Türkiye ve Ermenistan İlişkilerinde Çatışma Çözümü ve Uzlaşma Yaklaşımları, Yeni Öncelikler ve Çatışmanın Yönetilmesi

Öz

Türkiye ve Ermenistan arasındaki ilişkiler sıcak çatışma veya toprak bölüşümü boyutlarını içermeyen ve aktif olmayan bir çatışma türü olarak uluslararası literatürde farklı bir yerdedir. İkili ilişkilerde 1915’ten kalan geçmişe ilişkin sorunlar ve bu sorunlara eklemlenmiş Ermeni diaspora etkeni mevcuttur. Diaspora ikili ilişkilerde Ermenistan açısından aktif rol oynamakta, hâlihazırda zor bir mesele olan bölgesel barış inşasını güçleştirmektedir. Çatışma çözümleri literatüründe yer alan araçsal uzlaşma yöntemiyle Türkiye ve Ermenistan arasındaki dondurulmuş ilişkilerin uzun vadede olumlu bir seyre çevrilmesi zor ama mümkündür. Mevcut haliyle Türkiye ve Ermenistan arasındaki ilişkilere Liberal barış önerileri ve çatışma çözümleri uygulamak güçken son dönemde Azerbaycan’ın Dağlık Karabağ meselesinde Türkiye’nin aktif olarak yer almasıyla ve görüşmelerde Azerbaycan ile olan sorunların öncelikli olarak halledilmesi gerekliliğinin vurgulanmasıyla beraber durum giderek karmaşık bir hal almıştır. Azerbaycan ve Ermenistan arasındaki sıcak çatışmalarda toprak paylaşımı gibi öncelikli bir konunun varlığı ve bölgesel güçlerin olaya dâhil olması bölgenin realist siyasi karakteristiğini artırmıştır. Bu nedenlerle Türkiye ve Ermenistan arasındaki ilişkilerdeki çatışma boyutu giderek derinleşmiştir. Çalışmada Türkiye Ermenistan ilişkilerindeki çatışma çözümü ve uzlaşma yaklaşımları, çatışma çözümlerindeki realist ve liberal politikalar ve çatışma çözümü yerine çatışmanın yönetilmesi gibi realist paradigmalar tartışılacak ve diasporanın çatışma çözümlerindeki yeri incelenecektir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Çatışma çözümü
• uzlaşma
• çatışmanın yönetilmesi
• Realizm
• Liberalizm
• Türkiye
• Ermenistan
• Azerbaycan

Conflict Resolution and Reconciliation Approaches in Turkey-Armenia Relations, New Priorities and Conflict Management

Öz

The relations between Turkey and Armenia are in a different place in the international literature as an inactive conflict that does not include the dimensions of hot conflicts or territorial division. In bilateral relations, there are problems related to the past from 1915 and the Armenian diaspora factor added to these problems. Diaspora plays an active role for Armenia in bilateral relations and complicates regional peacebuilding, which is currently a difficult issue. It is difficult but possible to turn the frozen relations between Turkey and Armenia into a positive course in the long run with the instrumental reconciliation method in the conflict resolution literature. While it is difficult to implement Liberal peace proposals and conflict resolutions in the relations between Turkey and Armenia in the current circumstances, the situation has become increasingly complicated after Turkey's active involvement in the Nagorno-Karabakh issue of Azerbaijan and the acceptance of the solution of the problems with Azerbaijan as a priority. The existence of a priority issue such as territorial division in the hot conflicts between Azerbaijan and Armenia and the involvement of regional powers have increased the realist political characteristics of the region. For these reasons, the conflict dimension in the relations between Turkey and Armenia has gradually deepened. In the study, conflict resolution and reconciliation approaches in Turkey-Armenia relations, realist and liberal policies in conflict resolution, and realist paradigms such as conflict management instead of conflict resolution will be discussed and the place of diaspora in conflict resolution will be examined.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Conflict resolution
• reconciliation
• conflict management
• Realism
• Liberalism
• Armenia
• Azerbaijan

Kaynakça

1. Agha, Hussein, Shai Feldman, Ahmad Khalidi, Zeev Schiff, eds. Track-II Diplomacy: Lessons from the Middle East, Boston MA: MIT Press, 2004.
2. Carr, Edward Hallett. The Twenty Years Crisis. London: MacMillan, 1991.
3. Downes, Alexander. “The Holy Land Divided: Defending Partition as a Solution to Ethnic Wars.” Security Studies 10, no. 4 (2001): 58-116.
4. Dunne, Tim and Brian C. Schmidt, “Realism.” In The Globalisation of World Politics, edited by John Baylis and Steve Smith, 141-161. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001.
5. Dunne, Tim “Liberalism.” In The Globalisation of World Politics, edited by John Baylis and Steve Smith, 162-181. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001.
6. Fukuyama, Francis. The End of History and the Last Man. New York: Free Press, 1992.
7. Kaufman, Chaim. “Possible and Impossible Solutions to Ethnic Wars.” International Security 20, no. 4 (1997): 136-175.
8. Kaufman, Chaim. “When All Else Fails: Ethnic Population Transfers and Partitions in the Twentieth Century.” International Security 23, no. 2 (1998): 120-156.

