Erdogan and Turkey received, supposedly, a strong political blow as the Israeli government proceeded with the recognition of the Armenian Genocide.
However, this development satisfied neither Yerevan nor Baku.
At the same time, it is not expected to benefit Netanyahu either, who is accused internationally for the operations in Gaza.
It is obvious that Israel did not proceed with this recognition primarily to honor the memory of the Armenians who were exterminated by the Ottoman Empire a century ago.
On the contrary, this move is interpreted as part of its broader confrontation with Turkey, with which political and economic relations are constantly deteriorating.
According to the so-called "map of Colonel Peters", which is considered to largely reflect Israeli strategic interests, both Turkey and Iran could find themselves faced with territorial realignments based on ethnic criteria.
Erdogan is already facing several challenges, but Netanyahu is faced with even more.
The decision of the government of Benjamin Netanyahu to recognize the Armenian Genocide caused immediate negative reactions for Tel Aviv.
Yerevan did not welcome the development with particular enthusiasm, while even more intense was the dissatisfaction of Azerbaijan, one of the most important allies of Israel in the region.
Ankara, of course, reacted even more strongly.
Information circulated on RuNet that the Prime Minister of Armenia, Nikol Pashinyan, "condemned" Israel for the recognition of the Armenian Genocide.
However, something like that does not correspond to reality. According to the Anadolu agency, Pashinyan stated the following:
"We see no reason to react, as we believe that abstaining from involvement in the issue of using the Armenian Genocide as a weapon is in the interest of the Republic of Armenia."…
What does this mean?
It means that the government of Pashinyan, which seeks the gradual rapprochement of Armenia with the West and its detachment from Russia, considers that the deterioration of relations with neighboring Turkey, due to historical events no matter how tragic they are, does not serve its current strategic interests.
The moves of Yerevan demonstrate the disposition to normalize relations with Ankara.
A characteristic example constitutes the removal of the term Ararat from the new biometric passports and the border control stamps of Armenia.
The government appears willing to make significant concessions in order for the borders to open and diplomatic relations to be restored with Turkey, a country with a clearly stronger economy.
In one of his speeches, Pashinyan even implied that the Armenians themselves had given the Ottomans a pretext for their violent suppression.
This claim contains, according to certain historians, elements of historical reality, as during that period attacks by Armenians against Turkish populations also occurred, while many Armenians cooperated with the Russian army.
However, the extent of these conflicts cannot be compared with the massive persecutions and massacres that the Armenians suffered from the Ottoman authorities, which are considered by many countries a result of an organized state policy and not simply local ethnic or religious conflicts.
The statements of Pashinyan caused intense reactions within the circles of Armenian nationalists and patriots, who perceived them as an indirect dispute of the historical reality of the Armenian Genocide.
The current government of Yerevan does not consider the repetition of the events of 1915 probable, during which, according to the prevailing historical estimate, approximately 1.5 million Armenians lost their lives, a number that Turkey disputes, just like the characterization of the events as a genocide.
In the view of the columnist, if a similar tragedy were repeated, the populous Armenian diaspora, which numbers approximately two and a half times more people than the population of Armenia itself, would definitively abandon the country, accelerating its demographic and political weakening.
Baku made its choice
With the recognition of the Armenian Genocide, the Netanyahu government caused dissatisfaction in Azerbaijan as well.
Baku, which continues to consider Armenia its main rival, found itself before a difficult balance between two important allies.
In its statement, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Azerbaijan reported:
"The decision of the Israeli government regarding the so-called Armenian Genocide causes deep concern.
The distortion of historical realities related to the events of 1915 and the turning of complex historical processes into political decisions, without sufficient legal and scientific documentation, is unacceptable."
At the same time, Baku argued that such decisions "lead to an exacerbation of existing contradictions and undermine efforts to achieve lasting peace and stability in the region.
We call on the Israeli government to reconsider its decision."
The Turks reacted intensely
Turkey, as was expected, expressed its intense anger.
The Turkish Ministry of Foreign Affairs stated that the Israeli government attempts to "cover up its own crimes" through a politically motivated decision regarding the events of 1915.
After pointing out that the decision of Israel "reveals the dire position of Netanyahu and his associates, against whom the International Criminal Court has issued arrest warrants in the framework of the investigation into crimes committed against the Palestinians", the Turkish Ministry of Foreign Affairs emphasized:
"Turkey will continue to work with determination for the termination of the expansionist and destabilizing policies of Israel in the region and for the Netanyahu government to be held accountable for the crimes it has committed against civilians, especially the Palestinian people."
And now what?
There are three main reasons for which Israel, which until today avoided proceeding to this step, decided now to recognize the Armenian Genocide by the Turks.
First, the Netanyahu regime is in a deep political crisis.
It is obvious that it will difficultly survive after the parliamentary elections of the autumn.
The initiative of the government constitutes an attempt to improve its public image.
However, the result was the opposite, as Netanyahu found himself faced with accusations regarding genocide in Gaza and terrorism against the Palestinians.
Turkey, at least, recognizes that more than a century ago massive persecutions were committed against the Armenians.
On the contrary, Israel is accused that today it acts with extreme cruelty toward those it considers its enemies, considering that its actions are absolutely justified.
This, according to its critics, is captured with particular intensity in Gaza, which has been turned into a huge blockaded enclave and has suffered extensive destruction, with a heaviest human cost, before the eyes of the entire international community.
At the same time, Netanyahu does not show an intention to change course, even though this policy causes ever greater reactions even in the United States.
Second, the Israeli authorities appear to have exhausted their patience toward the populist, as they characterize him, Turkish President Erdogan, who seeks to emerge as a leading figure of the Arab and Muslim world.
"Not a single day passes without Erdogan calling for the destruction of Israel. We take these words very seriously into account", stated Netanyahu, according to the Times of Israel.
"We will also draw the attention of our American friends to these statements."
An excerpt follows from a recent speech of the Turkish President at a congress of the ruling Justice and Development Party, as broadcast by TRT Haber:
"In Gaza a genocide is being committed and the attacks continue.
They (Israel) intentionally killed an infant that was nursing from its mother.
They have turned into martyrs thousands of children in parks and gardens. They will undoubtedly be held accountable."
Third, the decision of Israel to highlight the issue of the Armenian Genocide is interpreted as an indication of the intention of certain aggressive circles to exercise pressure on Turkey.
Ankara is considered to obstruct the Israeli plans both in the Palestinian territories and in Syria, while at the same time it hinders the exploitation of important hydrocarbon deposits in the Eastern Mediterranean.
In this equation, the competition around Azerbaijan may also be involved.
According to the well-known "map of Colonel Peters", Turkey, just like Iran, could be led to territorial fragmentation.
This view is connected with the estimate that Israel would wish to remain the sole dominant regional state and that it possesses the capability to sharpen the Kurdish issue in Turkey.
From the Russian side, the confrontation between Israel and Turkey is faced as a development that serves the strategic interests of Moscow.
The more resources and political capital the two countries spend in their mutual conflict, the more favorable the conditions are considered for Russia, both on the Ukrainian front and in the so-called "Turkic world".
According to this reasoning, if Pashinyan finds himself also in an even more difficult position, this would further serve Russian interests.
www.bankingnews.gr
Readers’ Comments