“Confused” may be an appropriate term to describe Turkey’s current
foreign policy in the Middle East and Israel in particular. The source
of that confusion – aside from the appalling violence in Syria and
earlier in Libya – is Turkey’s own mistakes.
The Turkish government’s inconsistency regarding Israel highlights
earlier discrepancy in other political contexts. There was a time when
Turkey’s top foreign policy priority included reaching out
diplomatically to Arab and Muslim countries. Then, we spoke of a
paradigm shift, whereby Ankara was repositioning its political center,
reflecting perhaps economic necessity, but also cultural shifts within
its own society. It seemed that the East vs. West debate was skillfully
being resolved by politicians of the Justice and Development Party
(AKP).
Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, along with Foreign
Minister Ahmet Davutoglu, appeared to have obtained a magical
non-confrontational approach to Turkey’s historic political alignment.
‘The Zero Problems’ policy allowed Turkey to brand itself as a bridge
between two worlds. The country’s economic growth and strategic import
to various geopolitical spheres allowed it to escape whatever price
meted out by Washington and its European allies as a reprimand for its
bold political moves – including Erdogan’s unprecedented challenge of
Israel.
Indeed, there was a link between the growing influence of Turkey
among Arab and Islamic countries and Turkey’s challenge to Israel’s
violent behavior in Palestine and Lebanon, and its rattling against
Syria and Iran. Turkey’s return to its political roots was unmistakable,
yet interestingly, was not met by too strong an American response.
Washington couldn’t simply isolate Ankara and the latter shrewdly
advanced its own power and influence with that knowledge in mind. Even
the bizarre anti-Turkish statements by Israeli officials sounded more
like incoherent rants than actual foreign policy.
Political arrogance and US-financed military strength are two pillars
by which Israel maintains its clout in the region. The first was
childishly applied when then Israeli Deputy Foreign Minister Danny
Ayalon publicly snubbed Turkey’s Ambassador Ahmet Oguz Celikkol in
January 2010 by placing him on a lower sofa, then asked Israeli
journalists to take note of the insult. The second came in May 2010 when
Israeli commandos descended on the Turkish ship Mavi Marmara, carrying
humanitarian aid to Gaza, and killed nine Turkish citizens in cold
blood.
‘Idiocy’ is how Israeli columnist Uri Avnery described Israel’s
behavior towards Turkey, which was once one of Israel’s most vital
allies. But idiocy has little to do with it and Turkey knew that well.
Israel wished to send strong messages to the Turks, that its strategic
and political maneuvering was of no use here and that Israel would
continue to reign supreme in the face of Erdogan’s ambitious policies.
The real ‘idiocy’ was Israel’s miscalculations, which failed to take
into account that such behavior could only speed up Turkey’s political
transformation. The fact that the US was losing its once unchallenged
grip over the fate of the Middle East had also contributed to Turkey’s
sudden rise as a country with far-reaching ties and long-term political
vision. Erdogan quickly rose to prominence. His responses to Israel’s
provocations and to what was essentially a declaration of war came in
the form of strong words and measured actions. He conditioned any
rapprochement with Israel on a clear apology over its transgressions,
compensations to the victims and the families of the dead, and ending
the siege on Gaza. The last condition further highlighted Turkey’s new
political priorities.
As far as Turkey’s regional ascendency was concerned, it mattered
little whether Israel apologized. Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin
Netanyahu was losing favor, even with his own allies in Washington. And
unlike Washington, under the thumb of the pro-Israeli lobby, Ankara was a
country with independent foreign policy.
When AKP triumphed in Turkey’s elections in June 2011, the so-called
Arab Spring was still in its early stages. Then, much hope was placed on
the rise of popular movements in countries that have been disfigured by
Arab dictators and their Western benefactors. Not only did the ruling
party disregard the fact that Turkey had taken part of the old political
structure in the Middle East, it also escaped them that Turkey was an
important member of NATO which unleashed a terrible war on Libya on
March 19, deliberately misinterpreting UN Security Council Resolution
1973. Yes, Turkey had resisted the war option at first, but was quick to
forgive and forget and eventually recognized and supported its
political outcome. Thanks to the war, Libya is now in a permanent state
of bedlam.
Erdogan’s victory speech in June 2011 attempted to paint a new
picture of reality, future prospects and Turkey’s proposed role in all
of this. “I greet with affection the peoples of Baghdad, Damascus,
Beirut, Amman, Cairo, Tunis, Sarajevo, Skopje, Baku, Nicosia and all
other friends and brother peoples who are following the news out of
Turkey with great excitement,” Erdogan said. “Today, the Middle East,
the Caucasus and the Balkans have won as much as Turkey.”
But that ‘win’ was short-lived. The euphoria of change created many
blind spots, one of which is that conflicts of sectarian and ethnic
nature – as in Syria – don’t get resolved overnight; that foreign
military intervention, direct or by proxy, can only espouse protracted
conflict. Indeed, it was in Syria that Turkey’s vision truly fumbled. It
was obvious that many were salivating over the outcome of a Syrian war
between a brutal regime and a self-serving, divided opposition, each
faction espousing one foreign agenda or another. Suddenly, Turkey’s
regional and global ambitions of justice and morality grew ever more
provisional because of fear of chaos spilling over to its border areas,
the tragic rise of the number of Syrian refugees at Turkey’s borders and
the fear of a strong Kurdish presence in northern Syria.
Not even capable Turkish politicians could hide the confusion in
which they found themselves. Responding to Israel’s bombing of Gaza last
November, which killed and wounded hundreds of Palestinians, Erdogan
described Israel as a ‘terrorist state.’ “Those who turn a blind eye to
discrimination toward Muslims in their own countries, are also closing
their eyes to the savage massacre of innocent children in Gaza. …
Therefore, I say Israel is a terrorist state.”
But even then, discussions were underway regarding the text of an
Israeli apology to Turkey over the Mavi Marmara attack. That apology had
finally arrived as an undeserved gift to US President Barack Obama, who
visited Israel in March with a message of total support for Israel.
“In light of Israel’s investigation into the incident which pointed
to a number of operational mistakes, the Prime Minister expressed
Israel’s apology to the Turkish people for any mistakes that might have
led to the loss of life or injury and agreed to conclude an agreement on
compensation/non-liability,” Netanyahu’s apology read. No commitment
regarding Gaza was made. Erdogan’s office responded: “Erdogan told
Binyamin Netanyahu that he valued centuries-long strong friendship and
cooperation between the Turkish and Jewish nations.” According to
Netanyahu, the apology over the “operational mistakes” had everything to
do with the need to share intelligence over Syria between both of the
countries’ militaries. To balance out Turkey’s hurried retreat to its
old political foreign policy, Erdogan is reportedly planning to visit
Gaza in April.
“We will take on a more effective role. We will call, as we have, for
rights in our region, for justice, for the rule of law, for freedom and
democracy,” were the resounded words of Erdogan following his party’s
elections victory last year.
It is likely that Ankara will try to maintain a balanced position,
but, as Erdogan himself knows, in issues of morality and justice, middle
stances are simply untenable.
Wednesday 3 April 2013
Israel vs. The Rest
Posted @ 17:50
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment