Turkey-Azerbaijan tandem: Good cop, bad cop
Genesis Armenia Think Tank/Foundation has published Gevorg Galtakyan’s article, which explores a phenomenon observed in the policies of Turkey and Azerbaijan toward Armenia, known as “good cop, bad cop.” This technique is particularly used during interrogations to confuse the suspect and gain their trust in order to extract a confession. Thus, Turkey presents itself as wanting Armenia to gain economic benefits, while Azerbaijan continues its terrorist rhetoric. In fact, both are deceptive, yet people and societies have a need to hear “comforting lies” and are, consciously or unconsciously, influenced by even the illusion of “terror.” In Armenia, the most fervent promoters of these two notions are prominent representatives of the ruling Civil Contract party.
Almost all political forces in Armenia discuss the need for normalizing relations with Turkey and opening the Armenia-Turkey border; some view it as an opportunity for economic development, while others see it as a threat to statehood. However, the reality is that the border has not been opened by Turkey and remains closed, despite some well-known agreements reached regarding partially opening it. As to the process of normalization of relations, it is, de facto, suspended.
Turkey’s precondition has been clearly articulated by Recep Tayyip Erdoğan and Hakan Fidan: Armenia must sign a peace treaty with Azerbaijan. Nonetheless, information was spread on Dec. 24, 2024, on a Russian-language Telegram channel, stating that Yerevan and Ankara had reportedly agreed to establish diplomatic relations and mutually open embassies without a peace treaty signed with Azerbaijan, both sides recognizing that a peace treaty with Azerbaijan does not appear feasible in the near future. According to the post, this process could begin as early as January 2025, having the aim of reviving the Zurich Protocols.
The above-mentioned piece of information cannot be considered definitively credible. However, an interesting perspective from the Azerbaijani expert community suggests that establishing diplomatic relations and mutually opening embassies do not equate to border opening or cooperation. Thus, any potential establishment of diplomatic relations between Armenia and Turkey could be another step aimed at weakening Armenia’s resistance, which does not serve the true state interests of Armenia.
It is precisely in the word cooperation that the entire complexity of the problem lies, which has the following circumstances: First, when there are mutually beneficial or mutually disadvantageous issues between the parties, they can theoretically—and why not practically—cooperate easily. Second, when the parties have conflicting interests or perceptions, but they are nevertheless compatible, despite this being a more complex scenario, it does not theoretically contain an unsolvable problem since the parties can agree to disagree or engage in discussions and debates regarding their differing ideas, or in the case of conflicting interests, develop compromise solutions that will at least be partially acceptable to the parties. Third, when the parties have incompatible perceptions and non-negotiable contradictory interests, the “best model” that exists and about which Ilham Aliyev speaks most openly is the factor of force, which, in fact, determines the dominant party in a given case. And finally, the fourth circumstance is that there are incompatible and uncompromising issues, which neither side can resolve even through force or dominance. This last circumstance is perhaps the most interesting, as it is probably the most common type of conflict.
Thus, absolute cooperation does not exist in politics; rather, there are clear motives that are not always manageable and are not directed toward an abstract concept like “goodwill.” Unfortunately, both the Armenia-Azerbaijan “Peace Treaty”—as much as it has been made public—and the infamous Zurich Protocols are filled with such abstract and positive terms that, whether signed or not, ratified or not, they lack value, especially when Turkey and Azerbaijan utilize all military, geopolitical, and economic levers against Armenia, applying almost the whole set of both soft and hard power without restriction.
Both Turkey and Azerbaijan attempt to mislead and create unjustified expectations or panic in Armenia through exaggerated promises of benefits on the one hand and threats on the other. While it cannot be denied that Azerbaijan harbors a desire to completely eradicate Armenian civilization and Armenia, this aspiration fortunately exceeds the capabilities of that terrorist and genocidal entity. (Read about the “W. A.” propaganda discourse put forward by the Azerbaijani state mechanism in my following article.)
Ultimately, it is essential to remember that in the “good cop, bad cop” game, the most dangerous one is the “good cop,” as there is no more dangerous poison than a “comforting lie”, which must be completely removed from Armenia’s foreign policy menu, and we should not forget to at least occasionally savor the “bitter truth”—which is the appetizer— being able to clearly distinguish “friends” from “non-friends”, even if we don’t have or never had any “geopolitical friends”.
