Ankara's Dilemma

Iran is again in the news as Hillary Clinton, in Dubai on the first stop of a three-nation tour of the Persian Gulf, said the Arab world should act to sharpen enforcement of the sanctions and reject attempts to stoke Mideast tensions. She also said that if Iran succeeds in developing an atomic bomb, it will plunge the Mideast into a disastrous nuclear arms race, she said. "It is first and foremost in the interest of the region to prevent Iran from getting a nuclear weapon." Yet last week, Israel's newly retired spy chief said he thinks Iran won't be able to build a nuclear bomb before 2015.

Yet, a week before the P5-1 talks begin in Istanbul (the 1 being Germany which is not a member of the UN Security Council) with Iran, the emphasis appears to be on the nuclear issue that has clearly subsided in light of the Israeli assessment which was surely known before Meir Dagan, the former Israeli Mossad chief who made the assessment made his statement.

The call for Arab support is nothing new and as the Wikileaks cables show, the drum beater in chief against Iran is Saudi Arabia. But let’s look at what is happening in the region and how the nuclear issue should be relegated to the back of the fridge for a while.

As I have said frequently, much to the boredom of my readers I’m sure, the US has not yet come to grips with the new geo-political reality of the world in which it cannot dictate policy very much to the key players any longer. This applies as much to global powers as it does to regional ones. We are back to the pre-World War I geo-political realities. We know who are the global powers. The regional ones include Turkey and wannabe Iran. There is no regional Arab power since Egypt gave up the mantle after 1973 (although that may be changing).

The general public in the US would likely be shocked to learn that Iran, although Muslim, is not Arab. They, in their usual geo-political vacuum existence and Faux News environment, probably also do not realize that Turkey, although Muslim, is not Arab. Few people understand (more than before, I think as a result of the Iraq fiasco) that Sunni Muslims are not exactly on the same side as Shiite Muslims. They probably do remember that Turkey turned down fearless leader Junior Bush in his invitation (more like a demand at the time) to join his adventure in Mesopotamia and therefore concluded that Turkey was “looking east” and away from the West. The foundation of Turkey’s opposition is forgotten, if it was ever mentioned. Turkey said that the invasion would destabilize the balance of power in the region and that they were not keen on that idea. They were right. And now it is a truly more difficult region to stabilize.

So what we have now is a realpolitik wake-up call. Iraq has largely, though not entirely, been handed to Iran and return of Moqtada al-Sadr, a pro-Iranian cleric with a private army, cements that in place. The removal of Iraq as an independent force in the region has provided Iran with the opening it needs to pursue a historic dream – the control of the Persian Gulf (Arabian Gulf if you happen to be in Saudi Arabia). That is why the Sunni Saudis are so alarmed. The US is withdrawing and the only game in town is Iran, it seems. Nuclear weapons are not the problem. With the US out, Iran has the most powerful conventional military in the region – except for Turkey. But Iran is a lot closer to Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and the Emirates than is Turkey.

The regional balance of power may be at a tipping point in favor of Iran, which makes Israeli policies of apartheid against Palestinians and exchanging Greece for Turkey as an ally even more stupid than they appear on the surface. The current Israeli government now faces the prospect of the EU treating East Jerusalem as the future capital of a Palestinian state and having an EU presence at the demolitions of Palestinian homes, and intervention when peaceful protesters face arrest. All this follows the razing of the famous Shepherds Hotel in East Jerusalem to make way for 20 homes for Jewish settlers (a violation of international law).

The rivalries are just beginning as Turkey begins its reluctant maneuvering to offset Iran and represent all Muslims in the region. I say reluctant because Turkey has said that it will not act as a mediator between Iran and the West. Well, sorry boys. Turkey is going to find it impossible to play any other role. It’s what happens when you become a regional power.

Turkey will need to make decisions that it hates to make – about its neighbors, policies and actions that will not please everyone. The “zero problems” foreign policy only goes so far before national and regional interests force choices. How Turkey handles the upcoming talks with Iran will be a key example of how Turkey plans to exert its influence in Syria, Iraq and Saudi Arabia. Geo-politics is forcing Turkey into its natural place in the region as a counterbalance to a surging Persian Iran. It cannot afford to let the vacuum formed by the US withdrawal to result in Iran realizing its dream to control the Gulf, Saudi Arabia and Iraq.

The US will have little influence after leaving Iraq and shows no prospect of dealing with Israeli policies that are self-defeating and which adversely affect US national interests. Iran will negotiate in Istanbul, but further sanctions will do nothing if the results are the status-quo and Iran knows it. It consistently keeps the nuclear issue at center stage because that takes the eyes of the West off the target – which should be prevention of the creation of a regional hegemon at the expense of the West and its fundamental interests. Iran cannot afford for anyone to decide to indulge in an air campaign against its conventional military – which is where its real power lies. Smoke and mirrors – Iran can afford to lose what it does not have.

Which brings us back to the Saudis – who will not be in Istanbul. But it is the Saudi who are most concerned about Iran – and not from the nuclear side of the issue, but the conventional and the shifting balance of power. What is Turkey going to do? It is not in its interests to allow Iran a free hand to establish itself as the sole regional power, able to influence the policies of Arab states such as Saudi Arabia. Turkey cannot simply sit at the negotiating table and play the neutral. It is not neutral and it is in Turkey’s national interests to position itself as the regional power at the expense of Iran.

Welcome to the world of realpolitik, Ankara.

Welcome to BICT and Mult-Polar World

OK. I was wrong. I thought that the Israeli assault on the Turkish flotilla would have sunk the vote on sanctions against Iran. It did not. Whether these sanctions work or not, and I don’t believe that they will achieve the desired result, is not really the question. Israel is now more isolated than ever, as is Iran. The vote against the resolution by Turkey and Brazil was more about regional muscle-flexing and desire to play a larger role in their regions and the world, than their understandable anger over the snub of their nuclear fuel swap agreement with Iran – which is not entirely dead depending on the next move by the US.

Turkey has faced the fact that the opposition by France, Germany and Austria to EU membership has killed the prospect regardless of previous commitments by Brussels to move forward. It has now turned to its old domains in the east and south to increase and solidify Turkish influence and power and it is succeeding.
Ankara may have genuinely believed in the uranium swap deal; but, regardless of the outcome, it has placed itself solidly in the regional power column, independent of the US while still remaining within NATO. Turkey principal competition is Iran. They are not allies and the Iranian brand of Islamic rule is not palatable in Turkey. The attack on the Turkish flotilla has elevated Turkey’s standing in the region as the pre-eminent political power. By voting “no” in the UN against sanctions and joining with Brazil in a nuclear fuel swap deal, its political capital in the Middle East leaped multiple levels. All these events come at Iran’s expense and make Turkey a leader in the region, wielding political and military clout that cannot be safely ignored. Even Russia knows this and has been careful to rapidly build closer economic ties to Turkey. Although Turkey is heavily dependent on Russia for energy, Moscow knows that Turkey can create serious problems for it in the Caucuses and less so in Central Asia.

Brazil, meanwhile, is rapidly asserting its independence and strength in South America and has shown that it can be a player of international scope. Brasilia has increased its trade relationships with China, Russia, West Africa and the Middle East, especially now Turkey. Clearly the leading political and economic power in South America (despite the pretensions of the Chavez regime), it is in a position to require the US to pay attention to its views. Joining with Turkey in the nuclear fuel swap agreement puts Brazil on the map outside of its region.

Russian agreement on the new sanctions also reflects an awareness that it will need to be more sensitive to a multi-polar world. Although it clearly may indulge in more aggressive behaviour in the Caucuses, any such further adventure will come at a steep price as it tries to build ties with Turkey. Turkey is in a position to make life easier for Russia in the Caucuses and may ultimately be instrumental in resolving the long-running confrontation between Yerevan and Baku. By asserting its independence from the US when its interests conflict with those of Washington, Turkey is leveraging its regional strength and becoming a trusted broker.

All the recent events are pointing toward a new balance of power where regional interests can trump traditional alliances. The US can no longer rely on Turkey or Brazil to tow any particular line if their national interests would be adversely affected. For that matter, neither can Russia or the EU. Each must deal with the regional powers in a different way. The now famous BRIC bloc is not really accurate. Drop the R and add a T. Welcome to the new world.

International Law, Israel and Practicality

The debate over whether Israel violated international law by attacking the Turkish flotilla in international waters has begun. Unfortunately for Israel, it is likely to lose the legal argument despite the absurd attempt by FM Lieberman to justify the attack on the basis of international law – which he clearly does not understand nor cares to understand.

Aside from the pure stupidity of the selecting the wrong action from a range, it is part of a larger seige policy regarding Gaza that has failed catastrophically in achieving its goal of destroying Hamas. To hammer home that point, the Egyptian government today opened its border crossing to Gaza without a time limitation. Just to be clear, I believe that Hamas is a terrorist organization that hurts rather than helps the Palestinian people and needs to be consigned to a black hole somewhere.

The legal proposition that, absence a state of war, a state has the right to intercept ships in non-territorial waters is seriously flawed.

First, let’s dispose of one of the more absurd analogies such as the one here which equates this incident with the sinking, boarding or destruction of German ships in international waters by the US (or the UK, for that matter) during World War II. Unless news reports have missed it, Israel is not in a state of war with Turkey (although it might as well be, at this point). Furthermore, both during the First and Second World Wars there was serious condemnation by neutral nations for the blockades that affected their shipping imposed by the warring nations who were accused, correctly, of breaching international law. During the World War I England successfully ignored the complaints and continued to intercept, board and intern neutral ships bound for German ports if the navy determined that the cargo could, in any way, help the German war effort. There was no question that the actions were illegal, and effective; so effective in fact that those in Germany advocating unleashing unlimited submarine warfare overwhelmed those in the Kaiser's inner circle who opposed doing so because it was illegal. Circumstances of a declared war, however, changed the matrix of acceptability.

Second, by logical extension, Israel is now claiming the right to stop, destroy or seize any ship in international waters if it deems it to be a threat to its security. If this sounds absurd, it is. It is also profoundly stupid. Even the US relunctantly demurred  (under President Bush no less) from stopping and boarding a North Korean ship in international waters despite the fact that evidence strongly pointed to the possibility that it was carrying weapons destined for some unsavoury characters in the Middle East.

Under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, Israel would only be entitled to stop ships within its territorial waters if they breached any of the restrictions to the right of innocent passage. Israel could make a legitimate argument if the attack occurred within its territorial waters where innocent passage rules apply, but it did not. Innocent passage is the right of all ships to engage in continuous and expeditious surface passage through the territorial sea and archipelagic waters of foreign coastal states in a manner not prejudicial to its peace, good order, or security. Just ask Argentina.

Israel has no legal justification for its actions in international waters regardless of the inane remarks of its Foreign Minister – the same man incidentally who deliberately and publically embarrassed the Turkish ambassador last year and who has continually rejected all attempts by third parties to help in resolving the Palestinian issue.

Israel has engaged on a policy of confrontation and defiance with its ever shrinking circle of friends and handing its enemies the moral high ground. In effectively severing military and economic ties with Turkey with this action (something the current Turkish government was uncomfortable with in the first place) it has put it security at risk. It has also handed the current Turkish government an election victory.

But, ultimately it is not the legal question that matters.  Time and time again, this Israeli government has exhibited a remarkable aptitude for taking the least desirable route.  Assassination in Dubai using stolen, non-Israeli passports; embarrassing the Vice President of the United States and the Turkish ambassador; defying international opinion by continuing construction of illegal settlements and evicting Palestinians; continuing an ineffective blocade of an entire city; and, rattling sabers at Iran in an attempt to draw the United States into another war.  It has attracted the condemnation of Europe - particularly the UK and France while Ireland may go as far as expelling the Israeli ambassador- and irretrievably damaged its relations with a rising, powerful Turkey.  NATO is now involved because a member state's ship was attacked. 

As a result, there will be no new sanctions imposed on Iran and the fact that the United States agreed to the resolution in the UN condemning Israel's actions and calling for a raising of the Gaza siege is unprecedented. Turkey is lost as an even reluctant ally. Egypt has elected to break the circle. Nation's are now weighing their strategic interests and not to the benifit of Israel. This is a game changer.
Legal or not, this latest event puts Israel more at risk than ever. Time for Netanyahu and his conservative friends to go before Israel does.

Brazil and Turkey Convince Iran - Maybe

Brazil and Turkey appear to have brokered a deal with Iran to accept low-enriched uranium to Turkey for further enrichment. By appear, I mean that although the agreement has been signed by Iran, the Never-Ending-Negotiation Process of the Iranians may yet unravel this first step. And, lest anyone think the current Iranian regime has a corner on this particularly back to the bazaar tactic, the former Shah and his government also used this favourite of Persian tactics.

Nevertheless, despite the protestations of Israel that Turkey and Brazil have been “tricked”, this is a positive development. Israel has said that Erdogan and Lula are naïve. They may be a lot of things but naïve is not one of them - particularly in the case of Erdogan and Turkey for which this is a significant diplomatic and geo-political coup if it works.

Assuming acceptance of the deal by Russia, the United States and France and compliance by Iran, Turkey has established itself as a trusted broker in the region. If Iran follows through, then it has suffered a geo-political set-back as Turkey will use this to enhance its presence throughout the Middle East both economically and politically. By helping Iran to avoid an additional set of sanctions, Turkey has shown that it can accomplish what Iran cannot on its own. Big brother, little brother. Syria and Iraq need to pay attention now as Turkey puts its interests first to further enhance its position.

Israel needs to pay attention too. The remarks that Turkey is naïve show a strong tendency to ignore its ever shrinking circle of support. It is the present government that is naïve. If this deal is implemented, Netanyahu and his supporters lose their last chance for an attack on Iran. Good.

Turkey Rising?

Image via Wikipedia

The Turkish Foreign Minister, Ahmet Davutoğlu, has been quite busy of in the past month, meeting with the Foreign Ministers of Azerbaijan, the EU, Brazil, Serbia, Bosnia and NATO ministers, and has met with some success in getting what Turkey feels is in its interests. 

For example, after what by all accounts was a difficult dinner in Tallinn, Davutoğlu managed to win over enough NATO members, to get NATO MAP (Membership Action Plan) status for Bosnia.  Although this is part of Turkey's well know efforts to achieve reconciliation in the Balkans, an old stomping ground, it also shows that despite the brush-off and broken promises from certain EU members regarding accession, Turkey is in Europe.

As part of Turkey's Balkan reconciliation effort, Davutoğlu also met with the foreign ministers of Serbia and Spain.  Serbia, of course, is not happy about Bosnia's proposed NATO membership.  However,  Davutoğlu's meetings with Spain and Serbia are also meant to advance Serbia's integration efforts into the EU and NATO. As if that was not enough, a future meeting in Istanbul will involve a presidential summit among Turkey, Serbia and Bosnia.


Perhaps the EU needs to take another look at its tactics regarding Turkish membership and Turkey in general - because Turkey is a European power now whether they like it or not.

The riskiest venture though is Turkey's attempts, with Brazil, to negotiate some sort of fuel swap deal with Tehran.

Last week Davutoğlu met with Catherine Ashton, the EU Foreign Minister, to review his earlier talks in Tehran regarding the fuel swap negotiations. Brazil's Foreign Minister is flying to Tehran soon to continue the pursuit of a deal.  So, what happens if Turkey and Brazil do come up with a deal?  I'm very skeptical that the deal can be brokered given the current rhetoric flowing out ofTehran.  However, assuming that the talks succeed, then then sanctions would be off the table at the UN where they are scheduled to be raised in June when France chairs the Security Council. A deal would be embarrassing for the US and Tehran.  The US has been pushing hard for sanctions and Tehran has been its usual strutting self.  At the end of the day, the US can get over the embarrassment because a solution would be a vindication of its Iran policy.  Tehran not so much. Which is why I am not convinced the negotiations have any chance of success.

