Home

Projects

Three Views

Conference

Researches

Publications

Photos

Partners

Archive

Contacts

RESEARCHES

Reasearches

Laura Baghdasaryan

The Coverage of Turkey's Accession to EU in the Armenian Media

The report was presented at the round table meeting of journalists under "Armenia-Azerbaijan-Turkey: Journalist Initiative-2002" of Yerevan Press Club, "Yeni Nesil" Journalists Union of Azerbaijan and Association of Diplomacy Corespondents of Turkey (September 20-24, Turkey)

The Turkish subject is one of the topics of most permanent attention in the Armenian media since the declaration of the independence of this country. Certainly, this is a consequence of not only the geographic situation of Turkey, namely its neighboring with Armenia. Turkey along with all related modern and historical political and economic factors is one of the most essential and dominating issues in the foreign affairs sections of Armenian media primarily due to the absence of diplomatic relations between Armenia and Turkey; more exactly, due to the historical and political reasons that impede their establishment.

In this regard it is interesting to note that the intensity with which the relations between Armenia and Azerbaijan and Armenia and Turkey are covered (being at least unregulated and problematic even in long term perspective) is significantly ahead of the frequency with which the relations with another neighbor of Armenia, Georgia, are covered. If during the first half of 90s in the Turkey-related stories the aspect of bilateral Armenian-Turkish relations obviously prevailed, further on such issues as Turkey and its inner politics, the problems of Turkey with regard to other countries of the region, the world super powers, the integration potential of Turkey and, certainly, the problem of its membership in EU, having all the rights of such came forth.

The latter subject is almost constantly covered in the Armenian media during the past three to four years. This is true for both electronic and print media. The subject is introduced for varying perspectives that differ also in their presentation manner. It appears both as simple mentioning and also in special analytic pieces as well as in news items and interviews with Armenian, foreign (including Turkish) experts, politicians. Reprints from foreign media are also often published. As compared with electronic media, the press is more intensive and more thorough in reflecting the aspects of this problem.

The content analysis of the pieces published in eight leading newspapers of Armenia ("Azg", "Aravot", "Haikakan Zhamanak", "Iravunk", "Hayots Ashkhar", "Novoye Vremya", "Golos Armenii", "Republic of Armenia") during the past three years shows, however, that this diversity of perspectives is ensured in general, but never by a single medium. "Azg" daily, affiliated with Ramkavar Azatakan party is the leader in terms of how intensively this issue is covered. Yet, this edition per se is prominent for the traditionally big volume of publications on foreign policy issues.

The stories on the subject in question can be conventionally subdivided into two groups - these are the pieces on Turkey's accession to the EU and stories that touch upon this issue among other things.

The majority of publication on Turkey's accession to EU in this or that manner touch upon the problem of resolving the relations between Armenia and Turkey as a necessary condition. The attitude of media towards the fact of linking these two issues together differs. Thus, in "Hayots Ashkhar", a newspaper of pro-Dashnak orientation (ARF "Dashnaktsutyun") Turkey's accession to EU is viewed to be quite a negative phenomenon and it is directly linked to the recognition of the 1915 Genocide by Turkey. At the same time the editions that sympathize with the former administration of Armenia (represented by Armenian National Movement), as well as politicians of the same orientation, adhere to the opinion that "the membership of Turkey in EU can contribute to the civilized resolution of Armenian-Turkish relations, and having an EU member next door will only be of benefit to Armenia". This statement by the current leader of ANM, the former Foreign Minister of Armenia Alexander Arzumanian has been repeatedly printed by the media. Such publications of certain phrasings are quite frequent in "Aravot", "Haikakan Zhamanak" newspapers. Yet, other newspapers also feature such opinions but as direct quotations in interviews with ANM representatives. Thus, "Azg" daily gave the following title to an interview with an ANM administrator Andranik Hovakimian on Armenian-Turkish relations: "The Armenian Question: Each Bird Looks Upon Turkey from Its Own Flight Height". The interview says: "The role of stick chosen by Armenia during the past two years is unacceptable for ANM. We will have to live side by side with Turkey for a long time and it is impermissible to resort to such actions with regard to a neighbor" ("Azg", &"The Armenian Question: Each Bird Looks Upon Turkey from Its Own Flight Height", 18.01.2001).

