Today’s Zaman, Turkey
Feb 22 2009
`Turkey and Armenia nearing major breakthrough in relations’
Suat KınıklıoÄ?lu , deputy chairman for
external affairs for the ruling Justice and Development Party (AK
Party), has said Turkey and Armenia are within reach of a major
breakthrough, thus an Armenian resolution at the US Congress at this
time would be "extremely detrimental" to these unprecedented efforts
for normalization.
The Armenian diaspora has already started pressuring American
politicians over the "genocide resolution," calling for it to be
brought to the floor of the US Congress. In addition, there are
concerns that US President Barack Obama may use the word "genocide" in
his statement marking April 24 — the day when Armenians commemorate
the alleged genocide perpetrated by the Ottoman Empire during World
War I.
KınıklıoÄ ;?lu, who is also a deputy for the
AK Party, said the Armenian diaspora appears to be totally indifferent
to the Armenian government’s desire to have normalized relations with
Turkey.
"The diaspora is projecting an extremely negative influence on
Yerevan. If they manage to push this through I believe this would be a
historic example how a small ethnic diaspora subverts US national
interests and causes great harm to a delicate region," he added.
Kınıklıo& #xC4;?lu, who was in Washington, D.C.,
at the time of Prime Minister Recep Tayyip ErdoÄ?an’s walkout at
the Davos summit after an angry exchange with Israeli President Shimon
Peres over Israel’s deadly operation in Gaza last month, elaborated on
the issue and more.
You were in the United States recently. What was the purpose of your
visit?
We went to the United States with the purpose of attending a
conference on the Alliance of Civilizations, an initiative Prime
Minister ErdoÄ?an takes very seriously. I delivered a number of
speeches in Atlanta and then moved on to Washington, D.C. The primary
objective of my visit was really to engage with the new people in
Washington due to the change in administration. We aimed at discussing
the Turkish-American agenda and seeing what issues might come to the
fore under the Obama administration.
Who did you see there and what are your impressions from your trip to
Washington?
First of all, one cannot help but notice the deepening of the crisis
in the US economy. It is on everyone’s mind and President Obama was
struggling to push another financial package through Congress while we
were there. The new administration is very much preoccupied with the
economic crisis and it seems to overwhelm everything else. We met with
a number of congressmen and senators, as well as folks from the State
Department. We also met with leaders of Jewish organizations and spoke
at three events organized by think tanks. Overall we were very much
satisfied with our trip and I thought that it was extremely timely for
us to be there. Our trip, of course, coincided with the Davos
incident. In fact, we were at the CNN International headquarters in
Atlanta when we saw the breaking news on Al Jazeera first. Then, I
received a message on my Blackberry from the Anatolia news agency and
we immediately understood that something important was going on.
Future of Turkish-American partnership
So Davos was very much a part of your trip?
Indeed, it was, but we did not let that incident divert us from the
main mission of our trip. After all, we wanted to talk to our American
partners about the future of the Turkish-American partnership. I do
not think it is necessary to repeat the obvious about the last eight
years but you know the relationship has been strained very much. As
Obama won the election and began to line up a truly impressive team in
the White House and the administration in general, we wanted to get on
with our issues early on and get down to business with our partners in
Washington.
The unfortunate event at Davos has, in my opinion, made our meetings
even timelier as we obtained the opportunity to clarify our position
on the Gaza war and the miserable human tragedy there. Our meeting
with Robert Wexler, the co-chairman of the US-Turkey Caucus in the US
Congress, as well as the leaders of the Jewish organizations proved to
be very constructive. We registered their concerns and took note of
their views but respectfully disagreed on the Gaza war and the
overreaction by the Israeli government. I believe that regardless of
what the causes for the Israeli aggression in Gaza were that the war
resulted in gross human rights violations as well as the violation of
the Geneva Protocol and the Hague Convention. We were particularly
concerned by allegations about the use of white phosphorus shells in
Gaza. The US-based advocacy group Human Rights Watch also called on
Israel to stop using white phosphorus shells. I do not believe the
security of Israel, Palestine or our region has been enhanced by this
war. On the contrary, it is likely to breed more violence. That said,
our meetings were more forward-looking and aiming at containing the
tension between our countries. The leaders of the Jewish organizations
underlined that they value the relationship with Turkey and that they
do not want a break.
