TURKEY’S OBSESSION WITH MEDIATION
By Cengiz Aktarpublished
Middle East Times
rkeys_obsession_with_mediation/4309/
Feb 11 2009
Egypt
Since succeeding in launching membership talks with the European Union
in December 2004 Turkey’s governing Justice and Development Party (AKP)
turned its attention to regional issues. In an unprecedented policy
initiative, it added its geographical and historical kin to Turkey’s
two-century-old western inclination. The initiative is necessary
and important. However, its timing and implementation are much too
premature and utilitarian. Moreover, it runs the risk of disabling
Turkey by isolating these regional issues from its own deep internal
and external problems.
The policy initiative is the brainchild of Ahmet Davudoglu, Prime
Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s chief foreign policy adviser and the
"Kissinger of Turkey," as a former U.S. ambassador puts it.
"Turkey’s increasing weigh in the Middle East is taking the country
closer to the EU … Our influence spreading more in the Middle East
or in the Caucasus will make Turkey more important in Brussels as well
as in Washington," Davudoglu recently told reporters following his
latest mediation efforts for Hamas. When one compares this statement
with the reality, one gets the feeling of even losing what is in hand.
Turkey has systematically failed whenever it tried to play mediator
and to bring peace in various regional disputes. The meeting
between Israelis and Pakistanis had no follow-up; neither did
the Afghanistan-Pakistan talks. The Israeli-Syrian indirect talks
are over for good. Mediation between Iran and the United States
didn’t even start, neither did the Nagorno Karabagh mediation. The
Caucasus Stability and Cooperation Pact remains a lovely but incoherent
project. Because obtaining results in those issues is simply unworkable
under the present circumstances, with or without Turkey.
Let’s take the Hamas-Israel (not the Israeli-Palestinian) war. The only
self-declared Turkish success in hand is Hamas declaring a ceasefire,
thanks to the shuttle diplomacy of Davudoglu. Strangely enough, this
has not been announced by any other news media but those in Turkey.
Prime Minister Erdogan may enjoy being a popular leader of the Arab
street and Turkey may be close to Hamas. And Hamas should take its
place in the Middle East equation from now on — that is clear. But
this does not mean that Turkey is surely impressing Hamas, rather
it is being used by Hamas, and for that matter by Iran. Actually,
Turkish mediation zeal and anti-Israeli fury shown during the war
negatively affected the country’s interests.
A rapid cost-benefit analysis:
Israel, Turkey’s strategic partner in the region has been pushed
away. It is not difficult to foresee the results. It may be nothing
but just a simple detail that Turkey won’t see any Israeli tourist in
the country any time soon. Palestinian Authority leader Mahmoud Abbas’
undersecretary, Nabil Abu Rudeina, disavowed the "Turkish Kissinger"
who was preparing to mediate between Fatah and Hamas. Abu Rudeina
bluntly said this is Egypt’s responsibility. Otherwise, one must
have seen the forced smile on the face of Abbas while listening to
the platitudes of Turkish officials.
Besides, it is not difficult to guess how Egypt approaches to
have Turkish controllers at the Rafah crossing between Egypt and
Gaza, nor it is difficult to see how Hamas would smirk at this
eventuality. Recently, the Arab League diplomatically smashed ambitions
of non-Arab countries to meddle in their affairs.
Moreover, thanks to Erdogan’s harsh rhetoric in Brussels on Jan. 19,
and recently in Davos, Europeans and Americans noted how Turkey has
now turned into an advocate of Hamas and how it has been trying to
open a space for Iran via Hamas in the Middle East. This, despite the
relief many felt in Erdogan’s words in Davos against the unbearable
arrogance of Israel.
Foreign observers also took note of the religious rhetoric behind the
irrepressible fury of Erdogan, who otherwise is entrusted with the
task of allying the civilizations under the U.N. umbrella. Indeed Prime
Minister Erdogan’s sympathy goes to Muslims — not to Arabs who are not
all Muslims. And his empathy with Muslim Arabs is rather based on his
antipathy for Jews and not for any pro-Arab leaning. Within this flurry
of feelings, let’s also not forget the sheer double standards the new
Nasser of the Middle East, as suggested by some Turkish commentators
wild with joy following Erdogan’s dramatic sortie in Davos, experiences
in his own lands when it comes to respect for human rights.
Today, beginning with public opinions, no one in Europe and the West is
looking at the Israeli-Palestinian conflict through a black-and-white
perspective of the ruling AKP and Turkish public opinion. Neither
are Fatah members and supporters. Could there be any better indicator
for Turkey’s partisan approach in the Middle Eastern chess game?
Plus, while tackling with such complex issues all at the same time,
Turkey has no spare time to allow to its own problems with its
neighbors, as old and deep as the Palestinian question. Apparently
other volunteers are waited to mediate for Turkish disputes with
Armenia, Cyprus, Greece and the Kurdistan Regional Administration in
northern Iraq.
The government’s passion to mediate is just an immature move in
the eyes of observers in Turkey and Europe. It is simply giving
some Europeans eager to kill Turkey’s EU membership perspective an
opportunity to laud Turkey with free-of-charge compliments to say:
"Excellency you are so very important." Europe knows quite well
Turkey’s potential importance in the region. But it also knows that
to put this potential into action can only be achievable by bringing
in a durable political and economic stability together with social
peace through the EU membership.
Turkey is a country having an institutional and social amnesia on
the Balkans, the Caucasus and the Middle East in consequence of
distancing itself from these regions for over a century. Therefore,
it is condemned to remain a novice alongside the regional and global
actors. Despite these drawbacks, the government’s paying attention
to such issues is a positive development. But only if the feasible
is aimed at, if internationally recognized principles are respected
and if Turkey is humble enough; if it takes due advantage from real
assets, primarily its economy; if it rapidly is involved in building
up a long-term institutional and human capacity about these regions;
if it fully concentrates on the EU bid which gives an opportunity to
frame all these efforts into a permanent strategic ground. And not
if it presumptuously goes forward from where it left a century ago.
Otherwise, if the government, the prime minister and his chief adviser
keep getting involved in issues way beyond Turkey’s capacity and power,
this will continue to harm Turkey like it did after the Gaza war.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress
