Cyprus-Forum.com

[Kikapu]

These two articles appeared on the same page of the International Herald Tribune today, which gives some insight as to where Turkey is heading or not heading, as the case may be.!

TURKEY I

Choosing where to stand
By David L. Phillips Published: February 20, 2009


Detractors of Turkey's prime minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, insist that his Justice and Development Party is really a Trojan horse for an Islamist agenda.

As validation, they point to Erdogan's recent spat with Israeli President Shimon Peres at the Davos World Economic Forum and his support for Hamas.

Not only is it in Turkey's interest to restore ties to Israel, but Erdogan must also show the United States and Europe that he is a reliable partner by addressing other issues of concern - such as normalizing Turkey's relations with Armenia and Cyprus.

I recently met representatives of the Turkish Caucus in the U.S. Congress. They were stunned by Erdogan's description of Israeli policy in Gaza as a "crime against humanity." They were even more troubled by the hero's welcome he received upon returning from Davos to Istanbul. Thousands of his party faithful thronged the airport waving the green flags of Hamas.

Erdogan did not plan his confrontation with Peres in Davos. But he was quick to seek political gain from it. With local elections coming up on March 29, his support for Hamas has given his party a boost in polls. Heralding Hamas's democratic credentials plays well on the "Turkish street." It has also made Erdogan the darling of Damascus and Tehran.

This pro-Hamas rhetoric is a poison pill for Turkey's relations with the United States, and it could not come at a worse time. The Armenian Genocide Act will soon be introduced in the U.S. Congress. With leaders in both chambers on-record supporting recognition of the Armenian genocide, this year the bill is likely to pass.

Turkey's supporters on Capitol Hill - along with Jewish groups that support Ankara's rapprochement with Israel - have worked feverishly to defeat previous resolutions. Turkish parliamentarians met last week with their typically steadfast allies. But after Davos, they turned a cold shoulder.

If the resolution is adopted, Turkish officials will protest vehemently. Ankara may even go so far as to block U.S. access to Incirlik Air Force Base in southeast Turkey. Incirlik has been a base for U.S. war planes since the first Gulf War. Today it is critical to supplying troops in Afghanistan and redeploying forces from Iraq.

Closing Incirlik would cause a major crisis in U.S.-Turkish relations. Nobody wants this to happen. The Obama administration is keenly aware of Turkey's strategic importance. It knows that Turkey is a valued NATO ally and partner in the fight against violent extremist groups. Turkish troops are deployed alongside U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan. Turkey plays a moderating role in Central Asia and is the terminus for energy supplies from the Caspian Sea to western markets.

But while Turkey is an indispensable ally, the onus for avoiding a diplomatic train wreck rests with Erdogan. He can preempt a crisis by initiating normalized diplomatic relations and opening the border between Turkey and Armenia.

There is no linkage between normalizing relations and a decision to recognize the Armenian Genocide. And Turkey's conciliatory gesture would not go unnoticed in Washington. Nor would its efforts to improve increasingly strained relations with the EU.

If Erdogan wants to avert a showdown with Brussels, he must also do more to resolve the situation in Cyprus. Turkey invaded Cyprus in 1974, and the island remains divided today. The EU will evaluate Turkey's prospects for membership at year's end. While Brussels is not likely to formally suspend negotiations, it will decide not to expand negotiations absent progress in UN-mediated talks to reunify the island.

Opening Turkish ports to Cypriot ships would increase pressure on Greek Cypriots to negotiate in greater earnest. It would also take Turkey off the hook when it comes to parceling out blame in case reunification talks flounder.

If Erdogan wants to restore his reputation as a statesman and a reliable partner of the West, Turkey must repair its ties with Israel, normalize relations with Armenia, and welcome ships from Cyprus. Becoming an advocate for Hamas is a mistake. Turkey's future lies with the West. The Islamist street leads away from Europe to the Middle East.

David L. Phillips is a visiting scholar at Columbia University and director of the Turkey Initiative at the Atlantic Council of the United States.

http://www.iht.com/articles/2009/02/20/ ... hilips.php



TURKEY II

Looking to the east
By Asli Aydintasbas Published: February 20, 2009

ISTANBUL:

A little over a decade ago, I had an interview with an up-and-coming Islamist parliamentarian from the Refah (Welfare) Party who laid out a very interesting vision I had not heard from anyone in Turkish politics before.

The junior parliamentarian talked about establishing some sort of a "commonwealth" with Turkey's eastern neighbors, including Iran and Syria, and about the importance of building new alliances in Asia and the Muslim world.

"We have no desire to tear Turkey away from Europe or build walls around her," he said. "But we think Turkey's future should not depend on one axis, but rather on good ties with other nations."

He concluded with a peculiar metaphor in reference to Turkey's place in Europe: "We think the future ultimately lies in Asia. It is better to be the first of the lambs than be the last of the foxes."

The parliamentarian's name was Abdullah Gul, and we ran the interview with a somewhat caustic headline: "Refah's Ottoman Dream."

Today, Gul is the president of Turkey, and these ideas, which at the time seemed shocking, summarize Turkey's new global outlook.

Some call it neo-Ottomanism, others an "independent" foreign policy that defines a new role for Turkey on the world stage. But some things are changing in Turkey and, it seems, for good.

Perhaps nothing better epitomizes the mood here than the Turkish Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan's storming out of the Davos forum after a spat with Israeli President Shimon Peres earlier this month.

Turkey's turn towards the east follows a logic that runs roughly like this: Turkey does not fulfill its full potential when it is aligned solely with United States and the European Union; there is an untapped potential in trade and political gains eastward in its immediate neighborhood; and Ankara needs to embrace alternative axes - with Russia, Iran and the Muslim world - in order to be able to garner greater influence in the Middle East and beyond.

When introduced several years ago by Ahmet Davutoglu, Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan's influential foreign policy advisor, in a book called "Strategic Depth," the idea of alternative alliances had little traction among Turkey's pro-Western secular elite. The conservative AKP government's efforts to mediate in the Israeli-Palestinian dispute and pursue rapprochement with Iran and Syria were bitterly criticized.

But a lot has changed over the last few years. Since then, European rebuffs to Turkish EU membership, rising anti-American and anti-Western sentiment following the Iraq war, and an overall increase in Islamic awareness in the population have all contributed to this drift away from the West.

While the conservative AKP government provides an ideological framework, it cannot be held solely responsible for the outcome. Turkey's secular establishment has been just as - if not more - critical of alliances with United States and Israel.

In fact, opposition parties have long been trying to beat AKP in the game of "who can be more critical of the relationship with the West." No one in the political spectrum today is an open advocate of Turkey's traditional ties with the West, despite the fact that Turkey is one of the oldest NATO members and an indisputable beneficiary of the trans-Atlantic alliance.

Today, from liberal intellectuals to mainstream politicians, the idea of a neo-Ottoman awakening (as opposed to being part of the Western alliance) enjoys wide support. Erdogan was greeted in Istanbul a few hours after his Davos outburst with banners that read "Conqueror of Davos." A man in the crowd interviewed on television said, "Erdogan has awakened a giant that has been sleeping for almost a century."

That sleeping giant - a member of NATO and a candidate for EU membership - now seems eager for a new role.

Of course there is nothing wrong with a nation as significant as Turkey yearning for a bigger role on the world stage. Turkey is among Europe's biggest nations, the only truly democratic Muslim country and the world's 17th largest economy. Turks are right to be fed up with Europeans who have demonstrated a double standard in resisting Turkey's chance for EU membership.

We are, after all, also the descendants of the Ottoman Empire, and the modern republic's efforts since 1923 to break with its Ottoman legacy have left subsequent generations with a painful identity crisis.

Still, neo-Ottomanism presents problems of its own. First, there is democracy. Much of Turkey's democratization over the last two decades have taken place with the encouragement of the EU and Washington. Trying to find alternatives essentially means signing on to a marriage with illiberal non-democracies in the Middle East and Eurasia, where economic gains are seen as far more important than freedom of expression and political reform.

Turkey's popularity in the Palestinian territories, Iran or Sudan may become great, but it will mean little if Ankara cannot steer these nations towards an open society, or if it ultimately causes lapses in our own democracy.

The second trap for Turkish politicians is that forging greater bonds with our neighbors to the east will inevitably involve an injection of Islam and Islamic solidarity into Turkish foreign affairs. Part of the AKP's popularity on the Arab street comes from its embrace of Islamic values.

While Turkey probably does need to fine-tune its secular dogma to accommodate the will of its elected officials, it should not do so to the extent that secularism is undermined as a governing principle. It may be good to diminish the role of the West, but it is not good to undermine the existing secular and Western lifestyles here.