Lastly, we cannot overlook the fact that Prime Minister ErdoÄ?an
felt deeply offended by the fact that Prime Minister Olmert visited
Ankara and discussed the fifth round of talks between Israel and Syria
just days before the war on Gaza. In my opinion, Olmert should never
have come to Ankara. It put us in a very awkward position. After all
our efforts in the Israel-Syria talks I do not think we deserved to be
put in such a situation.
Did the issue of anti-Semitism come up?
You know Prime Minister ErdoÄ?an has condemned anti-Semitism on
a number of occasions. In fact he has called it a crime against
humanity. He is very strong on this. We do not accept the charge of
anti-Semitism. This is about concrete policy of a particular
leadership in Israel and has nothing to do with the people of Israel
or Jews throughout the world. On the contrary, Turkey has always been
very hospitable to Jews throughout history — be it in 1492 or after
World War II. We have always embraced them and these lands have been
among the rare places where Jews lived comfortably. I met many Turkish
Jews on a Foreign Affairs Committee trip in May 2008. They are fine
people trying to build a bridge between our countries; however, I have
also visited the town of Sderot near Gaza and seen the rockets fired
from Gaza. While sympathizing with the fear that the citizens of that
city feel and agreeing with them that this cannot be condoned, in no
way could the war on Gaza be justified by that. The true path to peace
in the region goes through the recognition that all parties must be
engaged in a peace process. Regrettably, the Gaza War has increased
the risk for more violence and will not enhance the security of
Israel. The graphic images of the war have been ingrained in the
subconscious of global public opinion.
What about rumors of an Armenian resolution to be brought to the US
Congress again?
While we were in Washington we were informed of a new push to bring an
Armenian resolution to the House. Of course, we are extremely upset
about the necessity to spend our energy on this issue every fall but
we are not going to let the Armenian diaspora get its way. This year,
I am particularly concerned because it would be a pity to see
Turkish-American relations severed at a time when we were preparing to
do what Obama-Biden described in their policy statement on Europe as
"rebuilding the strategic partnership with Turkey." As someone who
spent considerable time in maintaining and strengthening the
Turkish-American partnership I am most concerned with the potential
this resolution — if it is brought to the table — has to damage our
bilateral relationship. It seems totally inconsistent with the
objectives of the new administration in our region to push this
forward, but we do not know what will transpire in the coming
weeks. Secondly, the situation between Turkey and Armenia is
different. A major difference from 2007 when H.R. 106 was stopped at
the last minute is that since last summer Turkey and Armenia have been
engaged in a historic process of normalization between our
countries. We are within reach of having a major breakthrough between
Turkey and Armenia. More importantly, Azerbaijan is also on board and
this is no small achievement given the complexity of the issue. Recent
developments have the potential to turn the South Caucasus into a zone
of real peace, stability and integration. Bringing an Armenian
resolution at this time would not only be extremely detrimental to
these historic efforts but would also be interpreted as very
disrespectful to Turkey’s sincere efforts. Just as we felt offended by
the one-sided action of Israel when we were hosting the peace talks
between Israel and Syria, this would be equally detrimental. If there
is a genuine desire to have a major breakthrough in the South Caucasus
— which I know the State Department has — we need to make sure that
this irresponsible resolution will never make it to the floor.
Also, I think it would be timely to underline an important and for me
astounding fact. The Armenian diaspora appears to be totally
indifferent to the Armenian government’s desire to normalize relations
with Turkey. The diaspora is projecting an extremely negative
influence on Yerevan. All they care about is one word and that is
it. If they manage to push this through I believe this would be a
historic example of how a small ethnic diaspora subverts US national
interests and causes great harm to a delicate region. I am confident
that there are enough responsible people on all three sides to prevent
this from happening, especially when all the stars are lined up to
make a historic rapprochement between Turkey and Armenia a reality.
What about the Jewish lobby’s position on the Armenian resolution?
As you know in the past the Jewish lobby had sided with Turkey on
this, but in 2007 we saw some Jewish congressmen breaking the ranks
and switching to the Armenian side. The late Tom Lantos was a good
example. After Davos, conventional wisdom dictates that the Jewish
lobby will not oppose an Armenian resolution. I am not so sure about
that and really do not want to comment further. We will see how they
will position themselves. After all, this is their decision.
