We present excerpts from the article by retired ambassador and director of the International Research Center of the Turkish Economic Policy Research Foundation (TEPAV), Nazif Murat Ersavci, “Normalization is the New Threshold in South Caucasus”.
Circumstances Have Changed
Turkey and Armenia remain neighboring states without official diplomatic relations. Regardless of the historical reasons for this exceptional situation, the regional circumstances that contributed to it have fundamentally changed. Establishing diplomatic relations would mean acknowledging this reality and creating an institutional framework for managing both cooperation and disagreements.
Diplomatic relations do not require resolving all historical or political disputes. On the contrary, diplomacy exists precisely because states need permanent mechanisms to resolve disagreements. Embassies in Ankara and Yerevan would provide stable channels for political communication, crisis management, economic cooperation, and cultural exchange. They would also make the process of resolution less dependent on temporary regional circumstances.
Direct Trade is More Than Just Commerce
Economic relations can strengthen this process. Countries that trade, invest, and develop common interests lose more from the resumption of confrontation. Therefore, Turkey's steps to facilitate direct trade with Armenia are more than just a commercial initiative. It can provide a stronger foundation for political resolution.
The same applies to railway communication. On April 28, a meeting of the Turkish-Armenian joint working group took place in Kars to discuss the restoration and opening of the Kars-Gyumri railway. Over time, this route could become part of a broader transport network connecting Anatolia with the South Caucasus and then Central Asia. Together with efforts to open regional transport routes between Azerbaijan and Armenia, this could help transform the South Caucasus into a region primarily shaped by transit transfers, trade, and connectivity.
However, infrastructure works best under predictable political relations. Therefore, railways, trade routes, and border crossings should be viewed not as substitutes for diplomatic resolution but as integral parts of it.
The Alican-Margara border crossing may initially operate within the framework of already discussed agreements between the two sides, with subsequent implementation of mutual crossings for citizens of Turkey and Armenia, as well as commercial cargo.
The Opening of the Border Should Not Be the Only Criterion for Progress
However, the border should not become the only criterion for progress.
The broader goal is normal relations between the two neighboring states. The economic benefits can be significant. Kars, Igdir, and neighboring provinces can benefit from the growth of trade, logistics, tourism, and services. Armenia could gain easier access to Mediterranean and European markets through Turkey. The resumption of cooperation between Kars and Gyumri could gradually turn peripheral border areas into broader gateways for regional trade.
Progress Between Azerbaijan and Armenia Creates Space
Turkey's approach has so far ensured the development of the resolution with Armenia alongside the Armenian-Azerbaijani peace process, rather than at the expense of Azerbaijan's security interests. While it seemed that this coordination slowed progress, it did not allow the Turkish-Armenian rapprochement to become a source of tension. Today, progress between Azerbaijan and Armenia creates space for the Turkish-Armenian resolution to become an additional pillar of a broader regional architecture for peace. Establishing diplomatic relations with Yerevan does not necessarily weaken Turkey's strategic partnership with Azerbaijan. With careful coordination with Baku, it can, on the contrary, strengthen the emerging regional order and expand Ankara's opportunities to contribute to its development.
Translation: Marta Semyonova
This article has been translated and published with the support of the Gulbenkian Foundation: The opinions expressed in the article do not necessarily reflect the views of the Gulbenkian Foundation or Mediamax.