The same newspaper has a permanent section "Armenian Perspective" that publishes pieces on Turkey's accession to EU, too. For example, the chairman of the national Board of Ramkavar Azatakan party, Ruben Mirzakhanian and the director of Armenian office of "HaiDat" ("Armenian Question") Committee of "Dashnaktsutyun" party Edward Hovhannisian narrate their visions of relations between Armenia and Turkey under this heading ("Azg", "Ramkavars -for, dashnaks - against", 10.01.01): "However hard we try to look aside from our past, our tragic history, the Turkish crimes, all the evil that Turkey has committed, there is a political side to the matter. The acknowledgment of Genocide by various countries of the world means nothing. This acknowledgment is equivalent to a statement that killing a human being is bad. This principle is declared by many European countries. Meanwhile, these declarations are made not for the sake of Armenians. There is only one aspiration - to keep Turkey at a distance from the European Union, explained by the reluctance of Europeans to see the 70-million Turkey at the common European market. The Armenian genocide is used as a stumbling stone on the way of accession to EU. If the process of acknowledging the Genocide ends by futile announcements and not by the compensation of the damage suffered by Armenians - and Turkey will never pay the compensation - will we allow Turkey to flood Armenia with its low-quality goods? Until Turkey officially admits that Genocide was committed with regard to the Armenian nation, makes its apologies and takes the obligation of compensating the damage incurred by Armenians, I think political, economic and cultural relation with Turkey to be harmful for Armenia. Only once these terms are met, we can sit at a round table and start negotiations with Turkey".

These words of a Dashnak activist most typically reflect the approaches that are applied with regard to accession of Turkey to European Union in the vast majority of Armenian media. The activities and the role of the Turkish-Armenian Reconciliation Committee were evaluated approximately in the same manner; judging from statements by the representatives of the Armenian lobby in Europe and "Dashnaktsutyun" party activists, this Committee was initially set up to "prevent the discussion of the Genocide issue in international structures, in Parliaments of different countries. It is this danger that the numerous opponents of this Committee both in Armenia and Diaspora have been forewarning about ever since its formation" ("Novoye Vremya", "Europe plus... Turkey", 28.12.01).

The issue of TARC was also discussed in a number of publications in newspapers studied, which relate its activities directly to the issue of EU accession. Thus, upon the request of "Aravot", the TARC member David Hovhanissian rejects the accusations to the address of the Committee by saying that the acknowledgment of the 1915 Genocide has not been put forth as a condition to be met by Turkey for EU accession, and therefore the accusations are groundless ("Aravot", "They won't Leave the Committee", 24.10.2001). "Aravot" writes in one of its editorials about the exaggeration of the role of the TARC. It says in particular that the role of TARC is so much exaggerated in Armenia that we soon will be able to blame it for the worsened relations between, say, Colin Powell and Condolease Rice. "Yet, here we deal with a methodological mistake", the newspaper writes. "It lies in the belief that Armenia must, using all the means possible, obstruct Turkey's accession to EU. This belief is based on the emotional thesis, namely - what is bad for Turkey, is beneficial for Armenians"("Aravot", 26.10.01).

Among other publications on the subject, the intensification of which was due to the declaration of the EU requirement to Turkey for its membership, as stated in late October 2001, the following must be mentioned: "The recognition of the Genocide was not stipulated as a requirement"("Iravunk", 28.10.2001), "Armenia Can Enter the European Union" ("Novoe Vremya", 26.01.02), and other articles.

The pieces that reflect the complex of the conditions put forward to Turkey for its accession to the EU make a separate group. This group incorporates both news items and a number of analytical stories that refer to various aspects of these conditions. An impressive number of reprints from foreign media are offered by "Azg" daily as compared with other publications. It also gave a constant coverage to the governmental crisis in Turkey in early this summer, caused by the poor health of Turkish Prime Minister Bulent Ecevit. Such stories always quote arguments that neither the early elections in Turkey, nor the appointment of the new Cabinet can assist the compliance of Turkey with its commitments to Europe as scheduled ("Azg", "Clouds over the reform program", 6.07.2002, ibid, "Turkey: the new media law - a slap on democracy's face" 11.07.02, etc.).

The main group of materials on the EU membership that are not related to Armenian-Turkish relation are the articles on geopolitical interests of Turkey, the attitudes of European countries towards it, etc. It unequivocally outlines the idea that in the issue of allowing or disallowing of Turkey to their community, the leading European countries are playing a dubious game. On the one hand, Turkey is not refused bluntly, on the other - it is faced with such requirements that it cannot accept in the first place, such as the issue of the accession of Cyprus to EU in the nearest future.

