Wednesday
Oct212009
Turkey's Ambitions and US Plans: Obama Draws the Line on Israel
Wednesday, October 21, 2009 at 8:58
Israel-Turkey Crisis: Obama Intervenes
Receive our latest updates by email or RSS SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FEED
Buy Us A Cup of Coffee? Help Enduring America Expand Its Coverage and Analysis
In January, Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan walked out of a session at the Davos Summit after telling off Israeli President Shimon Peres over Israel's invasion of Gaza. That was the most striking picture of Turkey’s so-called “strategic depth strategy”, developed by Ahmet Davutoglu, a personal advisor to Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan before he was appointed Foreign Minister in May.
Turkey’s initiative to consolidate its "relative autonomy" was far more than an effort to appear pro-Palestinian in the eyes of Middle Eastern people. It came as the United States was suffering from the complications of military occupations in Iraq and Afghanistan and from the tensions of its political conflict with Iran. The emerging financial crisis was bringing new troubles for Western powers, especially Washington. This, to be blunt, was a Turkish effort, led by Erdogan, to establish its independence of action at a conjunction of international and regional events.
Ironically, Turkey’s interest in strengthening its authority in its region, even though it was propelled by American weakness, was not unwelcome to the US. The Obama Administration was grateful for Ankara’s initiatives in mediating talks between Damascus and Tel Aviv, for its bridging role between the West and Iran, and for the willingness to host Israeli and Palestinian leaders. While Turkey was establishing independence, it was not being "revisionist" to the point where it threatened Washington's position. The US would have reason to worry if Turkey's approach shifted from a stimulus for the peace process to pressure that would limit and gradually erode Israel's position.
Still, there were always the problems of symbolism.
The walkout in Davos was the first and most sensational image of a putdown for Tel Aviv. Obama was able to calm the situation when he spoke in Ankara in April:
However, Davos was not forgotten by the Netanyahu Government. That is why apparently minor "cultural" incidents, such as the broadcast of a Turkish series portraying Israeli soldiers as evil creatures shooting innocent children, as well as the political snub of cancelled military exercises has elevated tensions dramatically. And it is why Obama has had to make another intervention, this time through a phone call to Turkish President Abdullah Gul.
So why would Turkey, having made its point at Davos, risk a conflict with the US through renewed public animosity vis-a-vis Israel?Foreign Minister Davutoglu offered the answer in an interview with CNN. Just as Gaza War propelled Turkey's strategy for "strategic depth" because of the political advantage it offered in talks with Middle Eastern countries, so the renewal of the Gaza issue --- this time over the Goldstone Report and the continued Israeli obstacles to political and economic development in the area --- presented another opportunity:
However, Turkey's decision to risk causing the US a bit of discomfort can be explained by other issues: the dialogue with Armenia and the Kurdish problem. Washington, long plagued by the complications of the two situations for Turkey's place in the "West", wanted resolutions. As long as Ankara moved toward settlements --- which it did with the signing of the Armenian protocols last week, then the US would be satisfied with the big victory and could ignore the lesser challenge regarding Israel.
The Israeli reaction to the Turkish series, however, was too much for the US to ignore, especially given Netanyahu's public criticism. The tension between Washington's two democracies in the region was now jeopardising the US vision of the peace process. Israeli decisionmakers were using the “anti-Semitic” atmosphere, particularly after the endorsement of the Goldstone Report by the UN Human Rights Council, to justify a halt to talks, and Turkey's activities were offering support for that pretext.
And it appears that the Obama phone call is already having the desired effect. While there is still tension with rumors that Israeli ministers will not attend Turkish Ambassador's 29 October celebration of Turkish’s foundation in 1923, Tel Aviv's also announced that it will buy water from Turkey amidst reports that Israeli reserves will soon be exhausted. Israeli Army Radio is also reporting that Ankara is sending a new ambassador to Israel to improve the diplomatic atmosphere.
Up to now, Washington has been content with Turkey’s non-revisionist expansion of its regional position, even if this was propped up by symbolic snubs of Israel. Ankara crossed a line, however, and had to be told so by the US President: Turkey's postures stop when they threaten the Israeli-Palestinian peace process. Presumably, with that Obama reminder, Turkey can return to the proper strategic path in the Middle East, even if there are periodic objections from Benjamin Netanyahu.
Receive our latest updates by email or RSS SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FEED
Buy Us A Cup of Coffee? Help Enduring America Expand Its Coverage and Analysis
In January, Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan walked out of a session at the Davos Summit after telling off Israeli President Shimon Peres over Israel's invasion of Gaza. That was the most striking picture of Turkey’s so-called “strategic depth strategy”, developed by Ahmet Davutoglu, a personal advisor to Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan before he was appointed Foreign Minister in May.Turkey’s initiative to consolidate its "relative autonomy" was far more than an effort to appear pro-Palestinian in the eyes of Middle Eastern people. It came as the United States was suffering from the complications of military occupations in Iraq and Afghanistan and from the tensions of its political conflict with Iran. The emerging financial crisis was bringing new troubles for Western powers, especially Washington. This, to be blunt, was a Turkish effort, led by Erdogan, to establish its independence of action at a conjunction of international and regional events.
Ironically, Turkey’s interest in strengthening its authority in its region, even though it was propelled by American weakness, was not unwelcome to the US. The Obama Administration was grateful for Ankara’s initiatives in mediating talks between Damascus and Tel Aviv, for its bridging role between the West and Iran, and for the willingness to host Israeli and Palestinian leaders. While Turkey was establishing independence, it was not being "revisionist" to the point where it threatened Washington's position. The US would have reason to worry if Turkey's approach shifted from a stimulus for the peace process to pressure that would limit and gradually erode Israel's position.
Still, there were always the problems of symbolism.
The walkout in Davos was the first and most sensational image of a putdown for Tel Aviv. Obama was able to calm the situation when he spoke in Ankara in April:
In the Middle East, we share the goal of a lasting peace between Israel and its neighbors. The United States and Turkey can help the Palestinians and Israelis make this journey. Like the United States, Turkey has been a friend and partner in Israel’s quest for security. And like the United States, you seek a future of opportunity and statehood for the Palestinians.
However, Davos was not forgotten by the Netanyahu Government. That is why apparently minor "cultural" incidents, such as the broadcast of a Turkish series portraying Israeli soldiers as evil creatures shooting innocent children, as well as the political snub of cancelled military exercises has elevated tensions dramatically. And it is why Obama has had to make another intervention, this time through a phone call to Turkish President Abdullah Gul.
So why would Turkey, having made its point at Davos, risk a conflict with the US through renewed public animosity vis-a-vis Israel?Foreign Minister Davutoglu offered the answer in an interview with CNN. Just as Gaza War propelled Turkey's strategy for "strategic depth" because of the political advantage it offered in talks with Middle Eastern countries, so the renewal of the Gaza issue --- this time over the Goldstone Report and the continued Israeli obstacles to political and economic development in the area --- presented another opportunity:
We hope that the situation in Gaza will be improved, that the situation will be back to the diplomatic track. And that will create a new atmosphere in Turkish-Israeli relations as well. But in the existing situation, of course, we are criticizing this approach, [the] Israeli approach.
However, Turkey's decision to risk causing the US a bit of discomfort can be explained by other issues: the dialogue with Armenia and the Kurdish problem. Washington, long plagued by the complications of the two situations for Turkey's place in the "West", wanted resolutions. As long as Ankara moved toward settlements --- which it did with the signing of the Armenian protocols last week, then the US would be satisfied with the big victory and could ignore the lesser challenge regarding Israel.
The Israeli reaction to the Turkish series, however, was too much for the US to ignore, especially given Netanyahu's public criticism. The tension between Washington's two democracies in the region was now jeopardising the US vision of the peace process. Israeli decisionmakers were using the “anti-Semitic” atmosphere, particularly after the endorsement of the Goldstone Report by the UN Human Rights Council, to justify a halt to talks, and Turkey's activities were offering support for that pretext.
And it appears that the Obama phone call is already having the desired effect. While there is still tension with rumors that Israeli ministers will not attend Turkish Ambassador's 29 October celebration of Turkish’s foundation in 1923, Tel Aviv's also announced that it will buy water from Turkey amidst reports that Israeli reserves will soon be exhausted. Israeli Army Radio is also reporting that Ankara is sending a new ambassador to Israel to improve the diplomatic atmosphere.
Up to now, Washington has been content with Turkey’s non-revisionist expansion of its regional position, even if this was propped up by symbolic snubs of Israel. Ankara crossed a line, however, and had to be told so by the US President: Turkey's postures stop when they threaten the Israeli-Palestinian peace process. Presumably, with that Obama reminder, Turkey can return to the proper strategic path in the Middle East, even if there are periodic objections from Benjamin Netanyahu.