ARMENIAN REPLY TO TURKEY ON COMMISSIONS STILL IN

C O N F I D E N T I A L YEREVAN 000149

SIPDIS

SIPDIS

FOR EUR/CARC, EUR/SE

E.O. 12958: DECL: 02/08/2018
TAGS: PREL TU AM
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
Kirakossian to ask whether/when Armenia would respond to the
GOT's 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 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 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