18 Mart 2015 Çarşamba
20 Ağustos 2014 Çarşamba
12 Mayıs 2014 Pazartesi
23 Aralık 2012 Pazar
15 Ekim 2012 Pazartesi
7 Nisan 2012 Cumartesi
4 Haziran 2011 Cumartesi
26 Nisan 2011 Salı
23 Mart 2011 Çarşamba
26 Şubat 2011 Cumartesi
13 Aralık 2010 Pazartesi
“IRAN CRISIS"&TURKEY’S ROLE
[DEBATING SECURITY: CHANGES AND CHALLENGES FOR TURKEY”
22 - 23 October 2010,Istanbul
My paper was in Working Group 2 Turkey and Regional Politics: Country-Specific Analysis. Title of my paper: "Iran crisis & Turkey's role in the Middle East" Schedule: October 23, 09:00-11:00 Held by: Arı Movement, Bahçeşehir University, Friedrich Naumann Stiftung]
Iran’s foreign policy has classical allegations to the Middle East. Before Islamic Republic, some policies were also valid for Iran. Iran has two related approaches in the region. First of all, Shiah card is useful for Iran, on the other hand, Iran also manipulates some societies as “Persian”. Kurds are one of the sample. Shah supported Kurds against to Iraq central government during “1962-1975 rebellion” why Iraq became closer with Soviet Union after 1958 military coup. However, US encouraged Iran to sign “Algeria agreement” with Iraq in 1975 because Iraq was approaching to Western axis. Iran sustains to use Shiah card after Islamic Republic. Iran has gained “a new influence area” after Gulf Wars. Southern Iraq’s situation became a pro Iranian zone in the Gulf.
I. Lebanon War (1982) was a starting point of Hizballah’s challenge in Lebanon. II.Gulf War (2003) also strengthened Iran to have a periphery in Iraq. Hamas’ coup in Gaza (2007) gave a prize to Iran for manipulating Gaza entity. There is an interesting point, Hamas is Sunni. But Hamas’ sectarian structure is not a problem for Islamic Republic. The main cause is related Iran’s challnge. Especially Iran is trying to attract Arab populations with using anti semitic and anti western populist discourse. Currently Iran has proxy forces in Lebanon, Gaza Strip and Southern Iraq.
In this context Iran has a greater infrastructure which occupies a geography from Eastern Mediterranean to Gulf. So US-Iran clash occurres in the Middle East. Islamic Republic underlines some cooperations with Russia and China. Also Iran is an observer in Shangai Cooperation Organization. Iran’s president Ahmedinejad has met leader of Venezuela several times. Firstly, we will touch Iran’s influence zone in the Middle East, after concern nuclear issues and political effects.
IRAN’S GREATER INFLUENCE ZONE
Iran must not be evaulated with only “uranium enrichment plan”. It’s a important tool. But firstly, political content of Iran’s approach must be undestood. Iran’s political activities reach to Southern Iraq, Lebanon and some of the Gulf states; which was called as “Shiah crescent”. Beside the situation, Iran’s influence to Iraq, after 2011, would create a competition on Iraq. Main competitors are Iran and US. Beside these developments, Lebanon’s situation seems to be hard in the near future. Hizballah founded a tangible “state within state” in Lebanon. Iran’s influence to Lebanon could be realized with Syria’s support. In this context Turkey’s policies to Syria is parallel with US policies. US policies target to isolate Iran. But Iran’s challenge to Eastern Meditarranean has two wings. In Lebanon, Hizballah’s “state within state” creates Hizballahistan and Hamas’ policies in Gaza Strip concludes with a Hamasistan. Hizballahistan-Hamasistan axis is not only against Israel but also against moderate Arab regimes. So Iran challenges to Israel, moderate Arab regimes and consequently Western axis in the Middle East. Turkish pro Islamic government activities can be commented with some diplomatic efforts to Iran or Hamas. But mostly main route about Turkish Foreign Policy to conform US strategies. However Turkey voted against sanctions on Iran's "uranium enrichment program". The behaviour is the indicator of Turkish cabinet's approach to Iran. As it is remembered, Turkey and Brazil cooperated with Iran to prevent probabl sanctions from UN. The three countries prepared a "trilateral declaration" and "swap of uranium deal" in May 17.
Turkey's vote was estimated why Turkey kept her position with Brazil about uranium swapping and declaration.
Recently, Turkey lived a crisis with Israel and her 9 citizens were killed in "Gaza flotilla". Israel is criticized harshly on the other hand sending flotilla to Gaza is considered. Iran supported Turkish government’s discourse.
Turkish-Iranian relations is very problematic for Western countries. Turkey’s efforts which targeted to break pressures on Iran failed.
For Turkey, having a sympathy to Hamas in Palestine and to having a sympathy to Hizballah in Lebanon, include also contradictions with Arab regimes.
The all of the policies from Turkish administration seem to support Iran and Iran's periphery.
China and Russia urge countries to obey sanctions against Iran.
Current Turkish foreign policy reach to a dead end. Pro Iranian approach has no provision for Turkey's foreign policy.
The behaviour is not only against US policies but also Russia and China. It means a conflict with "international order".
Can it be commented as a second "March 1" crisis? It can be harder why obeying sanctions would be absolutely expected from Turkey.
Hamasistan-Hizballahistan axis from Lebanon to Gaza Strip is a real problem about pro western relations. Aforementioned axis is related with Iran. Iran as we told, has an influence zone from Southern Iraq to Eastern Mediterranean and Caucus. One of the approach from Iran to Caucus concludes closer relations with Armenia but colder relations with Azerbajcan. Iran’s Azerbajcan region became a main problem for Iran after Azerbajcan’s independence. Iran also tries to manipulate Azerbajcan with Shiah card.
“NUCLEAR IRAN” ISSUE
Iran's "uranium enrichment program" is significant why it has occupied the agenda of world public opinion. "Iran" issue is highlighted again and it is brought to the agenda format.
Iran's nuclear activities’ "peaceful" purposes is suspected. US and Western countries meanwhile Russia and China questions Islamic Republic’s targets. U.S. and Israel highlighted Iran's "nuclear studies to make nuclear weapons” since for a long time. “Dialogue with Iran" was considered by U.S. President Obama during G-20 summit October 1 2009 meeting. He has made a joint press conference with the French president, Sarkozy and former British Prime Minister Brown. Obama made a speech in the name of the three leaders and he especially underlined, the UN Security Council permanent members and Germany (5 +1) expected "tangible progress" from Iran.
IAEA condemned Iran to plan nuclear weapons in November 2009. After the resolution Islamic Republic exercised new long range missiles which have capability over 2000 km. . For instance Iran has done one of them in December 2009. Siccil 2 missiles was announced by Iran’s state run TV which is broadcasted in language of Arabic . It’s capacity reach to Israel and Southeastern Europe. Iran is perceived as a “pivotal” country and can attract a wide range region militarily. If nuclear warheads would be added to these missiles, Iran’s allegations may be commented very differently. It does not mean that Islamic Republic challenge to only the Middle East but to Center Asia and Southern Caucaus. With these developments Gulf Cooperation Council decided to found a joint military force in the region at the same time. (December 2009).
U.S. President and European leaders reflected a common attitude. Russian president Medvedev informed Obama that “heavy sanctions" to Iran is concerned. U.S. is planning to deploy the "missile shield" project in Poland and Czech Republic. Russia’s approach to Iran is also related to prevent missile shields in those countries why the issue can be related with themselves.
Turkish prime minister also visited Iran in October 2009. "Efforts to persuade" to Iran about nuclear issue can be observed in Turkey. Turkey’s Iran policy clash with the Western axis. Iran can gain time with these efforts. In this context “shifting away from the Western axis” is considered for Turkey.
