Noticed a couple things on my recent trips to Istanbul and Ankara. The media in Turkey these days is awash with stories on Syria, predictably. Somewhat less predictable is how Turkey will respond to the turmoil across its border.
Some Syrian anti-regime demonstrations have morphed into an armed resistance, with the Telegraph reporting this week that Libya’s new leaders intended to send hundreds of fighters and weapons to anti-regime forces in Syria. Some in Libya believe that the alleged proposal was a rogue one made by the Islamist, Libyan militia commander Abdul Hakim Bel Haj. While it is unclear how many Syrian anti-regime demonstrators have turned to armed resistance and exactly which outside parties are helping which side and to what extent, developments indicate that violence and repression are set to escalate in Syria.
The consequences of such an escalation would directly affect Turkey. Syrian refugees in Turkey who are staying in camps on the border number over 7000 currently. However, if the death toll keeps rising and certain key groups in Syria turn against the regime, the ensuing hostilities may force tens, possibly hundreds of thousands more streaming across the border. Leaders of the Free Syrian Army opposition group, made up mainly of former Syrian Armed Forces members who defected, are currently based near the Syrian border in southern Turkey. The Turkish government has failed to clarify what support, if any, they are providing to this group; however, it can be argued that Turkey, de facto, is harboring a group bent on violent regime change in a neighboring country. So much for Turkey’s “zero problems with neighbors” policy.
While the Turkish government has made it clear in recent weeks that they would like to see Assad step down, and that his regime has lost legitimacy, it is unclear how Turkish foreign policy makers will proceed. Turkish officials are quick to insist that the term “regime change” is not in their diplomatic vocabulary. However, it seems as if global consensus is pushing towards building pressure on the Assad regime. On Saturday, the Arab League agreed to impose sanctions on Syria, after Assad declined to respond to an Arab League proposal (Assad had been given a deadline to respond by 11 am GMT Friday) that would have set a course for a diplomatic solution. On Wednesday, Turkey followed suit and imposed its own sanctions. Both Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu and Prime Minister Recep Tayyıp Erdoğan have suggested that a militarily secure buffer zone might be set up on the Syrian border if things get out of hand. It is so far unclear which side of the border this buffer zone would need to be set up on in order to achieve its intended purpose, but many have speculated that such a move could provoke the Syrian regime and its Iranian backers. Any sort of intervention or peace-keeping mission, even a NATO-backed one, would place much of the burden on Turkey. With the country's large military and shared border, Turkey would be expected to take the lead in any NATO mission, something which would put Turkey in the uncomfortable position both domestically and across the Arab world of appearing to do the bidding of the West in a confrontation in the Middle East.
Along with sanctions, Davutoğlu also announced that Syrian trade routes would be detoured through Iraq. Turkey will host U.S. Vice President Joe Biden first in Ankara and then in Istanbul. The visit is important as Biden handles the White House’s Iraq portfolio, and American troops are set to withdraw from Iraq by the end of this year. While Washington has said that the troop withdrawal will not mean a complete U.S. disengagement from Iraq, Turkey is anxiously looking to the December withdrawal date. Any power vacuum in Iraq could lead to greater Iranian influence in the country, particularly in the south and amongst the Shia population. A power vacuum could also allow the PKK, the separatist Kurdish terrorist group based in northern Iraq, to have greater freedom of mobility and operations, a direct threat to Turkey.
Showing posts with label Iran. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Iran. Show all posts
Thursday, December 1, 2011
Sunday, August 29, 2010
Energy Forum to Seek Regional Dialogue on Sensitive Issues
The second annual Black Sea Energy and Economic Forum, organized by the Atlantic Council’s Eurasia Energy Center, is to take place in Istanbul on September 29th. Ambassador Ross Wilson, who recently joined the Atlantic Council as Director of the Dinu Patriciu Eurasia Center, is one of many experts who follow the region closely and will be attending the conference. Wilson, who has served as U.S Ambassador in both Azerbaijan and Turkey, spoke to the Hurriyet Daily News about the purpose of the conference and some of the issues that are to be discussed.
