OBAMA SEES TURKEY’S INFLUENCE AND VALUE, TRIP SHOWS
Mark R. Parris; Samuel Berger

USNEWS.com
April 9, 2009 Thursday

Obama overtures show that the United States recognizes nation’s
influence in the world.

Samuel Berger was national security advisor from 1997-2001 and is
co-chairman of Stonebridge International.

Mark Parris was ambassador to Turkey from 1997-2000 and is currently
visiting scholar at the Brookings Institution.

The past few years have been hard on America’s partnership with the
Republic of Turkey. Some Americans blame Prime Minister Recep Tayyip
Erdogan and his ruling AK Party; they claim Erdogan and his formerly
Islamist colleagues have systematically pushed Turkey from its Western
orbit toward a Muslim orientation.

These critics very likely did not welcome President Obama’s decision
to include Ankara on his first major trip abroad. They are missing
the point. Since 2002, Turkey’s regional stature has waxed while
a distracted America’s has waned. Today more than ever, Turkey can
help–or hurt–American interests.

When it comes to Afghanistan and Pakistan, for example, there are
few international players outside Washington with greater clout on
both sides of the border than Turkey.

Turkish diplomats have deftly engaged both countries at critical
moments. Turkey is a mainstay of NATO’s force in Afghanistan, has
trained Afghan police, and can take on missions like setting up girls’
schools and hospitals that are problematic for other NATO partners. In
addition, Turkish bases may be useful as NATO sorts out supply routes
for expanding operations.

On Iran, Tehran doesn’t listen to many countries, but it listens to
Turkey. Just days after Secretary of State Hillary Clinton visited
Ankara in March, President Abdullah Gul traveled to Tehran to tell
Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei to take the new U.S. administration
seriously. Ankara enjoys that access because of its engagement policy,
which has seen Turkish-Iranian commercial and other ties swell even as
Turkey has delivered hard messages on the need to end Iran’s nuclear
weapons program.

On Iraq, Erdogan has signaled Turkey’s full cooperation as U.S. forces
withdraw. Equally important, Turkey’s proximity and strong interest
in a unified, prosperous Iraq will make it a major player as the
U.S. military role winds down–and its recent overtures to Iraq’s
Kurds enhance its ability to mediate among Iraq’s various factions.

In the Middle East, Turkey has credibility on both the Syrian and
Palestinian "tracks," which has proven constructive in Syria-Israel
indirect talks and negotiations for a Gaza cease-fire, and helps
explain why George Mitchell has already visited Ankara twice.

Meanwhile, as the U.S. administration seeks to "reset" relations with
Russia, Ankara will play a new role. Russia has become Turkey’s largest
trading partner; it has targeted Turkey as the key to consolidating
its energy primacy; and Russian-Turkish positions have converged on
issues from Black Sea security to Iran to Gaza. The days when Ankara
would simply follow the U.S. lead on Russia are over. But Turkey can
and is willing to be more of a full partner on Russia than in the past.

None of this is to say that the United States and Turkey can expect
strategic partnership to be seamless. While both sides traditionally
describe U.S.-Turkish relations as based on "common values and
interests," perspectives compete on such interests as calibrating
carrots vs. sticks on Iran; the proper role for groups like Hamas
and Hezbollah; Russia’s place in strategic energy transportation;
what constitute legitimate security steps by Israel; and how to deal
with Sudan.

In terms of values, the Obama administration must acknowledge the
complexity of Turkey’s real but still maturing democracy. There should
be no doubt of U.S. readiness to work with freely elected Turkish
leaders. Neither can the United States ignore Erdogan’s efforts to
take his electoral successes as license to intimidate critics in the
media and elsewhere.

Then there is question of the April anniversary of the 1915 events that
Armenians call "genocide" and how Congress–or the White House–will
mark the tragic events in the Ottoman Empire at the start of the last
century. Reports of imminent moves to normalize Turkey’s relations
with Armenia are welcome. If implemented swiftly, such a process
could defuse an early crisis in U.S.-Turkish relations.

As for the AK government’s "Islamic" orientation, it is true that
Erdogan and his colleagues view the world through the eyes of devout
Muslims. But that does not mean our leaders cannot find common ground,
or have respectful, candid discussions. Not engaging with Turkey’s
government simply raises the likelihood that Turkish and American
policies will grow apart.

Thus, relations with Turkey will demand hands-on attention long after
President Obama leaves Ankara. And that is how it should be. As a
strategically located, secular democracy of nearly 80 million people,
most of them Muslims; a member of NATO, the OECD, the G-20, the
U.N. Security Council, the Organization of the Islamic Conference;
and a candidate for the European Union, Turkey is worth the time
and effort.

It is to President Obama’s credit that he has understood this so soon.