SYRIAN FACTOR FOR IRAN’S REGIONAL HEGEMONY
Turkish foreign minister’s book which is called "Strategic Depth" indicates that Turkey can found a regional periphery with a great power. The great power may be concerned as US. He has found an opportunity to practice his ideas.
In this context, Turkish-Syrian rapprochement does not clash with the United States. Since the September 2008 New York meetings, US-Syrian dialogue is developed. Delegations from the U.S. Congress visited Assad two times, then Obama’s Middle East special envoy Mitchell was sent to Assad , and also US embassy in Syria which was closed since 2005 reopened in June 2009. Syria is becoming closer to the axis of the West, but also keep her alliance with Iran. US strategy plan to isolate Iran politically. In this backdrop, the Syrian-Israeli talks were facilitated by Turkey but the talks were suspended in December 2008 related Israel’s Operation Cast Lead to Hamas’ entity in Gaza.
Syria-Iran alliance is realized in Lebanon. Lebanon's Shiite alliance, the most prominent component of this alliance and Hizballah, in a sense, the presence of Syria's, arising from its alliance with Iran to the logistical and political support owed. At the point reached today, Hizballah, in Lebanon, has become a phenomenon in itself. However, Syria lack of a source in the medium term may cornered Hizballah, Iran also "well into his shell" can be taken.
About the press, allegedly developed under the leadership of Turkey, Turkey-Syria-Iraq rapprochement or, in fact, still is an extension of U.S. policy. Now Iraq is ally of US. And the Iraqi government, made a harsh warning to Syria, not to deploy "terrorist groups" in her land. So, Turkey's "neo ottoman" approach, to use initiative, consists of a fantasy. In Turkish foreign minister Davutoğlu’s "Strategic Depth" book, his claims are met. Prof.Davutoğlu underlined Turkey behave with a great power’s "shadow" , to be "regional power", but such moves are not available to more than subcontracting.
Let come Patriots. What does Iran say? "Do not take Patriots, we are your friends". "Enforcement of the" slowdown is likely these days, the Organization of Islamic Conference Secretary-General Prof..Dr.Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu, warned the Western world with the following words. "In the invasion of Iraq, weapons of mass destruction cause was manifest. Now we do not create a reason the case for Iran." (Turkish cabinet to choose, with the logic to explain and boasts its own compasses.)
A possible military options against Iran comes to the agenda. The Middle Eastern Order is under threat of militant organizations. Generally we underline Iranian influence in the Middle East (ME) against Western relations. Especially Hizballah-Hamas line transformed as a pro- Iranian front and target Israel in the region and Western vision.
In August 2010, Syrian president Assad and Saudi king Abdullah visited Lebanon together. It indicates a crisis in the country. Why UN prosecution committee would announce indictment about Hariri assassination and there are some allegations that Hizballah is blamed in it. The main question is related the situation if there can be a new tension between Sunni and Shiite masses. On the other hand, Hizballah founded a Hizballahistan and Sunni PM Hariri the junior expressed his trust to Hizballah to defend his country from Israel. It also to give his country's sovereignty to Hizballah or at least to share Lebanon with Hizballah.
Saudi king supports Hariri and came to Lebanon with Assad to prevent any sectarian clash in the country. Syrian approach to Lebanon can be considered to patronize Amal and Hizballah. Amal is pro Syrian but Hizballah is pro Iranian and it is the symbol of Syrian-Iranian alliance.
As it is known Israel and Jordan were striked by rockets today (August 2, 2010). The interesting point, rockets were launched from Egypt. But Egypt did not realize the attacks. It is wondered that who striked Israel's Eliat and Jordan's Aqaba?
And there is one more entity strikes Israel. The entity is Hamas' Gaza Strip. Or the other name is Hamasistan..
A common approach is expected from regional countries and global actors against to militant organizations. And Iran’s main policy is related with the militant organizations.
CONCLUSION: TURKEY’S ROLE APPEASE IRAN?
Turkey is ally of USA, member of NATO, in EU accession process and member of European Council. These base is evaulated as associational alliance relations. We mean Turkey’s deployment in Western axis.
Iran’s approach to Turkey is going further with pro Islamic Turkish government’s political trends. Rapid conservatisation of Turkish masses facilitate Turkish-Iranian relations. However, Turkey is urged by EU and USA to keep Western position to Iran, especially nuclear issues. Turkish prime minister signed agreement with Iran includes natural gas and committed to develop bilateral economic relations’ volume.
Obama’s approach facilitates Turkish-Syrian, Turkish-Iranian relations which target to make dialogue with these countries. On the other hand Islamic Republic’s nuclear issue and proxy forces in Lebanon and Gaza Strip create main barriers. Also, Syria’s situation still sustain to send logistic support to these territories.
Iran’s most important strategy would occur in the Southern Iraq. Iraq’s Shia majority got the power and sectarian connections gave a determinance to Iran. KRG’s position will be considered with Turkey why they are in the Western axis. Current close approaches between Iran and Turkey is not realistic. After 2011, Turkey and Iran can become main competitors in Iraq.
Iran tries to break her isolation. Turkey’s efforts in the Middle East could conclude contradictions with pro western Sunni Arab regimes. Beside Turkey’s attitude, Iran’s approach to Turkey can not be like Syria. Syrian-Iran alliance is distinctive. Islamic republic’s great challenge targets Israel to wipe out from the map. Turkish-Israeli cold winter may reflect an illusion in this context. Why Turkish classical alignment with Israel lives a break. A probabl Israeli-Iranian clash would clarify crossroads for regional countries and Turkey.
Iran is going ahead on her own road map. So Turkish efforts to appease Iran is useless. Why Islamic Republic’s own agenda does not let a Western approach in the Middle East.
REFERENCE
Books:
Davutoğlu Ahmet, Stratejik Derinlik, Küre Yayınları, 32. Baskı, İstanbul, 2009.
Maloney Suzanna, Iran's Long Reach: Iran as a Pivotal State in the Muslim World (Pivotal State Series), USIP Pres Books, Washington D.C., October 2008.
Gold Dore, The Rise of Nuclear Iran: How Tehran Defies the West, Regnery Publishing Inc, Washington D.C., 2009.
Internet Resources:
Heinrich Mark, "IAEA votes to censure Iran over nuclear cover-up", Reuters, November 27, 2009.
http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSTRE5AQ1BZ20091127?pageNumber=1&virtualBrandChannel=11621
http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSN2550821720090925?pageNumber=1&virtualBrandChannel=11604
Spetalnick Matt and Heinrich Mark, "Western leaders warn Iran over nuclear site", Reuters, September 25, 2009.
Reuters, "FACTBOX: Iran's missiles and recent tests", December 16, 2009.
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE5BF2OR20091216.
Reuters, "U.S. to send ambassador to Syria after four-year hiatus", Haaretz, June 24, 2009.
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1095268.html
22 - 23 October 2010,Istanbul
My paper was in Working Group 2 Turkey and Regional Politics: Country-Specific Analysis. Title of my paper: "Iran crisis & Turkey's role in the Middle East" Schedule: October 23, 09:00-11:00 Held by: Arı Movement, Bahçeşehir University, Friedrich Naumann Stiftung]
Iran’s foreign policy has classical allegations to the Middle East. Before Islamic Republic, some policies were also valid for Iran. Iran has two related approaches in the region. First of all, Shiah card is useful for Iran, on the other hand, Iran also manipulates some societies as “Persian”. Kurds are one of the sample. Shah supported Kurds against to Iraq central government during “1962-1975 rebellion” why Iraq became closer with Soviet Union after 1958 military coup. However, US encouraged Iran to sign “Algeria agreement” with Iraq in 1975 because Iraq was approaching to Western axis. Iran sustains to use Shiah card after Islamic Republic. Iran has gained “a new influence area” after Gulf Wars. Southern Iraq’s situation became a pro Iranian zone in the Gulf.