After its inaugural convention in Bucharest last year, the Black Sea Energy and Economic Forum, or BSEEF, hopes to build a dialogue within the Eurasian region between economic players and policy makers. According to Ambassador Ross Wilson, the Atlantic Council is organizing the forum in Istanbul this year in order to highlight the economic and cultural commonalities between states in the region and stimulate discussions about common problems. The Atlantic Council is a Washington based think-tank that “promotes constructive U.S. leadership and engagement in international affairs” according to its website.
“We want, at the forum, to stimulate a conversation among political, business and other leaders of the region about the region’s problems,” Wilson told the Hurriyet Daily News in an interview last week. “In other words, it’s not so much Washington, the Washington think-tank world talking about the problems, it’s the region’s own leaders talking about their problems. We want to facilitate that, that is why we’re doing it there.”
Energy Issues: Seeking Alternative Supplies Cooperatively
One of the main issues in the region that affects trade, economic development and politics is that of energy. Some in the region either have energy resources that they export, like Russia, or are transit countries, like Turkey. However, other countries, particularly in Eastern Europe, are heavily dependent on energy imports. Debate in recent years has focused primarily on Europe’s overdependence on Russian energy supplies, with some accusing Russia of translating its energy exports into “soft power.”
“I think that the countries of Central and Western Europe and Eastern Europe should be concerned, as any country anywhere, about being overly dependent on one source of supply for a critical component of their national economy,” said Wilson.
However, Wilson believes that the problem is not just about Russia, but about nations being able to “stand on their own feet,” and maintain economic and political independence. For countries looking to diversify their energy supplies, Wilson believes that there are several alternatives to Russian energy. Wilson himself was ambassador to Azerbaijan when construction began on the Baku-Tblisi-Ceyhan, or BTC, pipeline. BTC is a crude oil pipeline that transports oil supplies from Azeri oil fields in the Caspian Sea through Georgia to the Turkish Mediterranean port of Ceyhan.
“For me it’s not so much a Russia-specific issue, it’s just being dependent on one source of supply for a critical component [of their national economy] is not a sound strategy,” said Wilson. “I think in part for that reason I supported [and] the US Government has strongly supported the development of Caspian Basin energy resources as an additional supply to what will always be large-scale purchases from Russia. Augment those with supplies that come from Kazakhstan, from Azerbaijan, maybe from Iraq at some point in the future and, if their politics change, maybe from Iran at some point as well.”
Energy issues also have a large impact on politics and foreign relations in the region. Attempts to promote new energy supply routes must take into account Russian concerns and Wilson sees ways around any potential conflicts.
“As you look now at the future of gas pipeline developments, you sort of have the same thing being played out, whether and how Russia is going to be accomodated, whether and how Russian resources might actually help to make gas pipelines more viable, financable, and exactly what the routes of large-scale, new gas pipelines might be,” said Wilson. Speaking in reference to the countries that he believes can be major energy suppliers to the Eurasian region, specifically Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan, Wilson believes that “these are integral issues for these countries’ foreign policies.”
Turkey’s “Central Role”
The choice of Turkey for this year’s forum “reflects the central role, the central position of Turkey... as a major player throughout the Eurasian region,” according to Wilson. He sees Turkey, along with Russia and increasingly China, as one of the big economic players in Eurasia with its vast investments and trade in the region.
“Broadly speaking, I think the decision reflected an appreciation of this absolutely crucial role that Turkey plays,” said Wilson.
Wilson dismisses concerns that Turkey’s developing economic ties with Russia and Iran, particularly in the energy sector, could negatively impact Turkey’s integration with Europe or its relations with the United States. On the contrary, he believes Turkey’s role as an energy transit country can be of great benefit to Europe.
“Turkey’s central role in energy issues, as one of the main transit routes, if not the main transit route for Caspian Basin, Central Asian oil and natural gas to access international markets puts it in a uniquely suitable position to demonstrate its importance to Europe, to European economic development,” said Wilson. “Turkey’s got a central role to play as Europeans, European consumers seek to diversify their source of supply away from over reliance on one set of suppliers. Turkey has a unique international role to play because of that energy issue and I dont think that Turkish relations with Russia or with Iran, either of those relationships, negatively impair this role.”
