By traces of the Turkish “ridiculous” “elite enquiry”

6 hours, 47 phone calls to different organizations and experts and all these just to find out the sense and the existence of a Turkish “elite enquiry”.

Turkish periodic “Today’s Zaman” has published the data of “elite enquiry” carried out in the frameworks of project “Neighbors of Turkey”. Those data were presented by stakeholders, journalists, scientists and graduates (Aysor.am had presented the publication with translation).

The enquiry shows that 73 percent of Armenians have shown positive attitude to the possible democratization of Turkey; as for the economic development of Turkey 46% of Armenia thinks that the gradually broadening trade and economic influence are good opportunity for them. And at last 90% of Armenians think that there are certain changes in the Turkish foreign policy.

What does this mean? What the published data speak about? And together with whom have they been implemented, for it is clear that no Turkish organization would be able to make such an inquiry without the assistance of the Armenian side. In Armenia the main organizations that are engaged in Armenian – Turkish relations, and carry out inquiries jointly with the Turkish are CRRC, IPSC, Caucasus Institute and the regional office the Eurasia Partnership - Armenia. The mentioned organizations have carried out inquiries with the Turkish side however they have had no relations with the Turkish program “Neighbors of Turkey”, moreover the inquiries have not recorded such high percent results.

Vazgen Karapetyan, the deputy director of Eurasia Partnership Foundation, mentioned that they cooperate with the Turkish TABDC, Turkish-Armenian Business Development Council and on May 18 the results of the inquires carried out among the Turkish businessmen have been summed up. According to V. Karapetyan the numbers appeared to be not that large as presented above.

Scientist in Turkish studies Artak Shakaryan mentioned in the interview with Aysor.am that usually if such enquiries are not realized in cooperation with the Armenian side, then it means they are ordered to certain organizations which have to implement it; and “it is possible that the question referring to Turkey has been asked in the list of questions concerning other countries, however the one who has answered the question has not realized that the target has been Turkey.”

Representative of Yerevan Press Club, Haykak Arshamyan who has walked around Turkey and Armenia in the frameworks of the Turkish and Armenian journalists’ meeting, mentioned that in the frames of the project “Improvement of Armenian-Turkish relations” a research has been carried out in which the Union of Manufacturers of Armenia and Eurasia Partnership – Armenia office partook. However, “it was implemented among the businessmen, while among the journalists there was no such an enquiry carried out.”

“In any case, me and the Yerevan national press club, which was to be informed about such an enquiry, didn’t know anything about it,” said H. Arshamyan.

According to the periodic, the Fatih University of Istanbul realized the enquiry which no one is aware of. As a result of 38th interview taken for preparing this material it became clear that a professor from Fatih University during the recent months had contacted the director of the sociological center “Sociometer” Aharon Adibekyan, and had suggested to realize a joint enquiry.
“Yes” I said, “but we also have to get acquainted with the questions and have to observe the question list jointly. Probably they didn’t like that answer, as they preferred to do it by their own question list, and left,” A. Adibekyan said adding that after that he never heard about the enquiry anymore.

One thing, however, is clear for the sociologist; “They do not ask whether it is good or bad to have relation; it is a rather tricky enquiry. The enquiry makes sense if you know what the sense is. If you are asked what is your attitude towards Turkish foreign policy the answer won’t be positive but when you are asked do you notice any changes in that foreign policy, they obviously will say “Yes”.

Karen Vrtanesyan, expert in information security, says that before accepting any results of any sociological enquiry you should get acquainted with the methodology, the questions that are formed, the data received, you should understand how the choice was made. Otherwise, according to the expert, there is no guarantee that that sociological enquiry really reflects the true opinion of this or that group.

“Generally speaking the sociological enquiries very often are used as a propaganda tool. The serious researchers usually clarify in their reports the methodology and all other issues, sometimes they even present the raw materials they have got, for their colleagues to check whether the sociological enquiry is correct or not,” K. Vrtanesyan mentioned.

For Bagrat Harutyunyan, doctor in Sociological sciences, this enquiry is “nonsense” as several principles of the enquiry are not preserved. Firstly, if, as the sociologist clarifies, the project is named “Neighbors of Turkey” then where are the other neighbors of Turkey? Where is Azerbaijan then? “If Azerbaijan thinks that Nakhichevan belongs to him, then it means Azerbaijan and Turkey are neighbors, now, it means Turkey confesses that Nakhichevan doesn’t belong to Azerbaijan and excludes Azerbaijan from the project “Neighbors of Turkey”.

As for the “Elite inquiry” then it is “the funniest point”. Bagrat Harutyunyan mentioned that the enquiry had to be called expertise at least. At the beginning it is mentioned that journalists, scientists, stakeholders have taken part in the enquiry and then it is suddenly “forgotten”.

“In the rest of the enquiry, in front of the numbers with percents only the Armenians are mentioned. There is nothing mentioned about the Iranians. The word expert is taken away completely spreading the information over the entire Armenian nation. Besides that in the enquiry the date is not mentioned. Because if it were on April 23 the attitude would be different, on other day the viewpoints would differ. One more suspicious thing, nowhere is mentioned how many people partook in the enquiry,” the sociologist summed up repeating that such ridiculous enquires are aimed at nothing.

One presumption concerning the “elite enquiry” is that the 73% and 90% Armenians mentioned in the Turkish “Today’s Zaman” periodic are aimed at showing that the “Armenian people have no problems with the people of Turkey, and that it is the authorities that impede them...”