I. Lebanon War (1982) was a starting point of Hizballah’s challenge in Lebanon. II.Gulf War (2003) also strengthened Iran to have a periphery in Iraq. Hamas’ coup in Gaza (2007) gave a prize to Iran for manipulating Gaza entity. There is an interesting point, Hamas is Sunni. But Hamas’ sectarian structure is not a problem for Islamic Republic. The main cause is related Iran’s challnge. Especially Iran is trying to attract Arab populations with using anti semitic and anti western populist discourse. Currently Iran has proxy forces in Lebanon, Gaza Strip and Southern Iraq.
In this context Iran has a greater infrastructure which occupies a geography from Eastern Mediterranean to Gulf. So US-Iran clash occurres in the Middle East. Islamic Republic underlines some cooperations with Russia and China. Also Iran is an observer in Shangai Cooperation Organization. Iran’s president Ahmedinejad has met leader of Venezuela several times. Firstly, we will touch Iran’s influence zone in the Middle East, after concern nuclear issues and political effects.
IRAN’S GREATER INFLUENCE ZONE
Iran must not be evaulated with only “uranium enrichment plan”. It’s a important tool. But firstly, political content of Iran’s approach must be undestood. Iran’s political activities reach to Southern Iraq, Lebanon and some of the Gulf states; which was called as “Shiah crescent”. Beside the situation, Iran’s influence to Iraq, after 2011, would create a competition on Iraq. Main competitors are Iran and US. Beside these developments, Lebanon’s situation seems to be hard in the near future. Hizballah founded a tangible “state within state” in Lebanon. Iran’s influence to Lebanon could be realized with Syria’s support. In this context Turkey’s policies to Syria is parallel with US policies. US policies target to isolate Iran. But Iran’s challenge to Eastern Meditarranean has two wings. In Lebanon, Hizballah’s “state within state” creates Hizballahistan and Hamas’ policies in Gaza Strip concludes with a Hamasistan. Hizballahistan-Hamasistan axis is not only against Israel but also against moderate Arab regimes. So Iran challenges to Israel, moderate Arab regimes and consequently Western axis in the Middle East. Turkish pro Islamic government activities can be commented with some diplomatic efforts to Iran or Hamas. But mostly main route about Turkish Foreign Policy to conform US strategies. However Turkey voted against sanctions on Iran's "uranium enrichment program". The behaviour is the indicator of Turkish cabinet's approach to Iran. As it is remembered, Turkey and Brazil cooperated with Iran to prevent probabl sanctions from UN. The three countries prepared a "trilateral declaration" and "swap of uranium deal" in May 17.
Turkey's vote was estimated why Turkey kept her position with Brazil about uranium swapping and declaration.
Recently, Turkey lived a crisis with Israel and her 9 citizens were killed in "Gaza flotilla". Israel is criticized harshly on the other hand sending flotilla to Gaza is considered. Iran supported Turkish government’s discourse.
Turkish-Iranian relations is very problematic for Western countries. Turkey’s efforts which targeted to break pressures on Iran failed.
For Turkey, having a sympathy to Hamas in Palestine and to having a sympathy to Hizballah in Lebanon, include also contradictions with Arab regimes.
The all of the policies from Turkish administration seem to support Iran and Iran's periphery.
China and Russia urge countries to obey sanctions against Iran.
Current Turkish foreign policy reach to a dead end. Pro Iranian approach has no provision for Turkey's foreign policy.
The behaviour is not only against US policies but also Russia and China. It means a conflict with "international order".
Can it be commented as a second "March 1" crisis? It can be harder why obeying sanctions would be absolutely expected from Turkey.
Hamasistan-Hizballahistan axis from Lebanon to Gaza Strip is a real problem about pro western relations. Aforementioned axis is related with Iran. Iran as we told, has an influence zone from Southern Iraq to Eastern Mediterranean and Caucus. One of the approach from Iran to Caucus concludes closer relations with Armenia but colder relations with Azerbajcan. Iran’s Azerbajcan region became a main problem for Iran after Azerbajcan’s independence. Iran also tries to manipulate Azerbajcan with Shiah card.
“NUCLEAR IRAN” ISSUE
Iran's "uranium enrichment program" is significant why it has occupied the agenda of world public opinion. "Iran" issue is highlighted again and it is brought to the agenda format.
Iran's nuclear activities’ "peaceful" purposes is suspected. US and Western countries meanwhile Russia and China questions Islamic Republic’s targets. U.S. and Israel highlighted Iran's "nuclear studies to make nuclear weapons” since for a long time. “Dialogue with Iran" was considered by U.S. President Obama during G-20 summit October 1 2009 meeting. He has made a joint press conference with the French president, Sarkozy and former British Prime Minister Brown. Obama made a speech in the name of the three leaders and he especially underlined, the UN Security Council permanent members and Germany (5 +1) expected "tangible progress" from Iran.
IAEA condemned Iran to plan nuclear weapons in November 2009. After the resolution Islamic Republic exercised new long range missiles which have capability over 2000 km. . For instance Iran has done one of them in December 2009. Siccil 2 missiles was announced by Iran’s state run TV which is broadcasted in language of Arabic . It’s capacity reach to Israel and Southeastern Europe. Iran is perceived as a “pivotal” country and can attract a wide range region militarily. If nuclear warheads would be added to these missiles, Iran’s allegations may be commented very differently. It does not mean that Islamic Republic challenge to only the Middle East but to Center Asia and Southern Caucaus. With these developments Gulf Cooperation Council decided to found a joint military force in the region at the same time. (December 2009).
U.S. President and European leaders reflected a common attitude. Russian president Medvedev informed Obama that “heavy sanctions" to Iran is concerned. U.S. is planning to deploy the "missile shield" project in Poland and Czech Republic. Russia’s approach to Iran is also related to prevent missile shields in those countries why the issue can be related with themselves.
Turkish prime minister also visited Iran in October 2009. "Efforts to persuade" to Iran about nuclear issue can be observed in Turkey. Turkey’s Iran policy clash with the Western axis. Iran can gain time with these efforts. In this context “shifting away from the Western axis” is considered for Turkey.
SYRIAN FACTOR FOR IRAN’S REGIONAL HEGEMONY
Turkish foreign minister’s book which is called "Strategic Depth" indicates that Turkey can found a regional periphery with a great power. The great power may be concerned as US. He has found an opportunity to practice his ideas.
In this context, Turkish-Syrian rapprochement does not clash with the United States. Since the September 2008 New York meetings, US-Syrian dialogue is developed. Delegations from the U.S. Congress visited Assad two times, then Obama’s Middle East special envoy Mitchell was sent to Assad , and also US embassy in Syria which was closed since 2005 reopened in June 2009. Syria is becoming closer to the axis of the West, but also keep her alliance with Iran. US strategy plan to isolate Iran politically. In this backdrop, the Syrian-Israeli talks were facilitated by Turkey but the talks were suspended in December 2008 related Israel’s Operation Cast Lead to Hamas’ entity in Gaza.
Syria-Iran alliance is realized in Lebanon. Lebanon's Shiite alliance, the most prominent component of this alliance and Hizballah, in a sense, the presence of Syria's, arising from its alliance with Iran to the logistical and political support owed. At the point reached today, Hizballah, in Lebanon, has become a phenomenon in itself. However, Syria lack of a source in the medium term may cornered Hizballah, Iran also "well into his shell" can be taken.
About the press, allegedly developed under the leadership of Turkey, Turkey-Syria-Iraq rapprochement or, in fact, still is an extension of U.S. policy. Now Iraq is ally of US. And the Iraqi government, made a harsh warning to Syria, not to deploy "terrorist groups" in her land. So, Turkey's "neo ottoman" approach, to use initiative, consists of a fantasy. In Turkish foreign minister Davutoğlu’s "Strategic Depth" book, his claims are met. Prof.Davutoğlu underlined Turkey behave with a great power’s "shadow" , to be "regional power", but such moves are not available to more than subcontracting.
Let come Patriots. What does Iran say? "Do not take Patriots, we are your friends". "Enforcement of the" slowdown is likely these days, the Organization of Islamic Conference Secretary-General Prof..Dr.Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu, warned the Western world with the following words. "In the invasion of Iraq, weapons of mass destruction cause was manifest. Now we do not create a reason the case for Iran." (Turkish cabinet to choose, with the logic to explain and boasts its own compasses.)
A possible military options against Iran comes to the agenda. The Middle Eastern Order is under threat of militant organizations. Generally we underline Iranian influence in the Middle East (ME) against Western relations. Especially Hizballah-Hamas line transformed as a pro- Iranian front and target Israel in the region and Western vision.
In August 2010, Syrian president Assad and Saudi king Abdullah visited Lebanon together. It indicates a crisis in the country. Why UN prosecution committee would announce indictment about Hariri assassination and there are some allegations that Hizballah is blamed in it. The main question is related the situation if there can be a new tension between Sunni and Shiite masses. On the other hand, Hizballah founded a Hizballahistan and Sunni PM Hariri the junior expressed his trust to Hizballah to defend his country from Israel. It also to give his country's sovereignty to Hizballah or at least to share Lebanon with Hizballah.
Saudi king supports Hariri and came to Lebanon with Assad to prevent any sectarian clash in the country. Syrian approach to Lebanon can be considered to patronize Amal and Hizballah. Amal is pro Syrian but Hizballah is pro Iranian and it is the symbol of Syrian-Iranian alliance.
As it is known Israel and Jordan were striked by rockets today (August 2, 2010). The interesting point, rockets were launched from Egypt. But Egypt did not realize the attacks. It is wondered that who striked Israel's Eliat and Jordan's Aqaba?
And there is one more entity strikes Israel. The entity is Hamas' Gaza Strip. Or the other name is Hamasistan..
A common approach is expected from regional countries and global actors against to militant organizations. And Iran’s main policy is related with the militant organizations.
CONCLUSION: TURKEY’S ROLE APPEASE IRAN?
Turkey is ally of USA, member of NATO, in EU accession process and member of European Council. These base is evaulated as associational alliance relations. We mean Turkey’s deployment in Western axis.
Iran’s approach to Turkey is going further with pro Islamic Turkish government’s political trends. Rapid conservatisation of Turkish masses facilitate Turkish-Iranian relations. However, Turkey is urged by EU and USA to keep Western position to Iran, especially nuclear issues. Turkish prime minister signed agreement with Iran includes natural gas and committed to develop bilateral economic relations’ volume.
Obama’s approach facilitates Turkish-Syrian, Turkish-Iranian relations which target to make dialogue with these countries. On the other hand Islamic Republic’s nuclear issue and proxy forces in Lebanon and Gaza Strip create main barriers. Also, Syria’s situation still sustain to send logistic support to these territories.
Iran’s most important strategy would occur in the Southern Iraq. Iraq’s Shia majority got the power and sectarian connections gave a determinance to Iran. KRG’s position will be considered with Turkey why they are in the Western axis. Current close approaches between Iran and Turkey is not realistic. After 2011, Turkey and Iran can become main competitors in Iraq.
Iran tries to break her isolation. Turkey’s efforts in the Middle East could conclude contradictions with pro western Sunni Arab regimes. Beside Turkey’s attitude, Iran’s approach to Turkey can not be like Syria. Syrian-Iran alliance is distinctive. Islamic republic’s great challenge targets Israel to wipe out from the map. Turkish-Israeli cold winter may reflect an illusion in this context. Why Turkish classical alignment with Israel lives a break. A probabl Israeli-Iranian clash would clarify crossroads for regional countries and Turkey.
Iran is going ahead on her own road map. So Turkish efforts to appease Iran is useless. Why Islamic Republic’s own agenda does not let a Western approach in the Middle East.
REFERENCE
Books:
Davutoğlu Ahmet, Stratejik Derinlik, Küre Yayınları, 32. Baskı, İstanbul, 2009.
Maloney Suzanna, Iran's Long Reach: Iran as a Pivotal State in the Muslim World (Pivotal State Series), USIP Pres Books, Washington D.C., October 2008.
Gold Dore, The Rise of Nuclear Iran: How Tehran Defies the West, Regnery Publishing Inc, Washington D.C., 2009.
Internet Resources:
Heinrich Mark, "IAEA votes to censure Iran over nuclear cover-up", Reuters, November 27, 2009.
http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSTRE5AQ1BZ20091127?pageNumber=1&virtualBrandChannel=11621
http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSN2550821720090925?pageNumber=1&virtualBrandChannel=11604
Spetalnick Matt and Heinrich Mark, "Western leaders warn Iran over nuclear site", Reuters, September 25, 2009.
Reuters, "FACTBOX: Iran's missiles and recent tests", December 16, 2009.
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE5BF2OR20091216.
Reuters, "U.S. to send ambassador to Syria after four-year hiatus", Haaretz, June 24, 2009.
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1095268.html
2 Ağustos 2010 Pazartesi
THE REAL ISSUE IN THE ME: MILITANT ORGANIZATIONS VS. STATES....
The Middle Eastern Order is under threat of militant organizations. Generally we underline Iranian influence in the Middle East (ME) against Western relations. Especially Hizballah-Hamas line transformed as a pro- Iranian front and target Israel in the region and Western vision.
Recently Syrian president Assad and Saudi king Abdullah visited Lebanon together. It indicates a crisis in the country. Why UN prosecution committee would announce indictment about Hariri assassination and there are some allegations that Hizballah is blamed in it. The main question is related the situation if there can be a new tension between Sunni and Shiite masses. On the other hand, Hizballah founded a Hizballahistan and Sunni PM Hariri the junior expressed his trust to Hizballah to defend his country from Israel. It also to give his country's sovereignty to Hizballah or at least to share Lebanon with Hizballah.
Saudi king supports Hariri and came to Lebanon with Assad to prevent any sectarian clash in the country. Syrian approach to Lebanon can be considered to patronize Amal and Hizballah. Amal is pro Syrian but Hizballah is pro Iranian and it is the symbol of Syrian-Iranian alliance.
As it is known Israel and Jordan were striked by rockets today (August 2, 2010). The interesting point, rockets were launched from Egypt. But Egypt did not realize the attacks. It is wondered that who striked Israel's Eliat and Jordan's Aqaba?
And there is one more entity strikes Israel. The entity is Hamas' Gaza Strip. Or the other name is Hamasistan..
PKK strikes Turkey from Northern Iraq or according to Iraq constitution Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG). PKK has a political wing which name is BDP in Turkish parliament. The seperatist terrorist organization provokes masses against Turkey why it does not want to break arms in "Kurdish opening". PKK demands to share power in KRG and Turkey as an armed group which has political wings in Turkey and KRG.
AKP government has contradictions against PKK terror. Pro Islamic administration supports Hamas and gives its sympathy to Hizballah. But the behaviour is also against to pro Western Sunni regimes.
The main problem, militant organizations reached to a power which can strike or threat the states in ME.
A common approach is expected from regional countries and global actors to militant organizations.