The real Ottoman dream would be to use Turkey's new stature in the Moslem world to help make those societies more modern, more secular and more open - in essence, more like us. That should be our real mission.

Asli Aydintasbas is the former Ankara bureau chief of Sabah and currently a writer based in Istanbul.

http://www.iht.com/articles/2009/02/20/ ... edasli.php

[YFred]

Kickapu, what is the big deal about this law with the Armenian genocide. What will it change that the Turkey should be worried about?

Will it threaten the aid they get?

America is not legally allowed to give aid to any country that has WMDs. This has not stopped them from giving aid to Israel. No matter what the government does, the American establishment will always do what is in its interest.

What’s the big deal?

Everyone is making a mountain out of a mole hill!

[insan]

2 too superficial articles. Turkey's future lies within the globalization process and globalized world. Neither in the west nor in the east. Right in the place where she is located. All Turkey needs to do is keep pace with the globalizing world by not only following the common strategies of other powerful Nato states but also contributing the policy making process especially as a bridge between east and west.

In a globalized world, the union is not just consist of EU but whole world. Sooner or later Turkey will join EU; if of course, surprises such as ww3 or a bio-chemical war not erupts. The countries(Especially the ones in western alliance) in hands of the bosses of globalization have to go in direction of common globalization policies.

[YFred]

2 too superficial articles. Turkey's future lies within the globalization process and globalized world. Neither in the west nor in the east. Right in the place where she is located. All Turkey needs to do is keep pace with the globalizing world by not only following the common strategies of other powerful Nato states but also contributing the policy making process especially as a bridge between east and west.

In a globalized world, the union is not just consist of EU but whole world. Sooner or later Turkey will join EU; if of course, surprises such as ww3 or a bio-chemical war not erupts. The countries(Especially the ones in western alliance) in hands of the bosses of globalization have to go in direction of common globalization policies.

But, can you see the significance of this law and how will it affect Turkey?
As far as I can see it’s just to appease the Armenian voters in America. It has no other purpose.
Am I wrong?

[insan]

2 too superficial articles. Turkey's future lies within the globalization process and globalized world. Neither in the west nor in the east. Right in the place where she is located. All Turkey needs to do is keep pace with the globalizing world by not only following the common strategies of other powerful Nato states but also contributing the policy making process especially as a bridge between east and west.

In a globalized world, the union is not just consist of EU but whole world. Sooner or later Turkey will join EU; if of course, surprises such as ww3 or a bio-chemical war not erupts. The countries(Especially the ones in western alliance) in hands of the bosses of globalization have to go in direction of common globalization policies.

But, can you see the significance of this law and how will it affect Turkey?
As far as I can see it’s just to appease the Armenian voters in America. It has no other purpose.
Am I wrong?

Yes, YFred. "Armenian Genocide" debate has always been a tool for Ruling party of US that worked both ways; getting Armenian votes and forcing Turkey to take an active role in US-NATO-EU military operations. Even if Turkey has rejected to take an active role in US-NATO-EU military operations; US ruling Party wouldn't dare to recognize "Armenian Genocide" because in such a case US would certainly loose her best NATO ally. At this point 2 questions might flash: Since Turkey rejecting to take an active role in US-NATO-EU military operations, could she still be the best US ally? If only she has an alternative plan satisfying US. If no alternative plan Turkey has; she couldn't be considered as an US ally anymore but still could be in NATO alliance depending the stance of other NATO members.. So what if majority of NATO members including US, groups against Turkey; force her to take an active role in US-NATO-EU military operations but still Turkey rejects? At this point it is obvious that Turkey would look for new allies in middle east and far east. There r plenty of Turkish Republics, some middle east countries and some far eastern countries for Turkey to form an alliance against poor western alliance. US and all NATO members r well aware of this, so they would never dare to force Turkey anything she does not want. Nevertheless, in such a situation, this does not mean Turkey is free to reject any US-NATO-EU organized military operations in an arrogant manner as if she is the queen of the world. If she is against an US-NATO-EU made plan; partly or completely she has to propose an alternative plan.

[Kikapu]

Kickapu, what is the big deal about this law with the Armenian genocide. What will it change that the Turkey should be worried about?

Will it threaten the aid they get?

America is not legally allowed to give aid to any country that has WMDs. This has not stopped them from giving aid to Israel. No matter what the government does, the American establishment will always do what is in its interest.

What’s the big deal?

Everyone is making a mountain out of a mole hill!