Ambassador Wilson believes that Turkey’s economic ties with Iran will not negatively impact its relationship with the U.S so long as Turkey stands by the committments made by Turkish officals that it will cooperate with U.N security council sanctions on Iran. Gas purchase agreements between Turkey and Iran, signed in 1996, currently provide roughly 13-14% of Turkey’s imported natural gas annually according to Wilson. However, gas trade between the countries does not constitute an investment in Iran, a development which would put Turkey in danger of violating sanctions.
“My personal perspective is that Turkey’s relationship with Iran is more correct rather than a particularly warm relationship. Trade has been dominated by these gas purchases which have been highly unreliable for Turkey and there has been some growth in other areas as Turkish firms have found opportunities. I am sure that it will continue to be the expectation of the US administration as well as governments pretty much around the rest of the world that Turkey will, as it has said it will, meet its committments pursuant to the U.N. Security Council resolutions that have been passed and that is a pretty good standard,” said Wilson.
(A version of this piece appeared first in the Hurriyet Daily News)
After its inaugural convention in Bucharest last year, the Black Sea Energy and Economic Forum, or BSEEF, hopes to build a dialogue within the Eurasian region between economic players and policy makers. According to Ambassador Ross Wilson, the Atlantic Council is organizing the forum in Istanbul this year in order to highlight the economic and cultural commonalities between states in the region and stimulate discussions about common problems. The Atlantic Council is a Washington based think-tank that “promotes constructive U.S. leadership and engagement in international affairs” according to its website.
“We want, at the forum, to stimulate a conversation among political, business and other leaders of the region about the region’s problems,” Wilson told the Hurriyet Daily News in an interview last week. “In other words, it’s not so much Washington, the Washington think-tank world talking about the problems, it’s the region’s own leaders talking about their problems. We want to facilitate that, that is why we’re doing it there.”
Energy Issues: Seeking Alternative Supplies Cooperatively
One of the main issues in the region that affects trade, economic development and politics is that of energy. Some in the region either have energy resources that they export, like Russia, or are transit countries, like Turkey. However, other countries, particularly in Eastern Europe, are heavily dependent on energy imports. Debate in recent years has focused primarily on Europe’s overdependence on Russian energy supplies, with some accusing Russia of translating its energy exports into “soft power.”
“I think that the countries of Central and Western Europe and Eastern Europe should be concerned, as any country anywhere, about being overly dependent on one source of supply for a critical component of their national economy,” said Wilson.
However, Wilson believes that the problem is not just about Russia, but about nations being able to “stand on their own feet,” and maintain economic and political independence. For countries looking to diversify their energy supplies, Wilson believes that there are several alternatives to Russian energy. Wilson himself was ambassador to Azerbaijan when construction began on the Baku-Tblisi-Ceyhan, or BTC, pipeline. BTC is a crude oil pipeline that transports oil supplies from Azeri oil fields in the Caspian Sea through Georgia to the Turkish Mediterranean port of Ceyhan.
“For me it’s not so much a Russia-specific issue, it’s just being dependent on one source of supply for a critical component [of their national economy] is not a sound strategy,” said Wilson. “I think in part for that reason I supported [and] the US Government has strongly supported the development of Caspian Basin energy resources as an additional supply to what will always be large-scale purchases from Russia. Augment those with supplies that come from Kazakhstan, from Azerbaijan, maybe from Iraq at some point in the future and, if their politics change, maybe from Iran at some point as well.”
Energy issues also have a large impact on politics and foreign relations in the region. Attempts to promote new energy supply routes must take into account Russian concerns and Wilson sees ways around any potential conflicts.
“As you look now at the future of gas pipeline developments, you sort of have the same thing being played out, whether and how Russia is going to be accomodated, whether and how Russian resources might actually help to make gas pipelines more viable, financable, and exactly what the routes of large-scale, new gas pipelines might be,” said Wilson. Speaking in reference to the countries that he believes can be major energy suppliers to the Eurasian region, specifically Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan, Wilson believes that “these are integral issues for these countries’ foreign policies.”