Recently Syrian president Assad and Saudi king Abdullah visited Lebanon together. It indicates a crisis in the country. Why UN prosecution committee would announce indictment about Hariri assassination and there are some allegations that Hizballah is blamed in it. The main question is related the situation if there can be a new tension between Sunni and Shiite masses. On the other hand, Hizballah founded a Hizballahistan and Sunni PM Hariri the junior expressed his trust to Hizballah to defend his country from Israel. It also to give his country's sovereignty to Hizballah or at least to share Lebanon with Hizballah.
Saudi king supports Hariri and came to Lebanon with Assad to prevent any sectarian clash in the country. Syrian approach to Lebanon can be considered to patronize Amal and Hizballah. Amal is pro Syrian but Hizballah is pro Iranian and it is the symbol of Syrian-Iranian alliance.
As it is known Israel and Jordan were striked by rockets today (August 2, 2010). The interesting point, rockets were launched from Egypt. But Egypt did not realize the attacks. It is wondered that who striked Israel's Eliat and Jordan's Aqaba?
And there is one more entity strikes Israel. The entity is Hamas' Gaza Strip. Or the other name is Hamasistan..
PKK strikes Turkey from Northern Iraq or according to Iraq constitution Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG). PKK has a political wing which name is BDP in Turkish parliament. The seperatist terrorist organization provokes masses against Turkey why it does not want to break arms in "Kurdish opening". PKK demands to share power in KRG and Turkey as an armed group which has political wings in Turkey and KRG.
AKP government has contradictions against PKK terror. Pro Islamic administration supports Hamas and gives its sympathy to Hizballah. But the behaviour is also against to pro Western Sunni regimes.
The main problem, militant organizations reached to a power which can strike or threat the states in ME.
A common approach is expected from regional countries and global actors to militant organizations.
27 Temmuz 2010 Salı
WESTERN NATION BUILDING LABORATORY: KURDS
Western history includes many interesting social engineering stories. One of them is about the Kurds.
Turkish nationalism is accepted as "late nationalism" why Turks has been the founder element of Ottoman Empire. However, Ottoman state has been based on Islamic infrastructure.
Turks understood that "they are Turks" in early years of 20th century. National Liberation War was the starting point of the state which was described with Turkishness. Before Lausanne negotiations, sultanate was abolished by Turkish Grand National Assembly. After Lausanne Treaty, Republic of Turkey was founded by the Turkish parliament. All of these revolutional steps were realized under Mustafa Kemal Atatürk's leadership.
Atatürk created a secular infrastructure for Republic of Turkey. And the state abolished caliphate in 1924.
Main opposition to the secular republic came from Islamist-Kurdist feudal elements.
In early Republic Era, Kurds in Southern Eastern Anatolia were provoked by Sheiks in the context of Islamism and it was related with Ottoman identity.
On the other hand, late 1930's showed Kurdishness in Kurdish upheavals.
Kurdish opposition kept its silence until 1970's. Socialist opposition facilitated Kurdish organizations.
PKK was founded in late 1970's by Ocalan which was the Kurdish seperatist organization.
PKK began its attacks in 1984. US intervention to Iraq developed PKK's violence. Because US operation created a no fly zone. And it meant Kurdistan in Iraq.
At last second Gulf War, concluded with a new Iraq. Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) became official with new Iraq constitution in 2005.
US withdrawing plan from Iraq implicated a consensus between Turkey and KRG. US policy reflected to AKP government's policy in the name of "Kurdish opening".
But PKK rejected the plan. PKK did not accept to leave arms. The seperatist organization demanded to be political organization and armed group in the same time.
AKP's government underlined IHH and Gaza flotilla for 18 days. (May 31-June 18)Erdogan dreamt to be Middle Eastern leader and used flotilla. AKP did not get attention to PKK attack to Iskenderun naval base in May 31. It preferred to provoke flotilla event.
PKK started its attacks again in June 19. AKP tried to ignore PKK attacks. But the attacks shaped a tension in Western provinces of Turkey. In each day new martyrs have gone to these provinces.
Inegol and Dörtyol events are the main risks for national heritage. Ethnic clash is occurring.
We can see that Western countries achieve to build a new nation in the Middle East.
But the score is wondered about Turkey as NATO member and US ally country. Turkey's instability would feed Western failure in the region.
Turkish nationalism is accepted as "late nationalism" why Turks has been the founder element of Ottoman Empire. However, Ottoman state has been based on Islamic infrastructure.
Turks understood that "they are Turks" in early years of 20th century. National Liberation War was the starting point of the state which was described with Turkishness. Before Lausanne negotiations, sultanate was abolished by Turkish Grand National Assembly. After Lausanne Treaty, Republic of Turkey was founded by the Turkish parliament. All of these revolutional steps were realized under Mustafa Kemal Atatürk's leadership.
Atatürk created a secular infrastructure for Republic of Turkey. And the state abolished caliphate in 1924.
Main opposition to the secular republic came from Islamist-Kurdist feudal elements.
In early Republic Era, Kurds in Southern Eastern Anatolia were provoked by Sheiks in the context of Islamism and it was related with Ottoman identity.
On the other hand, late 1930's showed Kurdishness in Kurdish upheavals.
Kurdish opposition kept its silence until 1970's. Socialist opposition facilitated Kurdish organizations.
PKK was founded in late 1970's by Ocalan which was the Kurdish seperatist organization.
PKK began its attacks in 1984. US intervention to Iraq developed PKK's violence. Because US operation created a no fly zone. And it meant Kurdistan in Iraq.
At last second Gulf War, concluded with a new Iraq. Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) became official with new Iraq constitution in 2005.
US withdrawing plan from Iraq implicated a consensus between Turkey and KRG. US policy reflected to AKP government's policy in the name of "Kurdish opening".
But PKK rejected the plan. PKK did not accept to leave arms. The seperatist organization demanded to be political organization and armed group in the same time.
AKP's government underlined IHH and Gaza flotilla for 18 days. (May 31-June 18)Erdogan dreamt to be Middle Eastern leader and used flotilla. AKP did not get attention to PKK attack to Iskenderun naval base in May 31. It preferred to provoke flotilla event.
PKK started its attacks again in June 19. AKP tried to ignore PKK attacks. But the attacks shaped a tension in Western provinces of Turkey. In each day new martyrs have gone to these provinces.
Inegol and Dörtyol events are the main risks for national heritage. Ethnic clash is occurring.
We can see that Western countries achieve to build a new nation in the Middle East.
But the score is wondered about Turkey as NATO member and US ally country. Turkey's instability would feed Western failure in the region.
19 Temmuz 2010 Pazartesi
ISRAEL'S "IRON DOME" TESTED...
If it is remembered, we have underlined "Israel's Iron Dome Missile Shield" in January 2010.
deniz tansi international, "Israel's iron dome missile shield", January 7, 2010.
http://dtansi-international.blogspot.com/2010/01/israels-iron-dome-missile-shield.html
Israeli media emphasized that, "Iron dome tested succesfully".
Associated Press, "Iron dome passes final tests", Jerusalem Post, July 19, 2010. http://www.jpost.com/Israel/Article.aspx?id=181936
And according to the sources, it will be active in November 2010.
What does it mean? As it is known, there are some expectations for further wars around Israel.
One of them is related Lebanon's Hizballah. And it is called as "III. Lebanon War". Or any scenarios are considered about Gaza which is stated as III. Intifada.
Israel is preparing a missile shield against Iran's proxy forces. Hamas-Hizballah line is so motivated for "wiping Israel off the map". It can be seen a provocative story.
However, Iran's possible "nuclear power" targets to change regions' balances fundamentally.
Hamas-Hizballah activities are part of these efforts.
Israeli defense ministry explained that, first Iron dome batteries would be deployed in November.
