
the upcoming Kazan meeting between the Armenian and
Azerbaijani Presidents and suggested the Turks seemed to be
"awaiting a breakthrough." He said the Turks viewed the
Kazan meeting as an indicator of how much latitude they could
afford in talks with the Armenians regarding border opening
and the proposed Turkish-Armenian historical commission.

--------------
NO MEETING DATE, BUT EXCHANGES CONTINUE
--------------


5. (C) Kirakossian said he was disappointed that Uzumcu was
unwilling to set the date for their next meeting until after
the Kazan summit. He emphasized, however, that mid-level
bureaucrats from both sides continued to work on the action
plan of administrative and people-to-people confidence
building measures. He would not say if the action plan had
changed significantly in recent months, but listed recent
cultural exchanges (including Armenian musicians performing
in Istanbul) as evidence that these contacts continue to
produce results. He said that the MFA was frustrated that
the GOT did not consult with the GOAM on the name of a
consultant for the restoration of the Akhtamar church
complex, but nonetheless said the project was a step in the
right direction. Kirakossian ended the discussion of
Turkey-Armenia relations with a brief discussion of the
proposed Turkey-Georgia-Azerbaijan railway project that would
circumvent Armenia. He told the Ambassador that the project
was "worrisome" and called it "another example of isolation"
for Armenia in the region (septel).

--------------
COMMENT
--------------


6. (C) We believe it is important that the MFA maintain at
least the appearance of momentum in talks so that more
nationalist forces in the GOAM do not seize on perceived
failures of the meetings as proof that opening the border is
an impossible goal. Our interpretation of the GOT's focus on
the outcome of Kazan--as reported by Kirakossian--is that
Turkey still views its closed border as an essential lever to
press Armenia to negotiate with Azerbaijan. Uzumcu's
approach could indicate that, without agreement from
Azerbaijan, Turkey will take no significant steps forward.
Regardless of the results of the Kazan meeting, we will
encourage the Armenians to set a date for the next set of
talks and keep pace on their people-to-people projects.
EVANS