Turkey’s “Central Role”
The choice of Turkey for this year’s forum “reflects the central role, the central position of Turkey... as a major player throughout the Eurasian region,” according to Wilson. He sees Turkey, along with Russia and increasingly China, as one of the big economic players in Eurasia with its vast investments and trade in the region.
“Broadly speaking, I think the decision reflected an appreciation of this absolutely crucial role that Turkey plays,” said Wilson.
Wilson dismisses concerns that Turkey’s developing economic ties with Russia and Iran, particularly in the energy sector, could negatively impact Turkey’s integration with Europe or its relations with the United States. On the contrary, he believes Turkey’s role as an energy transit country can be of great benefit to Europe.
“Turkey’s central role in energy issues, as one of the main transit routes, if not the main transit route for Caspian Basin, Central Asian oil and natural gas to access international markets puts it in a uniquely suitable position to demonstrate its importance to Europe, to European economic development,” said Wilson. “Turkey’s got a central role to play as Europeans, European consumers seek to diversify their source of supply away from over reliance on one set of suppliers. Turkey has a unique international role to play because of that energy issue and I dont think that Turkish relations with Russia or with Iran, either of those relationships, negatively impair this role.”
Ambassador Wilson believes that Turkey’s economic ties with Iran will not negatively impact its relationship with the U.S so long as Turkey stands by the committments made by Turkish officals that it will cooperate with U.N security council sanctions on Iran. Gas purchase agreements between Turkey and Iran, signed in 1996, currently provide roughly 13-14% of Turkey’s imported natural gas annually according to Wilson. However, gas trade between the countries does not constitute an investment in Iran, a development which would put Turkey in danger of violating sanctions.
“My personal perspective is that Turkey’s relationship with Iran is more correct rather than a particularly warm relationship. Trade has been dominated by these gas purchases which have been highly unreliable for Turkey and there has been some growth in other areas as Turkish firms have found opportunities. I am sure that it will continue to be the expectation of the US administration as well as governments pretty much around the rest of the world that Turkey will, as it has said it will, meet its committments pursuant to the U.N. Security Council resolutions that have been passed and that is a pretty good standard,” said Wilson.
(A version of this piece appeared first in the Hurriyet Daily News)
Thursday, June 10, 2010
Erdogan Defends "No" Vote in Security Council on Further Iran Sanctions
Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan on Thursday defended Turkey's "no" vote at Wednesday’s UN Security Council meeting that produced an agreement for the implementation of further sanctions on Iran. Erdogan said that during his country’s negotiations alongside Brazil for the Tehran agreement, which stipulated a transfer of enriched uranium from Iran to Turkey in exchange for uranium fuel rods for medical purposes, Turkey was in constant contact and coordination with the permanent members of the Security Council.
“When we were making strides towards the Tehran agreement we were in contact with the U.N permanent Security Council members,” said Erdogan at the Turkish Arab Economic Forum on Thursday. “Since the beginning we have always advocated a diplomatic solution to the problem. The U.N Security Council said that negotiations could still continue, and Turkey and Brazil will continue to negotiate.”
Erdogan attacked the Security Council’s decision to ratchet up sanctions, accusing certain permanent members of the council of dismissing a diplomatic solution, favoring instead a more hostile approach that Erdogan paralleled to the situations in Iraq and Afghanistan.
“With embargoes there is no way out of the problem. We learned this before. There are hundreds of widows and orphans in Iraq. Who is responsible for this?” said Erdogan, attacking “those people who have turned this region into a region of conflict.”
Erdogan explained that Turkey needed to vote against an additional embargo on Iran because of the fuel-swap agreement that his country had signed. He said that only if Iran proved that it was not standing by the words of its agreement could the international community reject the diplomatic progress that has so far been pioneered by Turkey and Brazil.
“Now that we signed [the agreement with Iran], we have to stand behind these signatures…This is why we said ‘no’ yesterday. If we want to advocate diplomacy, we had to say ‘no’,” said Erdogan. “Iran is behind its words.”
“Ill-Intentioned Propaganda”
Erdogan had some harsh words for critics, both domestic and international, who are concerned that Turkey is shifting away from the west and moving towards the east.
“Those who claim that Turkey is detaching from the west are part of ill-intentioned propaganda,” said Erdogan.
Erdogan reiterated his support for EU accession and said that, despite hindrances coming from some Europeans towards Turkey’s membership bid, Turkey is still committed to meeting the requirements for EU accession.
“Within the European union there are countries that try to slow down negotiations and raise barriers. We are not discouraged. We are still committed,” said Erdogan.
The Turkish Arab Economic Forum at which Erdogan was speaking was formed three years ago after a strong push from Prime Minister Erdogan’s government to strengthen ties with the Arab world. Since then, visa requirements to Turkey for people coming from Syria, Jordan, Lebanon and Libya have been dropped. The trade volume between Turkey and Arab countries went from $7 billion in 2002 to roughly $30 billion today. According to figures cited by the Prime Minister, between 2002 and 2009, $6.2 billion in FDI (Foreign Direct Investment) came into Turkey from Arab countries.
“Each brother or sister who wants to invest in Turkey should know that our doors are wide open to him or her,” said Erdogan.
The developing ties between Turkey and the Arab world stretches beyond economic ties, according to the leaders who were gathered at the forum Thursday. Several, including Turkish Finance Minister Mehmet Simsek, recalled the common history, culture, and religion shared between Turkey and Arab countries
“The Muslim world, led by Turks, led by Arabs, has built great civilizations in the past. The Muslim world was the source for innovation and enlightenment during the 9th and 17th centuries. There is no reason why we cannot go back to our roots,” said Simsek.
Erdogan also waxed poetic about the relationship between Turks and Arabs, quoting Turkish poet Mehmet Akif Ersoy who said that “the Arab is both the left eye and the left hand of the Turk,” which received thundering applause from the audience.
Harsh Words for Israel
Leaders from Turkey and the Arab world spoke at the forum on Wednesday about the need for political cooperation as well, particularly in providing a unified front against Israel’s policies towards the Palestinians. All visiting leaders expressed their condolences and support to Turkey and the Turks who were killed by Israeli soldiers in international waters last week as they were attempting to transport humanitarian supplies to Gaza.
“Turkey’s martyrs are our martyrs as well,” said Amr Moussa, the Secretary General of the Arab League, about those killed by Israel on the flotilla. “We welcome the role Turkey plays” regarding the Arab-Israeli conflict and the pursuit of peace in the region.
Saad Hariri, the prime minister of Lebanon, also expressed thanks to Turkey for the role it is playing in the region.
“I express my condolences to the people of Turkey for the murder of martyrs,” said Hariri.
No word was spared in the condemnations of Israel at the forum. “Our region has undergone such suffering under the criminal, barbaric actions of Israel,” said Hariri.
“At the moment, Israel is the reason for the black hole in the region,” said Amr Moussa.
Erdogan said that Turkey was standing up to state terrorism. He praised those who were on the boat going to Gaza with supplies, lamenting the fate of those who were killed or injured in last week’s attack by Israel.
“We are raising our voice against unfairness…we are against all forms of terror, including state terror,” said Erdogan. “I have seen with my own eyes that in different parts of their bodies there were bullet holes… doesn’t it mean we are keeping our eyes wide shut to state terrorism and piracy on the high seas?”
“While Gaza is under the blockade, we will never sacrifice the principles we believe,” said Erdogan, pledging further support for Gaza.
“When we were making strides towards the Tehran agreement we were in contact with the U.N permanent Security Council members,” said Erdogan at the Turkish Arab Economic Forum on Thursday. “Since the beginning we have always advocated a diplomatic solution to the problem. The U.N Security Council said that negotiations could still continue, and Turkey and Brazil will continue to negotiate.”
Erdogan attacked the Security Council’s decision to ratchet up sanctions, accusing certain permanent members of the council of dismissing a diplomatic solution, favoring instead a more hostile approach that Erdogan paralleled to the situations in Iraq and Afghanistan.
