Iran and Turkey Divided over Syria

Shayan GHAJAR  InsideIran

Though Turkey has invested a great deal of effort into its policy of maintaining good relations with neighboring states, the Arab winter of discontent has severely weakened the ability of the Turkish government to do so. Syria, which shares a border with Turkey stretching hundreds of miles, has proved particularly damaging to Turkey’s regional foreign policy. Forced to speak out on Syria’s burgeoning humanitarian crisis as Bashar al-Assad’s troops drive thousands to seek safety on the border between the two nations, Turkey’s stance has set it at odds with Syria’s staunch ally, Iran.

Turkey’s policy of seeking positive relations with regional states led it to better relations with Syria in recent years after decades of mistrust between the two nations. Similarly, Turkey has sought improved relations with Iran as well, brokering the ineffectual–and politically costly–Tehran Declaration in 2010, which sought to resolve the international dispute over Iran’s nuclear enrichment. While the United States supported Turkey’s efforts to coax Syria back into the international community, its efforts to do the same with Iran were met with skepticism and frustration. Now, with Syria’s instability representing a threat not only to Turkey’s border security but also its regional reputation, Ankara is taking a much firmer stance on its neighboring state.

Turkey's New AKP Government: Will It Move Towards a Liberal or Illiberal Democracy?

 Joshua W. WALKER** & Lenore G.MARTIN*      The Huffington Post

The Turkish election results are in with few surprises but with major questions as to Turkey's political directions. The Justice and Development Party (AKP), with its conservative-Muslim roots, claims the most victory, taking over half of the votes and improving three straight elections in a row, though it will lose seats in the new parliament. The Republican People's Party (CHP), with its secular, Kemalist legacy, improved on its last showing, but gained only a quarter of the vote. The ultranationalist National Movement Party (MHP) survived last-minute scandals to enter parliament with 13% of the vote. Even the Kurdish party managed to take seats in parliament with its independent candidates garnering 6% of the votes. What do the results betoken for the self-proclaimed model democracy in the Middle East? With these election results Turkey now faces a political crossroads. The new government of the AKP can either take Turkey down the road to constitutional reform in a more liberal democratic direction or revert to some of its campaign rhetoric that promoted illiberal tendencies that will only increase Turkey's societal divisions and repress fundamental political freedoms.

Turkey and France clash over Libya air campaign

Ian Traynor       Guardian 

Tension mounts over military action as Ankara accuses Sarkozy of pursuing French interests over liberation of Libyan people.

The Turkish prime minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, accused France of seeing Libya as a source of 'oil, gold mines and underground treasures'

Turkey has launched a bitter attack on French president Nicolas Sarkozy's and France's leadership of the military campaign against Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi, accusing the French of lacking a conscience in their conduct in the Libyan operations.

The vitriolic criticism, from both the prime minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, and the president, Abdullah Gül followed attacks from the Turkish government earlier this week and signalled an orchestrated attempt by Ankara to wreck Sarkozy's plans to lead the air campaign against Gaddafi.

With France insisting that Nato should not be put in political charge of the UN-mandated air campaign, Turkey has come out emphatically behind sole Nato control of the operations.

Libya: Nato to control no-fly zone after France gives way to Turkey

Ian Traynor & Nicholas Watt     The Guardian

Western allies and Turkey have secured a deal to put the entire military campaign against Muammar Gaddafi under Nato command by next week, UK and French sources have told the Guardian.

The US, Britain, France and Turkey agreed to put the three-pronged offensive – a no-fly zone, an arms embargo, and air strikes – under a Nato command umbrella, in a climbdown by France that accommodates strong Turkish complaints about the scope and control of the campaign.

The deal appeared to end days of infighting among western allies, but needed to be blessed by all 28 Nato member states. At the end of a four-day meeting of Nato ambassadors in Brussels, Anders Fogh Rasmussen, the secretary general, said Nato had agreed to take command of the no-fly zone from the Americans.

Disputes have raged at Nato HQ every day this week. Rasmussen contradicted leading western officials by announcing that Nato's authority was limited to commanding the no-fly zone, but he signalled there was more negotiation to come.

Libya and Turkey: Ankara’s foreign policy goes off key

Howard Eissenstat*           Informed Comment


For a while, at least, Turkey seemed to be riding high as a wave of protests swept from Tunisia to Egypt to a half dozen other states in the Middle East and North Africa. After a few days of uncomfortable silence as protests were met with violence in Egypt, Turkish Prime Minister Tayyip Erdoğan called on Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak to heed the will of his people and, using language meant to underline Turkey’s role as a regional leader, spoke in explicitly religious language to do so. The speech met with positive media coverage, both regionally and in the West, and Turkey’s image was burnished. Without giving too much thought about what the “Turkish model” might actually be, a lot of commentators suggested it might be a path for the region to take.

Of course, Erdoğan’s challenge to Mubarak was a relatively easy call. Mubarak was a rival to Erdoğan’s in his attempt to reframe Turkey as a regional powerhouse and the two were at odds over both Iran and Gaza. Moreover, Mubarak’s fall represented further proof that U.S. influence in the region was in decline and that the time was ripe for a more aggressive Turkish regional policy based on both shared values (democratic, Islamic, and anti-imperial) and a shared desire for economic development (preferably with Turkish companies leading the way). As Turkish Foreign Minister’s recent speech at Ahmet Davutoğlu at the al Jazeera Conference in Doha, this is how Turkey hopes to present itself within the region.

Mr Erdoğan goes to Germany

The Economist

IT IS no secret that Turkey's efforts to join the European Union have not been going well. But a bout of Europe-bashing this week by Turkey’s mildly Islamist prime minister, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, has exposed just how rotten relations have become since the EU formally began membership talks with Turkey in 2004. All the more so because Mr Erdoğan made his comments in Germany, where he was meant to be shoring up Turkey’s case. If anything his visit has had the opposite effect.

Mr Erdoğan's German hosts were outraged by a speech he delivered in Dusseldorf on Sunday before a huge crowd of Turkish immigrants. He accused Germany of seeking to forcibly assimilate its estimated 3m-strong Turkish community. "Nobody will be able to tear us away from our culture…our children must learn German, but they must learn Turkish first," he thundered. Not so, riposted Guido Westerwelle, who said German had to come first.

Turkey's Election: A Muslim democracy in action

The Economist

Popular uprisings in the Arab world are drawing new attention to the example of Turkey’s democracy.

“VOTE for AK. Write Your Own Constitution.” This is the slogan under which Turkey’s ruling Justice and Development (AK) party will launch its campaign for the general election that is to be held on June 12th. On one level, the outcome seems predictable. Opinion polls have consistently suggested that the mild Islamists who came to power in 2002 will bag a third term of single-party rule, with over 40% of the vote.

Rather less predictable is whether AK can win enough seats in the grand assembly (it needs 367 of a total 550) to approve a new constitution on its own. But Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the prime minister, insists that the new document will be based on consensus and that it will give Turkey a full-blooded, Western-style democracy. Can he be taken at his word?

In his eight years in power, Mr Erdogan has done more than any of his secular predecessors to move Turkey closer to its coveted goal of full membership of the European Union. Reforms that he rammed through during AK’s first term in office persuaded the EU to open membership negotiations with Turkey in 2005.

What can Turkey do for the Middle East’s freedom-seeking peoples?

Mehmet KALYONCU*      Today's Zaman

About a century ago, Arabs revolted against the Ottoman Empire in a campaign masterminded and guided by the Europeans in order to allegedly liberate themselves from the Turks. About half a century ago, Arabs revolted against the Europeans in a campaign led by nationalist Arab leaders in order to liberate themselves from their European colonizers.

Today, Arabs are revolting against their leaders in a campaign led by ordinary citizens in order to liberate themselves from leaders that have long been backed by the Europeans and the US -- and they have just deposed one in Egypt who had long seemed to be the most invincible. What is odd, if the foregoing is not, is that today Europeans are suggesting that Arabs should take Turkey as a model for development and democratization. A recent Financial Times editorial has suggested that the European governments help the Arab countries to evolve into free societies following the example of Turkey. Perhaps, it is better just to leave the Arabs alone, and let them figure out the best way forward for their countries.

Turkey basks in prestige from early response to Egypt uprising

Fulya ÖZERKAN    Hurriyet Daily News and Economic Review

Turkey’s strong challenge to Egypt’s ousted President Hosni Mubarak before he resigned Friday will give the country a boost in regional prestige, especially among the Arab public, experts say, while cautioning this outcome depends on how the regime changes in Cairo.

“Ankara’s early reaction to the developments in Egypt could be in Turkey’s interest; the regime change in Egypt would undoubtedly raise Turkey’s growing prestige on the Arab streets,” Professor Mensur Akgün told the Hürriyet Daily News & Economic Review earlier on Friday.

Mubarak resigned as president and handed control to the military Friday evening after 29 years in power, bowing to a historic 18-day wave of pro-democracy demonstrations by hundreds of thousands, The Associated Press reported.

Turkey tells Mubarak to listen to the people

REUTERS

Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak should heed his people's desire for change, Turkey's Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan said Tuesday, piling pressure on Mubarak to end his 30-year rule in the face of mass protests.

As hundreds of thousands of Egyptians rallied in Cairo, Erdogan stopped short of explicitly calling for Mubarak's resignation but urged the Egyptian leader to ponder his legacy.

"Mr. Hosni Mubarak: I want to make a very sincere recommendation, a very candid warning... All of us will die and will be questioned over what we left behind," Erdogan said in a speech to members of his ruling AK Party in Ankara.

"As Muslims, where we all go is a two cubic meter hole," he said. The speech was broadcast live by some Arabic-language channels.

"Listen to the shouting of the people, the extremely humane demands. Without hesitation, satisfy the people's desire for change," Erdogan said.

Erdogan, whose country is held up as a model in the West for democracy in Muslim nations and has seen its influence rise in recent years in the Middle East, went on to say the solution to political problems lay in elections.

"If there is a problem, the place for solution is the ballot box," Erdogan said. The United States and other Western powers have also urged Mubarak to hold free elections.

2010: A difficult year in Turkish-American relations

As we approach the end of the year, it is time to take stock of 2010 and offer some predictions for next year in Turkish-American relations. Overall, 2010 proved to be a challenging year for the Washington-Ankara axis. From of the point of view of the Obama administration, the most disappointing part was no doubt Ankara’s Iran policy, culminated with the “no” vote at the United Nations Security Council. Particularly frustrating for Washington was that the Turkish vote came at a time when all P-5 (permanent five) countries -- including Russia and China -- voted in favor of sanctions against Iran. President Barack Obama reportedly tried to convince Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan during a 45-minute phone conversation the night before the vote and pleaded at least for abstention if voting “yes” would not prove feasible. The fact that Turkey opted for a “no” came as a bitter reminder to the Obama administration that on issues of utmost strategic and national security importance to Washington, Turkey could no longer be trusted. As a result, Ankara lost considerable leverage and goodwill in the American capital. read full: http://www.todayszaman.com/columnistDetail_getNewsById.action?newsId=230770