Are you hopeful for the future of the relationship between Turkey and
the United States?
Actually, I am. Despite all sorts of reasons that may point to the
contrary I believe that the tough times are behind us and that we will
be able to work together. If we can overcome the untimely nuisance of
the Armenian resolution there is good reason to be optimistic. We have
a lot of issues on our agenda ranging from Afghanistan to the
nuclearization of the region, Middle East peace process to energy
security and others. US support for Turkey’s membership drive to the
European Union will be more valuable at this time. I believe both
Turkey and the US have mutual interests which necessitate us working
together. Turkey has become a regional power and is destined to
further solidify its position in its immediate environment. As a NATO
member with a UN Security Council seat for the next two years, a G-20
member and a candidate country to the EU, Turkey has a lot to offer to
its neighborhood. Our American and European allies underline the
utility and value of our new regional posture. It is evident in almost
every aspect of our neighborhood policy, ranging from the peace talks
between Israel and Syria to the Caucasus Stability and Cooperation
Platform. We are encouraged by the positive feedback we receive from
our friends. Yet, I am somewhat concerned with some practical facts.
Some Americans should make the mental shift about Turkey
Like what?
About how much time and attention the new administration will have for
Turkey. Is Turkey policy going to be the derivative of Obama’s Middle
East policy or Iran policy or Europe policy? Or will there be a Turkey
policy on its own, which is what is needed. The economic crisis in the
US even further complicates the picture. Obama knows he needs to fix
the economy if he wants to be re-elected. Hence, I doubt that the new
administration will be able to appropriately prioritize Turkey in
their foreign policy agenda. If Turkey were to come into the picture
within the framework of the administration’s Middle East policy this
would be problematic. What we expect first is that President Obama’s
first European trip will include Ankara and that the president
emphasizes to our European partners how much he values Turkey’s
membership in the EU. This would be a marvelous start between our
great countries and a very constructive step in rebuilding the
strategic partnership. As Ambassador [Marc] Grossman used to say, the
Turkish-American relationship is not a natural relationship — it
needs constant care and attention to prosper.
What do you see as a major challenge in Turkish-American relations?
I have said for a number of years now that the primary challenge in
the relationship is the inability of some Americans to make the mental
shift about Turkey. Turkey is no longer the Cold War satellite state
which came under consideration within a purely security
outlook. Turkey has grown into something else. It is a functioning
democracy; it has a young and dynamic population and a growing
economy. Most importantly, it has growing awareness of its past and is
going through a renaissance about its Ottoman heritage. The
neighborhood policy we started to implement in 2002 has sparked an
enormous process whereby Turkey began to reintegrate with its
immediate environment — be it in the Balkans, the Black Sea, the
Caucasus, the Middle East or the eastern Mediterranean. The architect
behind this policy is Professor Ahmet DavutoÄ?lu. He articulated
it in such a manner that it blew me away when I first read his
treatise "Strategic Depth." The greatest challenge in the relationship
is to complete this mental shift and restructure our partnership
accordingly. Once you do that our American friends will see that
Turkey has become a country whose destiny has meaning way beyond its
national borders. What happens in Turkey, what is said about Turkey
and how Turkey is treated is very closely monitored by a wide
geography which includes the Middle East, the larger Muslim world and
even Southeast Asia. Turkey is a great experiment that must
succeed. My measuring stick for that success is that Turkey becomes a
full member in the European Union and is a respectable member of this
new union. The moment we have the US with us on this — I mean
acknowledging that Turkey’s fate has repercussions beyond Turkey’s
borders and therefore should be a primary concern for Washington — we
will have a great possibility to work together.
What are your thoughts on recent comments related to Turkey turning
away from the West?
Turkey’s security is enhanced by its reintegration with its
neighborhood. I would like to reiterate that our neighborhood policy
is not at the expense of our Western vocation. On the contrary, it is
complementary to it. Interpreting Turkey’s neighborhood policy as a
shift in our orientation does gross injustice to our efforts and
totally ignores the sophistication behind our regional outreach.
Turkey will be — just like the double-headed eagle symbolizing the
coat of arms of the Seljuk Turkish Empire — looking to both the East
and West. This is what our geography, our history and regional
identity dictate.
22 February 2009, Sunday
ALÄ° ASLAN KILIÃ?