The fact is, Turkey and Iran are not strategic partners and both have geo-political aims for dominance in the Middle East.  Iran has a military budget the size of Finland's and is an economic mess. Turkey is a major military and economic power that just happens to anchor NATO in the east. For Tehran to agree to a fuel swap would deliver a huge diplomatic plum to Turkey, enhance its prestige and allow it to reach deep into a region in which Iran would like to compete and control.  The deal won't happen without some intense bargaining.

There is a downside risk for Turkey in its attempt to work with Iran.  Failure to broker this deal will tarnish Turkey's image as a regional leader.  It has been unable to arrive at a successful solution among Israel, Syria and the Palestinians and is already seen in the West as being just a little too supportive of Iranian ambitions. Failure to move Iran to accept a fuel swap deal acceptable to the West will put Ankara in an awkward position when sanctions come to a vote in the UN in two months time where it will likely abstain.

Foreign Policy and the State of the Union

I've read a number of commentaries regarding the absence of foreign policy remarks in President Obama's State of the Union message. Perhaps not directly, but indirectly all the emphasis on economic growth in the United States is proximate to the foreign policy strategy of the country.

Some time in the distant past, the New York Times conducted a poll (this is from memory, so no link) which posited questions that, simply put, asked about the public interest in national as opposed to international as a way of judging the emphasis that should be put - at the time - on network news programming. The results were surprising inasmuch as when national affairs, and specifically economic matters, were put in the context of international effect - job losses to Mexico, drops in industrial production to China and the like. The responses clearly showed that public interest in international matters increased when put in a national economic context.

Consequently, for political scientists to bemoan the strong emphasis on national economic matters is misplaced. First, the US public is clearly focused on the economic state of the union. They are not interested in and would not take kindly to the President giving more that short shrift to mentioning a US foreign policy agenda. Welcome, ladies and gentlemen academics, to politics.

More than that, however, is the fundamental fact that the US must get its economy in order if its foreign policy goals are to succeed. Economic matters - together with the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq - make it difficult to deal with Russian expansionism through support for Poland and the Baltics, finding a non-military solution on the Iranian nuclear issue and especially working on a Middle East settlement. The latter has suffered in particular since US policy, which had promised to put pressure on the Israeli government to stop illegal settlement construction (West Bank settlements are a violation of international law), has clearly been dropped from the agenda.

So, economic issues in the US directly affect its foreign policy choices. The linkage is abundantly clear and the State of the Union had the right emphasis.

Predictions

And off we go.

In the 1st year of the next decade (yeah, yeah, I know - it really starts in 2011. Well, that's not the common usage, so live with it.) I'll indulge in a couple of predictions.

Prediction 1 - The last free and fair election in Ukraine will be in January if Yanukovich wins so he can fulfill his threat to end "democracy".

Prediction 2 - The new Russian empire will expand and consolidate its hold on Central Asia, Ukraine and the South Caucuses.

Prediction 3 - The US will increase its military footprint in the Baltics and Poland to counter the newly imperial Russia.

Prediction 4 - Turkey will flex its newly found military, economic and (most importantly) cultural muscle in the Middle East, most of the time against the wishes of the US and Israel.

Prediction 5 - Iran will continue to experience shocks to its social system with a concomitant reduction in its ability to interfere abroad until it reaches a tipping point - at which time they will do something stupid.

Prediction 6 - There will be a ground assault on Somali pirates.

Prediction 7 - The "surge" in Afghanistan will not achieve its intended goals, and the Afghan military will continue to be the phantom army of the 21st century.

