On the Middle East, Turkey and the U.S. Are Closer Than Suspected
We are among those who believe that recent developments in the Middle East will draw Turkey and the U.S. closer. In the end, it seems that both Washington and Ankara were caught unprepared for these events, which has increased the need for them to work together. Nowadays neither of the grand “Middle East projects” of the U.S. or Turkey has any relevance. Despite this, the region continues to become more prosperous in the eyes of both nations. Meanwhile, we see the discourses in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya and Syria are in agreement in many ways. As a final note, we saw Obama highlight new perspectives on the region in his speech about the Middle East two days ago. For instance, although he made sharp criticisms toward Bashar al-Assad, he admitted that he was not yet ready to see him step down. This was made clear when Obama said, “We are giving him one last chance.” Otherwise he would have threatened that he “must step down immediately,” as with Moammar Gadhafi.
We know that Ankara also sees the situation in Syria this way. It cannot be said that the U.S. or Turkey sees a way for Assad to become disentangled from the mess he is in. Therefore, we can take “giving him one more chance” as a tactic for these two countries to buy time and create a plan.
It is obvious that there remains no distinction between Ankara and Washington’s position on Libya. Turkey has gone from saying, “What business does NATO have in Libya” to “We fully support NATO’s operations in Libya.” With regard to Tunisia and Egypt, as well, there isn’t much difference in their positions.
On the other hand, the fact that Obama will erase $1 billion of Egypt’s debt as a way to provide for both Egypt and Tunisia’s transition into a free-market economy will work in Turkey’s favor by promoting further economic development in the region.
Meanwhile, the small restraints made by Bahrain and Saudi Arabia in their repression of Shi’ites in response to criticisms from the U.S. and Turkey have attracted attention. This, no doubt, ventures into the realm of “realpolitik.” As CNN’s famous editorialist Fareed Zakaria explains, “No one can risk sending the price of oil up to $250 per barrel by hanging out Saudi Arabia’s dirty laundry.”
Obama’s call for Israel to return to 1967 borders was also synchronous with Ankara’s efforts. This editorial should not be interpreted, however, to mean that there is no difference in Turkey and America’s views on the Middle East.
Certainly there is disagreement with regard to Israel and Iran. Just as Iran has withdrawn to the background to look on nervously at developments in the region, so have the U.S. and Turkey’s differences over how to handle Iran moved to the edge of our consciousness. The Israel issue, however, maintains the potential to be very divisive in Turkish-American relations.
The State Department undersecretary** responsible for Europe and Eurasia, Philip Gordon, expressed concern over this issue to the Senate Subcommittee on Foreign Relations on Wednesday. Gordon stated that a repeat of last year’s Blue Marmara incident — in which Israel blocked the docking of a Turkish convoy in Gaza — could possibly occur this June. The fact that this could once again greatly disrupt U.S.-Turkish relations caught the attention of the subcommittee members.
On this topic, Ankara has stated once again, “This is a private endeavor, and we will not interfere.” The ruling Justice and Development Party in the parliament, however, will encourage the government to actively support another convoy, saying, “Why didn’t you do it last year?!” Another dimension of this argument is that Turkey is entering election season, and the JDP is pushing forward in its efforts to capture the Islamic vote. To sum up, it doesn’t look like Turkey’s relations with Israel, which are not likely to straighten out anytime soon, are likely to become a bone of contention between the U.S. and Turkey at a time when developments in the region more than ever require them to work cooperatively.
*Editor’s Note: The quotations in this article, accurately translated, could not be verified.
**Editor’s Note: Philip Gordon is the current Assistant Secretary of the State Department’s European and Eurasian Affairs.
We know that Ankara also sees the situation in Syria this way. It cannot be said that the U.S. or Turkey sees a way for Assad to become disentangled from the mess he is in. Therefore, we can take “giving him one more chance” as a tactic for these two countries to buy time and create a plan.
It is obvious that there remains no distinction between Ankara and Washington’s position on Libya. Turkey has gone from saying, “What business does NATO have in Libya” to “We fully support NATO’s operations in Libya.” With regard to Tunisia and Egypt, as well, there isn’t much difference in their positions.
On the other hand, the fact that Obama will erase $1 billion of Egypt’s debt as a way to provide for both Egypt and Tunisia’s transition into a free-market economy will work in Turkey’s favor by promoting further economic development in the region.
Meanwhile, the small restraints made by Bahrain and Saudi Arabia in their repression of Shi’ites in response to criticisms from the U.S. and Turkey have attracted attention. This, no doubt, ventures into the realm of “realpolitik.” As CNN’s famous editorialist Fareed Zakaria explains, “No one can risk sending the price of oil up to $250 per barrel by hanging out Saudi Arabia’s dirty laundry.”
Obama’s call for Israel to return to 1967 borders was also synchronous with Ankara’s efforts. This editorial should not be interpreted, however, to mean that there is no difference in Turkey and America’s views on the Middle East.
Certainly there is disagreement with regard to Israel and Iran. Just as Iran has withdrawn to the background to look on nervously at developments in the region, so have the U.S. and Turkey’s differences over how to handle Iran moved to the edge of our consciousness. The Israel issue, however, maintains the potential to be very divisive in Turkish-American relations.
The State Department undersecretary** responsible for Europe and Eurasia, Philip Gordon, expressed concern over this issue to the Senate Subcommittee on Foreign Relations on Wednesday. Gordon stated that a repeat of last year’s Blue Marmara incident — in which Israel blocked the docking of a Turkish convoy in Gaza — could possibly occur this June. The fact that this could once again greatly disrupt U.S.-Turkish relations caught the attention of the subcommittee members.
On this topic, Ankara has stated once again, “This is a private endeavor, and we will not interfere.” The ruling Justice and Development Party in the parliament, however, will encourage the government to actively support another convoy, saying, “Why didn’t you do it last year?!” Another dimension of this argument is that Turkey is entering election season, and the JDP is pushing forward in its efforts to capture the Islamic vote. To sum up, it doesn’t look like Turkey’s relations with Israel, which are not likely to straighten out anytime soon, are likely to become a bone of contention between the U.S. and Turkey at a time when developments in the region more than ever require them to work cooperatively.
*Editor’s Note: The quotations in this article, accurately translated, could not be verified.
**Editor’s Note: Philip Gordon is the current Assistant Secretary of the State Department’s European and Eurasian Affairs.
Previous article![]( "The Obama Doctrine")