“With embargoes there is no way out of the problem. We learned this before. There are hundreds of widows and orphans in Iraq. Who is responsible for this?” said Erdogan, attacking “those people who have turned this region into a region of conflict.”
Erdogan explained that Turkey needed to vote against an additional embargo on Iran because of the fuel-swap agreement that his country had signed. He said that only if Iran proved that it was not standing by the words of its agreement could the international community reject the diplomatic progress that has so far been pioneered by Turkey and Brazil.
“Now that we signed [the agreement with Iran], we have to stand behind these signatures…This is why we said ‘no’ yesterday. If we want to advocate diplomacy, we had to say ‘no’,” said Erdogan. “Iran is behind its words.”
“Ill-Intentioned Propaganda”
Erdogan had some harsh words for critics, both domestic and international, who are concerned that Turkey is shifting away from the west and moving towards the east.
“Those who claim that Turkey is detaching from the west are part of ill-intentioned propaganda,” said Erdogan.
Erdogan reiterated his support for EU accession and said that, despite hindrances coming from some Europeans towards Turkey’s membership bid, Turkey is still committed to meeting the requirements for EU accession.
“Within the European union there are countries that try to slow down negotiations and raise barriers. We are not discouraged. We are still committed,” said Erdogan.
The Turkish Arab Economic Forum at which Erdogan was speaking was formed three years ago after a strong push from Prime Minister Erdogan’s government to strengthen ties with the Arab world. Since then, visa requirements to Turkey for people coming from Syria, Jordan, Lebanon and Libya have been dropped. The trade volume between Turkey and Arab countries went from $7 billion in 2002 to roughly $30 billion today. According to figures cited by the Prime Minister, between 2002 and 2009, $6.2 billion in FDI (Foreign Direct Investment) came into Turkey from Arab countries.
“Each brother or sister who wants to invest in Turkey should know that our doors are wide open to him or her,” said Erdogan.
The developing ties between Turkey and the Arab world stretches beyond economic ties, according to the leaders who were gathered at the forum Thursday. Several, including Turkish Finance Minister Mehmet Simsek, recalled the common history, culture, and religion shared between Turkey and Arab countries
“The Muslim world, led by Turks, led by Arabs, has built great civilizations in the past. The Muslim world was the source for innovation and enlightenment during the 9th and 17th centuries. There is no reason why we cannot go back to our roots,” said Simsek.
Erdogan also waxed poetic about the relationship between Turks and Arabs, quoting Turkish poet Mehmet Akif Ersoy who said that “the Arab is both the left eye and the left hand of the Turk,” which received thundering applause from the audience.
Harsh Words for Israel
Leaders from Turkey and the Arab world spoke at the forum on Wednesday about the need for political cooperation as well, particularly in providing a unified front against Israel’s policies towards the Palestinians. All visiting leaders expressed their condolences and support to Turkey and the Turks who were killed by Israeli soldiers in international waters last week as they were attempting to transport humanitarian supplies to Gaza.
“Turkey’s martyrs are our martyrs as well,” said Amr Moussa, the Secretary General of the Arab League, about those killed by Israel on the flotilla. “We welcome the role Turkey plays” regarding the Arab-Israeli conflict and the pursuit of peace in the region.
Saad Hariri, the prime minister of Lebanon, also expressed thanks to Turkey for the role it is playing in the region.
“I express my condolences to the people of Turkey for the murder of martyrs,” said Hariri.
No word was spared in the condemnations of Israel at the forum. “Our region has undergone such suffering under the criminal, barbaric actions of Israel,” said Hariri.
“At the moment, Israel is the reason for the black hole in the region,” said Amr Moussa.
Erdogan said that Turkey was standing up to state terrorism. He praised those who were on the boat going to Gaza with supplies, lamenting the fate of those who were killed or injured in last week’s attack by Israel.
“We are raising our voice against unfairness…we are against all forms of terror, including state terror,” said Erdogan. “I have seen with my own eyes that in different parts of their bodies there were bullet holes… doesn’t it mean we are keeping our eyes wide shut to state terrorism and piracy on the high seas?”