Iron Dome is unique for her kind.
Katyushas and Al Quassam's will be useless?
It can be an another question for the Middle Eastern clashes...
deniz tansi international, "Israel's iron dome missile shield", January 7, 2010.
http://dtansi-international.blogspot.com/2010/01/israels-iron-dome-missile-shield.html
Israeli media emphasized that, "Iron dome tested succesfully".
Associated Press, "Iron dome passes final tests", Jerusalem Post, July 19, 2010. http://www.jpost.com/Israel/Article.aspx?id=181936
And according to the sources, it will be active in November 2010.
What does it mean? As it is known, there are some expectations for further wars around Israel.
One of them is related Lebanon's Hizballah. And it is called as "III. Lebanon War". Or any scenarios are considered about Gaza which is stated as III. Intifada.
Israel is preparing a missile shield against Iran's proxy forces. Hamas-Hizballah line is so motivated for "wiping Israel off the map". It can be seen a provocative story.
However, Iran's possible "nuclear power" targets to change regions' balances fundamentally.
Hamas-Hizballah activities are part of these efforts.
Israeli defense ministry explained that, first Iron dome batteries would be deployed in November.
Iron Dome is unique for her kind.
Katyushas and Al Quassam's will be useless?
It can be an another question for the Middle Eastern clashes...
29 Haziran 2010 Salı
OBAMA PLAYS A GAMBLE ON TURKISH-ISRAELI RELATIONS
Obama administration plays some gambles in the Middle East. After Obama's presidency, new government planned a new version of "Arab peace plan". And Jordan's king Abdullah was promoted by new US president. Revised plan could not have concluded. Especially, Netenyahu's government disturbed Obama's policies why new Israeli cabinet included radical parties. For instance Lieberman became new foreign minister of Israel.
Israeli cabinet rejected many offers from Obama. Even Netenyahu's administration planned new settlements and did not approach to new peace plans.
Obama did not prefer to clash with Israel directly. So pro islamic AKP government seemed very attractive for "Democratic government"s policies. Erdogan started with "one minutes" event for anti Israeli discourse.
In 2009 there were many crisis between Turkey and Israel.
(drill crisis, serie crisis, in 2010 lower sofa crisis and so on..)
And at last Turkey and Israel clashed in the Eastern Mediterranean on date of May 31, 2010.
According to Obama's mind, an NATO ally's attempt to break Israel's Gaza blockade could be effective.
However these approaches only legitimized political Islam in Turkey and in the region.
Recently Erdogan and Obama met in Canada.
After the meeting, Erdogan declared to Charlie Rose from PBS TV, "Turkey still friend to Israel".. However, he challenged to Israeli government and told that, "Netenyahu government is the biggest barrier to peace". He added that, there must be an opportunity to Hamas why it won the elections.
ynet, "Erdogan: Turkey still friend to Israel", June 29, 2010. http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3912596,00.html
Obama's trend facilitated AKP's pro islamic utopias. Erdogan projected Turkish FM Prof.Davutoglu's "problem solver" and "founding order" policies.
"Changing Israeli government" and "to become Hamas as full Palestine's government" is the new mission of AKP.
Erdogan's approach welcomes a new adventure....
There are new missions to AKP government from Obama administration. But Obama's style is very problematic. Turkish-Israeli relations reached a very risky point and Obama administration's policies built it. Obama plays a gamble. He uses pro islamic AKP to press Israeli government. And new environment encourages Erdogan to challenge in the Middle East. That's why I underline the adventure.
Obama's gamble could damage pro western axis in the Middle East and Iran's approach would gain from US appeasement policies.
Israel's cabinet can be critiziced or US policies can try to compress her strategic ally. But using AKP government for changing Israeli government is a gamble. Cabinets can change but Turkish-Israeli relations' long term vision is effected from Obama's gamble.
Israeli cabinet rejected many offers from Obama. Even Netenyahu's administration planned new settlements and did not approach to new peace plans.
Obama did not prefer to clash with Israel directly. So pro islamic AKP government seemed very attractive for "Democratic government"s policies. Erdogan started with "one minutes" event for anti Israeli discourse.
In 2009 there were many crisis between Turkey and Israel.
(drill crisis, serie crisis, in 2010 lower sofa crisis and so on..)
And at last Turkey and Israel clashed in the Eastern Mediterranean on date of May 31, 2010.
According to Obama's mind, an NATO ally's attempt to break Israel's Gaza blockade could be effective.
However these approaches only legitimized political Islam in Turkey and in the region.
Recently Erdogan and Obama met in Canada.
After the meeting, Erdogan declared to Charlie Rose from PBS TV, "Turkey still friend to Israel".. However, he challenged to Israeli government and told that, "Netenyahu government is the biggest barrier to peace". He added that, there must be an opportunity to Hamas why it won the elections.
ynet, "Erdogan: Turkey still friend to Israel", June 29, 2010. http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3912596,00.html
Obama's trend facilitated AKP's pro islamic utopias. Erdogan projected Turkish FM Prof.Davutoglu's "problem solver" and "founding order" policies.
"Changing Israeli government" and "to become Hamas as full Palestine's government" is the new mission of AKP.
Erdogan's approach welcomes a new adventure....
There are new missions to AKP government from Obama administration. But Obama's style is very problematic. Turkish-Israeli relations reached a very risky point and Obama administration's policies built it. Obama plays a gamble. He uses pro islamic AKP to press Israeli government. And new environment encourages Erdogan to challenge in the Middle East. That's why I underline the adventure.
Obama's gamble could damage pro western axis in the Middle East and Iran's approach would gain from US appeasement policies.
Israel's cabinet can be critiziced or US policies can try to compress her strategic ally. But using AKP government for changing Israeli government is a gamble. Cabinets can change but Turkish-Israeli relations' long term vision is effected from Obama's gamble.
9 Haziran 2010 Çarşamba
TURKEY'S VOTE IN UN SECURITY COUNCIL...
Turkey voted against sanctions on Iran's "uranium enrichemt program". The behaviour is the indicator of Turkish cabinet's approach to Iran. As it is remembered, Turkey and Brazil cooperate with Iran to prevent probabl sanctions from UN. The three countries prepared a "trilateral declaration" and "swap of uranium deal" in May 17.
Turkey's vote was expected why Turkey kept her position with Brazil about uranium swapping and declaration.
Recently, Turkey lived a crisis with Israel and her 9 citizens were killed in "Gaza flotilla". Israel is criticized harshly however, sending flotilla to Gaza is considered. Iran supported AKP's discourse.
Turkish-Iranian relations is very problematic for Western countries. AKP's efforts for breaking pressures on Iran failed.
For Turkey, has a sympathy to Hamas in Palestine and has a sympathy to Hizballah in Lebanon, have also contradictions with Arab regimes.
The all policies from AKP show to support Iran and Iran's periphery.
China and Russia urge countries to obey sanctions against Iran.
AKP's foreign policy reach to a dead end. Pro Iranian approach has no provision for Turkey's foreign policy.
AKP's behaviour is not only against US policies but also Russia and China. It means a conflict with "international order".
Can it be commented as a second "March 1" crisis? It can be harder why obeying sanctions would be absolutely expected from Turkey.
Turkey's vote was expected why Turkey kept her position with Brazil about uranium swapping and declaration.
Recently, Turkey lived a crisis with Israel and her 9 citizens were killed in "Gaza flotilla". Israel is criticized harshly however, sending flotilla to Gaza is considered. Iran supported AKP's discourse.
Turkish-Iranian relations is very problematic for Western countries. AKP's efforts for breaking pressures on Iran failed.
For Turkey, has a sympathy to Hamas in Palestine and has a sympathy to Hizballah in Lebanon, have also contradictions with Arab regimes.
The all policies from AKP show to support Iran and Iran's periphery.
China and Russia urge countries to obey sanctions against Iran.
AKP's foreign policy reach to a dead end. Pro Iranian approach has no provision for Turkey's foreign policy.
AKP's behaviour is not only against US policies but also Russia and China. It means a conflict with "international order".
Can it be commented as a second "March 1" crisis? It can be harder why obeying sanctions would be absolutely expected from Turkey.
6 Haziran 2010 Pazar
ERDOGAN'S STRATEGY TOWARDS A MIDDLE EASTERN ANXIETY...
Turkish PM Erdogan's Konya speech was very significant.(June 4, 2010) He has declared that, "Hamas is not a terror organization". This declaration was a challenge to Western axis especially US. In the same day, Fethullah Gülen (Turkish cleric and called as Turkish imam) who has a worlwide social network and also has a hegemony on Turkish politics and bureaucracy, urged AKP government indirectly. He has reminded that, before Gaza flotilla's moving fom Turkish coasts, there must have been a permission from Israeli authorities. Gülen told, IHH's show can be commented as political targets. Fethullah Gülen's explanations indicated that, these aids can be realized with Israeli cooperation and could be silent.
Hizballah held a meeting in Beirut and supported Erdogan government. Hasan Nasrallah who is General secretary of Hizballah criticized Arab leaders and praised Erdogan. Erdogan was praised by Hamas leaders in Gaza and Damascus too.
Erdogan cabinet's tendency to Iranian nuclear studies is known. AKP's targets reach to Hizballah and Hamas which are proxy forces of Iran in the Middle East. However Erdogan's approach clash with Arab leaders. AKP makes its political investments to Hamas. But what about Fatah?
Hamas blames Egypt and lauds Erdogan's administration.
Washington Post reminds that, Turkey is NATO member and US ally. In the article, AKP-IHH relation is questioned and IHH-Hamas ties are considered.
Washington Post, "Turkey's Erdogan bears responsibility in flotilla fiasco", June 5, 2010.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/06/04/AR2010060404806.html
NY Times urges that "Turkey's rhetoric go way so far".
NY Times, "Turkey's Fury", June 4, 2010. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/05/opinion/05sat2.html?scp=1&sq=Turkey+is+understandably+furious+about+Israel%E2%80%99s+disastrous+attack+on+the+Turkish-flagged+aid+ship%2C%22&st=cse
Turkey can behave with Iran until to which date.. In each day, rhetoric's content creates an anxiety to Western countries.
Obama administration failed on the Middle East. Is US losing Turkey? Also EU's demands legitimated AKP's policies...
According to Al-Mustaqbal newspaper Erdogan would go Gaza with a flotilla and Turkish navy?
Being a "new Nassir" requires some costs... The cost is not only related with Turkey but also Western axis in the Middle East.
Hizballah held a meeting in Beirut and supported Erdogan government. Hasan Nasrallah who is General secretary of Hizballah criticized Arab leaders and praised Erdogan. Erdogan was praised by Hamas leaders in Gaza and Damascus too.
Erdogan cabinet's tendency to Iranian nuclear studies is known. AKP's targets reach to Hizballah and Hamas which are proxy forces of Iran in the Middle East. However Erdogan's approach clash with Arab leaders. AKP makes its political investments to Hamas. But what about Fatah?
Hamas blames Egypt and lauds Erdogan's administration.
Washington Post reminds that, Turkey is NATO member and US ally. In the article, AKP-IHH relation is questioned and IHH-Hamas ties are considered.
Washington Post, "Turkey's Erdogan bears responsibility in flotilla fiasco", June 5, 2010.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/06/04/AR2010060404806.html
NY Times urges that "Turkey's rhetoric go way so far".
NY Times, "Turkey's Fury", June 4, 2010. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/05/opinion/05sat2.html?scp=1&sq=Turkey+is+understandably+furious+about+Israel%E2%80%99s+disastrous+attack+on+the+Turkish-flagged+aid+ship%2C%22&st=cse
Turkey can behave with Iran until to which date.. In each day, rhetoric's content creates an anxiety to Western countries.
Obama administration failed on the Middle East. Is US losing Turkey? Also EU's demands legitimated AKP's policies...
According to Al-Mustaqbal newspaper Erdogan would go Gaza with a flotilla and Turkish navy?
Being a "new Nassir" requires some costs... The cost is not only related with Turkey but also Western axis in the Middle East.
31 Mayıs 2010 Pazartesi
AT LAST, ERDOGAN ACHIEVED TO CLASH WITH ISRAEL....
Recent events about Turkey seem very pesimistic. One of them occurred in Iskenderun. Iskenderun naval base was striked by PKK terror organization. Unfortunately, 7 Turkish soldiers were killed by rockets.
On the other hand, international aid flotilla to Gaza, was intervened by Israeli commandos. 16 activist were killed -at least according to international news agencies-. And among the dead activist, Turkish citizens exist. And the ship which was intervened belong to Turkey.
In order to understand current situation of bilateral relations, we must analyze some developments.
As it is known, Turkish PM, used an anti-Israeli discourse since January 2009 which was called -one minute polemic.-
Drill crisis, serie crisis, lower sofa crisis were lived in the year of 2009. And at last "flotilla crisis" has come in May 2010.
First time, blood was considered for bilateral relations.
Israeli intervention caused killings. However, "flotilla route" was scheduled clearly and announced to world's public opinion. Expectation converted to a reality.
To destroy Israeli blockade on Gaza, was very attractive.
But the score is a great problem.
We are questioning the Turkish Foreign Policy "...to shift away from the Western axis." for a long time.
Israeli intervention must be critiziced hardly. But on the other hand, AKP government is reaching a target, -to break relations with Israel-.
Turkish attitude in UN Security Council about Iran and to support only Hamas in Palestine and to exclude Fatah is significant.
We wonder the next step from Erdogan...
On the other hand, international aid flotilla to Gaza, was intervened by Israeli commandos. 16 activist were killed -at least according to international news agencies-. And among the dead activist, Turkish citizens exist. And the ship which was intervened belong to Turkey.
In order to understand current situation of bilateral relations, we must analyze some developments.
As it is known, Turkish PM, used an anti-Israeli discourse since January 2009 which was called -one minute polemic.-
Drill crisis, serie crisis, lower sofa crisis were lived in the year of 2009. And at last "flotilla crisis" has come in May 2010.
First time, blood was considered for bilateral relations.
Israeli intervention caused killings. However, "flotilla route" was scheduled clearly and announced to world's public opinion. Expectation converted to a reality.
To destroy Israeli blockade on Gaza, was very attractive.
But the score is a great problem.
We are questioning the Turkish Foreign Policy "...to shift away from the Western axis." for a long time.
Israeli intervention must be critiziced hardly. But on the other hand, AKP government is reaching a target, -to break relations with Israel-.
Turkish attitude in UN Security Council about Iran and to support only Hamas in Palestine and to exclude Fatah is significant.
We wonder the next step from Erdogan...
13 Mayıs 2010 Perşembe
US IS FIGHTHING WITH ANTI SANCTIONS APPROACH TO IRAN...
What an interesting situation..
US seems to persuade Russia and China for applying sanctions into Iran about nuclear facilities. Both of them are permanent members of UN Security Council like US.
On the other hand, some temporary members of Security Council attempt to blockade sanctions on Iran.
Brazil and Turkey are significant..
But especially Turkey why she is ally of US, member of NATO and in EU accession process.
US Secretary of State telling to Turkish FM Davutoğlu that "Iran is not serious about accepting international demands to prove its nuclear program peaceful. She said Tehran must face fresh penalties unless it does a quick about-face and complies."
Matthew Lee, "US tries to blunt Iran anti-sanctions push", Associated Press Writer, Tulsa World, May 13, 2010. http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_US_IRAN_SANCTIONS?SITE=OKTUL&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT
Turkish Foreign Policy has some suspicions on herself why there is a perception that she is shifting away from the West. Turkish approach to Iran is very problematic.
It is just like an "appeasement policy" on Iran's nuclear efforts.
What will Turkey do to a potential sanction resolution draft in Security Council?
Turkey's aim to be a facilitator or mediator between Iran and US? It is not realistic.
Turkish anti Israeli discourse has an ideological content. It targets to draw a spectacle periphery but includes contradictons. Arab countries and Iran has not a common axis. Anti Israeli propaganda can create an attraction on Turkish PM.
However, Arab regimes and Iran do not have a similar approach. Iran's nuclear efforts also distur Arabs.
So what is the construction of AKP's foreign policy..
To sustain relations with US, to appease Iran, to develop relations with Russia and to be leader of Arabs in spite of pro Iranian approach..
This is a dead end.
And has not a tangible future..
US seems to persuade Russia and China for applying sanctions into Iran about nuclear facilities. Both of them are permanent members of UN Security Council like US.
On the other hand, some temporary members of Security Council attempt to blockade sanctions on Iran.
Brazil and Turkey are significant..
But especially Turkey why she is ally of US, member of NATO and in EU accession process.
US Secretary of State telling to Turkish FM Davutoğlu that "Iran is not serious about accepting international demands to prove its nuclear program peaceful. She said Tehran must face fresh penalties unless it does a quick about-face and complies."
Matthew Lee, "US tries to blunt Iran anti-sanctions push", Associated Press Writer, Tulsa World, May 13, 2010. http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_US_IRAN_SANCTIONS?SITE=OKTUL&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT
Turkish Foreign Policy has some suspicions on herself why there is a perception that she is shifting away from the West. Turkish approach to Iran is very problematic.
It is just like an "appeasement policy" on Iran's nuclear efforts.
What will Turkey do to a potential sanction resolution draft in Security Council?
Turkey's aim to be a facilitator or mediator between Iran and US? It is not realistic.
Turkish anti Israeli discourse has an ideological content. It targets to draw a spectacle periphery but includes contradictons. Arab countries and Iran has not a common axis. Anti Israeli propaganda can create an attraction on Turkish PM.
However, Arab regimes and Iran do not have a similar approach. Iran's nuclear efforts also distur Arabs.
So what is the construction of AKP's foreign policy..
To sustain relations with US, to appease Iran, to develop relations with Russia and to be leader of Arabs in spite of pro Iranian approach..
This is a dead end.
And has not a tangible future..
7 Nisan 2010 Çarşamba
ERDOGAN: "MAIN THREAT IS ISRAEL"
In Paris, there was an interesting meeting. Turkish PM Erdogan visited French president Sarkozy. After his meeting with Sarkozy, Erdogan made some comments about Turkish-French relations. Meanwhile, Sarkozy accepted to come to Turkey as an official visiting.
But the significant point of Turkish PM's to the media was related Israel. He has blamed Israel about Operation Cast Lead again and he repeated his condemnation. Erdogan insisted that "Israel's reasons are not valid" like his previous declarations.
Recently, he had a polemic with Israeli foreign minister Avigdor Lieberman why Lieberman told "Erdogan behaves like Gaddafi". He responded that "Lieberman (that man) is not my counterpart."
Erdogan's most intensive and radical challenge occurred in Paris.
He allegated that, "Israel is main threat to Midddle East Peace." As it is known, there is a campaign against Israel about Middle East Peace Process. US president Obama lived a high tension with Israeli PM Netenyahu. US has urged Israel to conform new Middle East Peace Process. Israel was especially concerned to make new settlements in West Bank and Jerusalem.
Also Jordan King Abdullah who is the one of Obama's good friend declared his approach to Israel. According to him, Israel can not be trusted for new attempts which target to reach Peace Process in the Middle East.
However Turkish PM's prospect to Israel becomes more radical in each step. Turkey's status quo in the Western axis contradicts with Erdogan's aspects.
Turkey and Israel are allies of US. Both of the countries has relations since 1949 with each other. Turkey is the first country recognized Israel in 1949 which has a Muslim majority population and was unique until 1978. Why Turkey took place in Western bloc and constructively secular.
Currently there are problems in the Middle East. Israel's cabinet has paradoxes in the Peace Process and Palestine problem. Extremist elements in Israeli cabinet also create problems for Israel's foreign policy.
On the other hand, Turkish PM's two different statements reflect his real aims. He told recently "my dear friend Ahmedinejad" in one of his speech and the last declaration he challenged "Israel is the main threat in the region."
Turkey as it is known-NATO member and US ally country- and her PM prefers Iran in the Middle East and stated Israel as a "main threat." Beside US, EU has an appeasement policy on Iran.Pro islamic cabinet in Turkey uses the process.
If it is calculated, "more conservative Turkey" would clash with the Western axis in the long term. Erdogan also praises Hamas and Hizballah in the region.
Now, EU accession process is used to eleminate secular republic in Turkey. AKP's aim to support Iran ironically shows EU's political investments in Turkey. Also Obama's administration would not get Turkey's vote in UN Security Council.
Western countries can think now.
"Turkey Quo Vadis"
But the significant point of Turkish PM's to the media was related Israel. He has blamed Israel about Operation Cast Lead again and he repeated his condemnation. Erdogan insisted that "Israel's reasons are not valid" like his previous declarations.
Recently, he had a polemic with Israeli foreign minister Avigdor Lieberman why Lieberman told "Erdogan behaves like Gaddafi". He responded that "Lieberman (that man) is not my counterpart."
Erdogan's most intensive and radical challenge occurred in Paris.
He allegated that, "Israel is main threat to Midddle East Peace." As it is known, there is a campaign against Israel about Middle East Peace Process. US president Obama lived a high tension with Israeli PM Netenyahu. US has urged Israel to conform new Middle East Peace Process. Israel was especially concerned to make new settlements in West Bank and Jerusalem.
Also Jordan King Abdullah who is the one of Obama's good friend declared his approach to Israel. According to him, Israel can not be trusted for new attempts which target to reach Peace Process in the Middle East.
However Turkish PM's prospect to Israel becomes more radical in each step. Turkey's status quo in the Western axis contradicts with Erdogan's aspects.
Turkey and Israel are allies of US. Both of the countries has relations since 1949 with each other. Turkey is the first country recognized Israel in 1949 which has a Muslim majority population and was unique until 1978. Why Turkey took place in Western bloc and constructively secular.
Currently there are problems in the Middle East. Israel's cabinet has paradoxes in the Peace Process and Palestine problem. Extremist elements in Israeli cabinet also create problems for Israel's foreign policy.
On the other hand, Turkish PM's two different statements reflect his real aims. He told recently "my dear friend Ahmedinejad" in one of his speech and the last declaration he challenged "Israel is the main threat in the region."
Turkey as it is known-NATO member and US ally country- and her PM prefers Iran in the Middle East and stated Israel as a "main threat." Beside US, EU has an appeasement policy on Iran.Pro islamic cabinet in Turkey uses the process.
If it is calculated, "more conservative Turkey" would clash with the Western axis in the long term. Erdogan also praises Hamas and Hizballah in the region.
Now, EU accession process is used to eleminate secular republic in Turkey. AKP's aim to support Iran ironically shows EU's political investments in Turkey. Also Obama's administration would not get Turkey's vote in UN Security Council.
Western countries can think now.
"Turkey Quo Vadis"
Kaydol:
Kayıtlar (Atom)
