SPIRIT OF COOPERATION DOMINATES TURKIC SUMMIT
Mevlut Katik
EurasiaNet, NY
Nov 20 2006
The results of the November 17 summit of the leaders of Turkic-speaking
nations exceeded the expectations of many diplomats and political
analysts. The presidents of Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan
and Turkey took the first steps toward the creation of a Turkic
commonwealth, giving an enthusiastic endorsement to efforts aimed at
strengthening energy and security ties.
The four leaders, along with Turkmenistan’s envoy to Turkey, gathered
at the Turkish Mediterranean resort city of Antalya for the summit,
the eighth such gathering of its kind, but the first held in five
years. [For background see the Eurasia Insight archive]. Officials
from Uzbekistan, who had been slated to attend, ended up boycotting
the event due to a breakdown in relations with Turkey.
The participants signed a declaration committing the Turkic states
to strengthen economic and transport ties, while stressing "the
importance of the joint fight against terrorism, the proliferation
of weapons of mass destruction, drug smuggling, weapons smuggling,
human smuggling and other organize crimes." The statement also
endorsed the concepts of Turkey’s accession to the European Union,
and a peace settlement to the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict that leaves
the territory under Azerbaijan’s control.
"We declare that we support peaceful solution to the Nagorno-Karabakh
conflict in accordance with the principle of territorial integrity
of Azerbaijan, and that we will further support fraternal Azerbaijan
in this dispute," Turkish President Ahmet Necdet Sezer said. [For
background see the Eurasia Insight archive].
The four leaders underlined both the "increasing importance of the
Caspian Basin for the energy security of Europe" and the "strategic
importance of the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan [BTC] oil pipeline opening and
the [expected] completion of the Baku-Tbilisi-Erzurum [BTE] natural
gas pipeline." They also stressed the importance of the possible
addition of trans-Caspian transportation routes to both the BTC
and the BTE. [For background see the Eurasia Insight archive]. Sezer
stressed in his opening speech the importance of involving energy-rich
Turkmenistan in the summit process, and vowed that Ankara would work
to facilitate energy exports from the Caspian Basin to Europe via
Turkey. Turkic leaders underlined in the Antalya declaration that
"increasing energy cooperation would positively and directly contribute
to economic and political stability" in Eurasia.
Kazakshtani President Nursultan Nazarbayev took observers, and even
many participants, by surprise by proposing the creation of a Turkic
parliamentary assembly. Nazarbayev went on to nominate former Turkish
president and prime minister Suleyman Demirel to serve as the proposed
assembly’s first chairman.
Nazarbayev’s proposal was indicative of his interest in exploring the
feasibility of a full-blown Turkic commonwealth. "We have to discuss
it," Kazakshtani Foreign Minister Foreign Minister Kasymzhomart
Tokayev told EurasiaNet, referring to the commonwealth possibility.
It would appear that Nazarbayev, Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev
and Kyrgyzstani leader Kurmanbek Bakiyev now see closer cooperation
as a way to leverage the collective influence of "200 million Turks,"
as Nazarbayev put it, in pursit of specific policy aims.
"The problem of one Turkic speaking nation must be the problem of other
Turkic speaking nations," the Anatolia news agency quoted Aliyev as
saying. Observers interpreted his comments as meaning Turkic states
should collectively push for results in Turkey’s EU accession process
and Azerbaijan’s Karabakh peace talks that are satisfactory to Ankara
and Baku respectively.
If the Turkic states actually opted to coordinate diplomatic action,
they might have the collective muscle to alter the existing equilibrium
in many geopolitical matters. In the case of Turkey’s troubled drive
to join the EU, for example, a Turkic commonwealth could influence
Brussels’ decision-making calculus by playing the energy card, letting
it be known that a rebuff of Ankara could hinder the EU’s access to
Central Asian energy supplies.
Kyrgyzstani diplomats also stressed that closer cooperation would
enhance Bishkek’s international profile. Kanat Tursunkulov, a top
Kyrgyz Foreign Ministry official, said President Bakiyev’s attendance
at the summit, despite the "recent troubles" in Bishkek, underscored
the Kyrgyz government’s position that closer cooperation among Turkic
states is a top political priority. [For background see the Eurasia
Insight archive].
Commenting on the outcome of the summit, a top Turkish diplomat
said, "The era of romantic embracing has ended; the era of concrete
cooperation has started." Nazarbayev, Aliyev and Bakiyev all quietly
expressed a desire for their respective countries to host to the next
Turkic summit. At the same time, participants emphasized a need to
proceed cautiously, seeking to dispel any impression that they are
rushing toward institutionalizing the group.
Beyond the steps toward closer cooperation, the Turkic summit will be
remembered for the public airing of a diplomatic feud between Turkey
and Uzbekistan. Some news reports claimed that Uzbek officials stayed
away from the gathering to protest the final declaration’s wording on
the Karabakh settlement. However, a senior Turkish official said the
reason for Tashkent’s displeasure was Turkey’s decision to join the
United States in supporting a draft measure in UN General Assembly’s
Human Rights Council that would condemn human rights violations
in Uzbekistan.
The official was outspoken in his criticism of both Uzbekistan’s
rights behavior and Tashkent’s reaction to Ankara’s vote. "It is
time that some countries learned that democracy and human rights
are essential to integrate into the global system," he said. "Turkey
will persistently work to promote democracy and human rights for the
region`s own benefit."
Turkey’s decision to vote for the draft Human Rights Council
resolution was "a reflection of our ideals and understanding of
the importance of democracy and respect for human rights," the
official continued. "Turkey has been criticized for similar reasons
[human rights violations] in the past, but we never turned it into
a bilateral issue, and chose to make improvemenst in our [democracy
and human right] records instead."
Such blunt talk would appear to mark a significant shift in Turkish
policy, as Turkish officials had unitl now avoided open criticism of
Uzbek government action. It may be that Turkey’s desire to meet EU
accession criteria, especially the need to bolster its human rights
credentials, is playing a role in the adoption of a toughter line
toward Tashkent. The official also indicated that Ankara is growing
tired of Uzbek President Islam Karimov’s demands. "They [Uzbek
officials] also accuse us of supporting the Uzbek opposition, citing
[the fact that] opposition leader Mohammad Solih freely travels to and
lives in Turkey. Mr. Solih is free to travel anywhere he wants to go,
and travels to Norway, Britain and the United States. Why is Turkey
being singled out?" the official said.
Editor’s Note: Mevlut Katik is a London-based journalist and analyst.
He reported this piece from Antalya where the summit took place.