“While Gaza is under the blockade, we will never sacrifice the principles we believe,” said Erdogan, pledging further support for Gaza.
Monday, September 14, 2009
U.S - Iranian policy and the Turkish factor
News Analysis
On Friday, the Obama administration notified Congress of a possible sale of missiles to Turkey, worth $7.8 billion. Two major reasons have been identified as motivating this deal. First, predictably, is to gain business from Turkey, which is also looking at potential missile purchases from Russian and Chinese arms manufacturers. However, the second reason is more interesting.
On July 26, speaking in Bangkok, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said:
We want Iran to calculate what I think is a fair assessment, that if the United States extends a defense umbrella over the region, if we do even more to support the military capacity of those in the Gulf, it’s unlikely that Iran will be any stronger or safer, because they won’t be able to intimidate and dominate as they apparently believe they can once they have a nuclear weapon.
In line with this notion of a "defense umbrella", other large American arms deals in the region have been announced, including a "$220 million artillery rocket sale to Jordan and a possible $187 million sale of F-16 fighter-carried weapons to Morocco".
Of course, it is not clear that this approach is set policy. In fact, very little of the U.S policy is clearly defined. Questioned on Meet the Press, by David Gregory on her use of the term "defense umbrella" and overall U.S policy towards Iran, Mrs. Clinton went back and forth:
SEC'Y CLINTON: ...First, we’re going to do everything we can to prevent you from ever getting a nuclear weapon. But your pursuit is futile, because we will never let Iran–nuclear-armed, not nuclear-armed, it is something that we view with great concern, and that’s why we’re doing everything we can to prevent that from ever happening.
In the same program the Secretary (simultaneously) suggested pursuing diplomatic engagement, preventing nuclear weaponization at all costs ("we're going to do everything we can"), and a nuclear umbrella strategy. All three approaches are complicated by the Iranian government's lack of legitimacy after the disputed election as well as increasing pressure on the U.S from Israel's right-leaning government to take strong action on Iran.
However, with regards to the idea of a nuclear umbrella and its possible connection to the recent announcements of arms deals in the region, there is an additional problem. The missile sales were announced last Friday. On Sunday, Turkey's foreign minister, Ahmet Davutoglu was in Iran. In addition to the impressive growth in bilateral trade, (estimated at $11 billion in 2008), relations between the two countries seems to be at a high point in other areas. According to the Tehran Times, Iranian Foreign Minister, Manouchehr Mouttaki called the relations between his country and Turkey "strategic and comprehensive". At their meeting, the two ministers committed themselves to cooperating against Kurdish terrorists in Northern Iraq, implying a degree of military cooperation. Such cooperation between Turkey and Iran would surely hinder any U.S attempt to use Turkey in a "nuclear umbrella" strategy against Iran. This is especially true as Turkey believes that, according to Davutoglu quoted by the Tehran Times: "Access to nuclear technology for peaceful purposes is the right of all nations, including Iran" .
If Turkey is unlikely to take part in a U.S attempt at a "nuclear umbrella", designed to mitigate the problem of a nuclear-armed Iran, would it participate in a U.S-led international attempt to squeeze Iran with additional sanctions should talks (if they ever occur) fail? According to the Fars News Agency, Mr. Davutoglu told his counterpart "All our attempts are aimed at campaigning against potential sanctions and removing the existing barriers so that Iran will not remain outside the regional and global economy". This is particularly important as Turkey currently holds a seat on the UN Security Council.
There is one avenue of potential cooperation amongst all parties according to the Turks. During his visit to Iran, Davutoglu offered to host G5 +1 (China, U.S, Russia, Britain, France + Germany) discussions with Iran on its nuclear program, praising Iran's recent package of proposals. However, Iran's new proposals have not been received with much enthusiasm either by the EU or the U.S. It is clear that Ankara and Washington are not on the same wavelength in the current, pre-talks phase of the elaborate diplomatic minuet. It remains to be seen whether they draw closer or drift further apart if engagement should fail.
On Friday, the Obama administration notified Congress of a possible sale of missiles to Turkey, worth $7.8 billion. Two major reasons have been identified as motivating this deal. First, predictably, is to gain business from Turkey, which is also looking at potential missile purchases from Russian and Chinese arms manufacturers. However, the second reason is more interesting.
On July 26, speaking in Bangkok, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said:
We want Iran to calculate what I think is a fair assessment, that if the United States extends a defense umbrella over the region, if we do even more to support the military capacity of those in the Gulf, it’s unlikely that Iran will be any stronger or safer, because they won’t be able to intimidate and dominate as they apparently believe they can once they have a nuclear weapon.
In line with this notion of a "defense umbrella", other large American arms deals in the region have been announced, including a "$220 million artillery rocket sale to Jordan and a possible $187 million sale of F-16 fighter-carried weapons to Morocco".
Of course, it is not clear that this approach is set policy. In fact, very little of the U.S policy is clearly defined. Questioned on Meet the Press, by David Gregory on her use of the term "defense umbrella" and overall U.S policy towards Iran, Mrs. Clinton went back and forth:
SEC'Y CLINTON: ...First, we’re going to do everything we can to prevent you from ever getting a nuclear weapon. But your pursuit is futile, because we will never let Iran–nuclear-armed, not nuclear-armed, it is something that we view with great concern, and that’s why we’re doing everything we can to prevent that from ever happening.
MR. GREGORY: All right, but let’s be specific. Are you talking about a nuclear umbrella?
SEC’Y CLINTON: We, we are, we are not talking in specifics, David, because, you know, that would come later, if at all. You know, my view is you hope for the best, you plan for the worst. Our hope is–that’s why we’re engaged in the president’s policy of engagement toward Iran–is that Iran will understand why it is in their interest to go along with the consensus of the international communityIn the same program the Secretary (simultaneously) suggested pursuing diplomatic engagement, preventing nuclear weaponization at all costs ("we're going to do everything we can"), and a nuclear umbrella strategy. All three approaches are complicated by the Iranian government's lack of legitimacy after the disputed election as well as increasing pressure on the U.S from Israel's right-leaning government to take strong action on Iran.
However, with regards to the idea of a nuclear umbrella and its possible connection to the recent announcements of arms deals in the region, there is an additional problem. The missile sales were announced last Friday. On Sunday, Turkey's foreign minister, Ahmet Davutoglu was in Iran. In addition to the impressive growth in bilateral trade, (estimated at $11 billion in 2008), relations between the two countries seems to be at a high point in other areas. According to the Tehran Times, Iranian Foreign Minister, Manouchehr Mouttaki called the relations between his country and Turkey "strategic and comprehensive". At their meeting, the two ministers committed themselves to cooperating against Kurdish terrorists in Northern Iraq, implying a degree of military cooperation. Such cooperation between Turkey and Iran would surely hinder any U.S attempt to use Turkey in a "nuclear umbrella" strategy against Iran. This is especially true as Turkey believes that, according to Davutoglu quoted by the Tehran Times: "Access to nuclear technology for peaceful purposes is the right of all nations, including Iran" .
If Turkey is unlikely to take part in a U.S attempt at a "nuclear umbrella", designed to mitigate the problem of a nuclear-armed Iran, would it participate in a U.S-led international attempt to squeeze Iran with additional sanctions should talks (if they ever occur) fail? According to the Fars News Agency, Mr. Davutoglu told his counterpart "All our attempts are aimed at campaigning against potential sanctions and removing the existing barriers so that Iran will not remain outside the regional and global economy". This is particularly important as Turkey currently holds a seat on the UN Security Council.
There is one avenue of potential cooperation amongst all parties according to the Turks. During his visit to Iran, Davutoglu offered to host G5 +1 (China, U.S, Russia, Britain, France + Germany) discussions with Iran on its nuclear program, praising Iran's recent package of proposals. However, Iran's new proposals have not been received with much enthusiasm either by the EU or the U.S. It is clear that Ankara and Washington are not on the same wavelength in the current, pre-talks phase of the elaborate diplomatic minuet. It remains to be seen whether they draw closer or drift further apart if engagement should fail.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)