"The Cyprus issue is a factor that slows down the development of both Turkish-Greek relations as well as the relations of Turkey with the European Union", "Azg" daily. "It is difficult to say whether the unification of two parts of the state and the restoration of its territorial integrity will be assisted by the Republic of Cyprus being a member of EU. Ankara announces that should Cyprus be admitted to the EU, it will annex the Turkish part of Cyprus" ("Azg", "European Countries do not Allow Turkey to be alienated from Europe").

Another aspect is the resolution of Kurdish issue and other problems urgent for Turkey. Thus, for example, the article "Turkey did not get any closer to Europe" ("Novoye Vremya" newspaper), on the one hand, questions the viability of the reform complex passed by this country and on the other - maintains that even in this case the Europeans will hardly admit Turkey to their company. The newspaper writes: "The package of legislative amendments passed in the end of last week by the Turkish Parliament did not eliminate the obstacles to Turkey's accession to EU. It is strange that Ankara pins so much hope on the insignificant changes introduced into the legislation. Obviously, certain broadening of Kurdish language use does not solve the problem of Kurds and neither does the obligation to keep Abdullah Ocalan alive. Nevertheless, it is evident that the Turkish society is not ready even for such small concessions" ("Novoye Vremya", "Turkey did not get any closer to Europe", 28.08.02).

Why is Europe not in a hurry to soften its attitude towards Turkey? The answers to these questions are offered in the analytical articles of geopolitical nature."Today Turkey that has over 60 million of population and quite a high population growth is a candidate for membership in EU, where the population growth in average does not exceed 0.5%. And this is when the place and the role given to the member countries in the EU governing structures are greatly pre-conditioned by the population of these countries. Besides, Turkey will most probably aspire to join the Schengen agreement, which will in effect grant a carte blanche to the Turkish nationals and citizens of other Muslim countries eager to get to Europe to be able to freely travel about the European countries. This is not an issue of a trifle but a serious headache for the European countries, especially for the UK, France, Germany", "Azg" daily writes ("Azg", 8.08.2002).

"Hayots Ashkhar" newspaper writes in its article "The Trap for Turkey" questions the need for Turkey to join EU proceeding from the national interests of this country: "EU has shut its doors before Turkey, the USA demand support in their struggle to overthrow the regime of Saddam Husseyn, which can lead to the danger of forming Kurdish state. Iran and Russia (leaving out even Greece, Cyprus and Armenia) have always been and still remain the natural rivals of Turkey, whose interests clash in Transcaucasia and Central Asia. Under these conditions the only direction that can be supported by the USA is the South Caucasus, for this reason Turkey aspires to penetrate our region as soon as possible" ("Hayots Ashkhar", 13.02.02).

Out of the article group on the geopolitical interests of Turkey or the interests of other countries towards it, related to the EU accession, one can mention also "The Growth Of Nationalism" ("Hayots Ashkhar", 3.05.02), "Turkey Threatens To Make An Annexion" ("Aravot", 24.11.01), "The Big Politics and the Armenian Genocide" ("Haikakan Zhamanak", 31.01.01), etc.

In Spring 2002 "Hayots Ashkhar" wrote: "One can, of course, blame Turks for using the attempts of civilized dialogue for the dissemination of lies, the negation of the fact of Armenian Genocide, the disorientation of the international community. But, excuse me, what surprises is not this, but the obstinacy of political and public activists, with which they continue the dialogues. Can it be so difficult to understand that it is not the bad-tempered neighbors we are dealing with, but Turks? Represented by the Europarliament, the international community obliges them to acknowledge the Armenian Genocide. Therefore, it is not we, but the Turks must be anxious to initiate of the dialogue. It is they who must ask and plea about this, but we will think whether we should answer such appeals or not" ("Hayots Ashkhar", 15.03.02).

Similar statements are often met in Armenian media. Yet not only this characterizes the content of stories on Turkey, including the issue of its accession to EU. There is a tangible multitude of opinions, according to which, whatever the dialogues are, they are more preferable than the worsened relations and isolation policy. I think that this meeting of journalists of the three countries, the relations between which demand a lot of time and effort, must be viewed from this perspective as well.