9. Kelman, Herbert. “The Political Psychology of the Israeli–Palestinian Conflict: How Can We Overcome the Barriers to a Negotiated Solution.” Political Psychology 8, no. 3 (1987): 347–63.
10. Kriesberg, Louis. “Coexistence and the Reconciliation of Communal Conflicts.” In The Handbook of Interethnic Coexistence, edited by Eugene Weiner, 182-198. New York: Abraham Fund, 2000.
11. Lederach, John Paul. Building Peace: Sustainable Reconciliation in Divided Societies. Washington, D.C.: United States Institute of Peace Press, 1999.
12. Linklater, Andrew. “Globalisation and the Transformation of Political Community.” In The Globalisation of World Politics, edited by John Baylis and Steve Smith, 141-161. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001.
13. Maoz, Ifat. “An Experiment in Peace: Reconciliation-Aimed Workshops of Jewish-Israeli and Palestinian Youth.” Journal of Peace Research 37, no. 6 (2000): 721-736.
14. Morgenthau, Hans. Politics Among Nations. New York: Knopf, 1978.
15. Nadler, Arie ve Nurit Shnabel. “Instrumental and Socioemotional Paths to Intergroup Reconciliation and the Needs-Based Model of Socioemotional Reconciliation.” In The Social Psychology of Intergroup Reconciliation, edited by Arie Nadler, Thomas E. Malloy, Jeffrey D. Fisher, 37-56. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008.
16. Posen, Barry. “The Security Dilemma and Ethnic Conflict.” In Ethnic Conflict and International Security, edited by Michael Brown,103-124. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1993.
17. Pundak, Ron. “From Oslo to Taba: What Went Wrong?.” Survival 43, no. 3 (2001): 31-45.
18. Rynhold, Jonathan. “Realism, Liberalism, and the Collapse of the Oslo Process: Inherently Flawed or Flawed Implementation?.” In The Failure of the Middle East Peace Process?: A Comparative Analysis of Peace Implementation in Israel/Palestine, Northern Ireland and South Africa, edited by Guy Ben-Porat, 111-132. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2008.
19. Seliktar, Ofira. Doomed to Failure? The Politics and Intelligence of the Oslo Peace Process. Santa Barbara: ABC CLIO, 2009. Smooha, Sammy. “The Model of Ethnic Democracy: Israel as a Jewish and Democratic State‏.” Nations and Nationalism 8, no. 4 (2002): 475-503.
20. Smooha, Sammy. “Types of Democracy and Modes of Conflict Management in Ethnically Divided Societies.” Nations and Nationalism 8, no. 4 (2002): 423-31.
21. Steinberg, Gerald M. Unripeness and Conflict Management: Re-Examining the Oslo Process and Its Lessons. Occasional Paper No 4. Ramat Gan: Bar Ilan University, Program in Conflict Resolution, Management and Negotiation, 2002.
22. Tamir,Yael. Liberal Nationalism. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1993.
23. Walt, Stephen. The Origins of Alliances. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1987.
24. Wolff, Stefan. “Managing and Settling Ethnic Conflicts.”, In Managing and Settling Ethnic Conflicts: Perspectives on Successes and Failures in Europe, Africa and Asia, edited by Ulrich Schneckener and Stefan Wolff, 1-17. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2004.
25. Wolff, Stefan. “Managing Ethnic Conflict: The Merits and Perils of Territorial Accommodation.” Political Studies Review 9 (2011): 26–41.
26. “Erdoğan, Paşinyan'la görüştü: 'Ermenistan'la tam normalleşme hedefine ulaşacağımıza inanıyorum,” BBC Türkçe, 6 Ekim 2022, https://www.bbc.com/turkce/articles/cyxyrgvzerqo , Erişim tarihi: 08.02.2023.
27. “Türkiye ve Ermenistan liderlerinden 13 yılın ardından ilk görüşme, Bianet, 7 Ekim 2022, https://m.bianet.org/bianet/siyaset/268162-turkiye-ve-ermenistan-liderlerinden-13-yilin-ardindan-ilk-gorusme, Erişim tarihi: 08.02.2023.
28. “Erdoğan normalleşme sürecini Ermenistan-Azerbaycan ilişkilerine bağladı,” Agos, 11 Kasım 2022, https://www.agos.com.tr/tr/yazi/27772/erdogan-normallesme-surecini-ermenistan-azerbaycan-iliskilerine-bagladi, Erişim tarihi: 08.02.2023.