I really don't know what it means either exactly, but Turkey does, hence the fact they have been successful in convincing mostly Republican US governments from allowing such resolutions from passing. The Democrats had this issue on the books last year, but Bush asked them to "shelve it" because of the wars in Iraq ands Afghanistan. I knew that the Democrats once in power were going to push for the passage of this resolution, and what ever it may or may not mean to you and me, it appears to mean a great deal to Turkey and the Armenians. Basically, Turkey will be labelled as a country whose people (the Turks) that have committed this crime against Humanity, despite Turks of today who had nothing to do with the past, but will be deemed guilty by association in the media all the same, specially since their handling of the Kurds and their occupation in Cyprus is far from being "kosher", can be attributed to their past history if one was to make that connection, and believe me, there will be many who will take advantage of this and they will put Turkey in a very bad light.

Look how angry Erdogan got when the Israeli general accused the Turks of doing the same thing what they have done to the Palestinians. Being accused of Genocide of 1.5 Million people is no small incident. It will have far reaching ramifications, including Turkey’s falling out of favour with the Americans, which could lead to anything in the future. If as the second article states, that Turkey is heading towards an Islamic state, it will be a matter of time before the US, Kurds and Secular Turks team up to together to “degrade” Turkey’s military might that the Americans themselves help built, just like they did with Sadam. Nothing stays the same forever. In the last hundred years, many countries have switched sides as well as gone from being a great strength to being "neutered". Don't count anything out when you got the Americans as your “friend”. Last thing America and Israel will want, is a militarily built up Islamic state near Israel. They may even use Cyprus as a pretext to start a conflict, by the Americans telling Turkey to “vacate” Cyprus. Only time will tell.!

[Tim Drayton]

Thanks for posting these articles.

[YFred]

Kickapu, what is the big deal about this law with the Armenian genocide. What will it change that the Turkey should be worried about?

Will it threaten the aid they get?

America is not legally allowed to give aid to any country that has WMDs. This has not stopped them from giving aid to Israel. No matter what the government does, the American establishment will always do what is in its interest.

What’s the big deal?

Everyone is making a mountain out of a mole hill!

I really don't know what it means either exactly, but Turkey does, hence the fact they have been successful in convincing mostly Republican US governments from allowing such resolutions from passing. The Democrats had this issue on the books last year, but Bush asked them to "shelve it" because of the wars in Iraq ands Afghanistan. I knew that the Democrats once in power were going to push for the passage of this resolution, and what ever it may or may not mean to you and me, it appears to mean a great deal to Turkey and the Armenians. Basically, Turkey will be labelled as a country whose people (the Turks) that have committed this crime against Humanity, despite Turks of today who had nothing to do with the past, but will be deemed guilty by association in the media all the same, specially since their handling of the Kurds and their occupation in Cyprus is far from being "kosher", can be attributed to their past history if one was to make that connection, and believe me, there will be many who will take advantage of this and they will put Turkey in a very bad light.

Look how angry Erdogan got when the Israeli general accused the Turks of doing the same thing what they have done to the Palestinians. Being accused of Genocide of 1.5 Million people is no small incident. It will have far reaching ramifications, including Turkey’s falling out of favour with the Americans, which could lead to anything in the future. If as the second article states, that Turkey is heading towards an Islamic state, it will be a matter of time before the US, Kurds and Secular Turks team up to together to “degrade” Turkey’s military might that the Americans themselves help built, just like they did with Sadam. Nothing stays the same forever. In the last hundred years, many countries have switched sides as well as gone from being a great strength to being "neutered". Don't count anything out when you got the Americans as your “friend”. Last thing America and Israel will want, is a militarily built up Islamic state near Israel. They may even use Cyprus as a pretext to start a conflict, by the Americans telling Turkey to “vacate” Cyprus. Only time will tell.!

Only time will tell.
I cannot believe that the American Establishment will fall out with the Turkish establishment about a law that has nothing to do with RoT.
Despite what Erdogan says, it’s just posturing. The day he cancels the contract with the Israeli military and American military (I don't mean the Nato bases but the American bases in Turkey and access to Israeli air force in Turkey), then I would worry about his activities.

Turkish democracy is not a conventional democracy. They have a council which is only half elected and half military. Before anything like that happens, they will find a way of removing Erdogan in no time.

Turkish presence is as important to American interests as the Israeli presence. Saddam did not go down because of what he did in Iraq or against the Kurds, he was dealt with because he threatened the American Establishment by invading Kuwait and the oil fields.