Prediction 8 - Political relations between Germany and the US will continue their slide as Germany becomes more reliant on Russia for energy and trade.

Prediction 9 - The Israeli government will continue its illegal construction activities on Palestinian land despite international condemnation and new fighting will erupt between Hezbollah and Israel.

Prediction 10 - All the previous predictions will change as the inevitable chaos theory takes over.

Welcome to the next decade.

The Turkish Armenia Protocols

Without question, both Turkey and Armenia are moving toward a mutual understanding while pinching their respective noses. I have long said that the relationship between Ankara and Yerevan was unsustainable for a variety of reasons.

First, the Nagorno-Kharabakh issue was not going to be settled on terms that either Yerevan or Baku liked. While working in Armenia for three years I found that the consensus expressed was that the NK should - and indeed could not be returned to Azerbaijan. However, the parallel consensus was that Armenia should not keep its military presence in the areas bordering the NK. They felt that the NK was Armenia but acknowledged that the occupied areas were exactly that - occupied and should be returned. This may ultimately be part of the deal. In addition, for all the bluster coming from Baku, they were not going to start another war if only because they would run smack into Russian border guards and Turkey would not back them up. That is why it recently proposed that the NK become semi-independent.

Second, Armenia is landlocked, poor and cannot grow economically with closed borders. They mistrust Iran and are not particularly close to Georgia whom they felt indulged in a great deal of profiteering during the war at the expense of Armenia despite being coreligionists. Businesses in Eastern Turkey have long wanted access to and across Armenia and Armenia needs the trade that will result - particularly if it then has additional access to the Black Sea and is not forced to use Georgian ports.

Finally, Turkey would like this diversion ended. It is a rising power in the Caucuses and Central Asia, not to mention the elephant in the room in the Middle East. Turkey is a competitor with Iran and is a democratic country - more so than any of its neighbors. The beginning of the end of this problem would allow Turkey to concentrate on expanding its influence, likely at the expense of Iran and Russia even though Russia wants a hold on Armenia.

The Armenia diaspora is demonstrating actively against any rapprochement. But then, I have always observed that, aside from summer vacations, they don't have to live in Armenia but can retreat to their pleasant California or French homes where they have running water, electricity 24 hours a day and incomes that exceed $35 a month. The Armenians, left to themselves, would have sorted out their international relations some time ago.

Settlements and compromises usually come gradually in diplomatic affairs. Finally, a major step appears to be on the verge of happening. Good.

Remnants of Neo-cons put on notice

Image via Wikipedia

Just in case the pathetic dregs of the neo-cons have missed the point because they can't hear over their incessant drumbeating for war with Iran there is this.

Characterizing an attack on Iran as "insanity" is probably too soft a term. Understand one thing - the US needs Turkey for a variety of reasons. Everyone got the point during the Bush Iraq War of Choice when Turkey turned down a troop transit request. Turkey is a key - if not the key - player in the Middle East. It is best to pay attention.

The PKK Plan for Peace

The details of the plan have been leaked. A key point is Abdullah Öcalan's proposal to create "an entity similar to a democratic nation and to be organized in different fields of life such as sport, education and religion. This entity will similarly have the right to establish its own parliament and municipality if it can, according to Öcalan. He also dismissed the federal-state system in northern Iraq, finding it noncompliant with his model."

The chances of the Turkish government agreeing to this part of the plan are nil.

Notice: Newt Gingrich is a Private Citizen with NO POWER

Image by Getty Images via Daylife

The other day I said that I thought it would be a good idea to tone down the rhetoric about Iran. In line with that, all foreign readers, particularly in the Middle East should understand a very important fact:

Republican Newt Gingrich is not a member of the US Government. He is a private citizen. To call him eccentric is kind. The fact that news organizations continue to give him air time (in this case Al Jazeera) is the mystery of the decade. He is a disgraced former member of the House of Representatives, has no power and his ideas will not be implemented. Particularly those involving blowing up Iranian oil refineries (even though he thinks there is only one that produces gasoline).

This has been a public service message. That is all.