Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

ANKARA: Is Turkish Foreign Policy For Sale?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • ANKARA: Is Turkish Foreign Policy For Sale?

    IS TURKISH FOREIGN POLICY FOR SALE?
    by Ibrahim Karagul

    Yeni Safak
    Feb 1 2012
    Turkey

    [translated from Turkish]

    Maj Gen Yahya Rahim Safevi, the military advisor to Iran's religious
    leader Ayatollah Ali Hamaney, asserted that Turkey received billions
    of dollars from the Qatari administration in order to create a problem
    for Syria. This is a shocking allegation, an extremely disturbing,
    crass and inappropriate remark. Naturally, this is going to be
    refuted, but will that be enough? Has the Syria issue reduced the
    way two countries regard one another to this level? If the problem
    is Syria we should take a look at what is going on before discussing
    the Iranian general's comments.

    It would appear that the end is in sight in Syria. There is still
    intense fighting in some town and cities in Syria, certain areas have
    fallen into opposition hands, in Russia the formula to get all sides
    to the table was rejected by opponents and there is speculation in
    the press that Beshar al-Asad's family is trying to flee. And so
    the overall opinion is that the end is in sight for the Damascus
    administration.

    Syria is a knot for everybody. It is very difficult to unravel. Even
    if it were to be fixed, what comes next might be even tougher.

    Everything is in some way connected to Syria from the Middle East's
    new power structure to the Kurdish issue, from the future of Iran's
    position in the region to what Qatar is banking on, from Arab League
    initiatives to Turkey's future in the region and from Russia's presence
    in the Mediterranean to Israel's perceptions of the threat...

    Naturally, we are watching every development regarding this country,
    all the effects spilling out of the country and all the very lethal
    scenarios. But mostly, we are watching them from the standpoint of
    Syria-Iran and Syria-Turkey relations. According to Iran, the Syrian
    administration has to stay on but according to Turkey it absolutely
    has to go.

    Just how these two tough and resolved attitudes pan out will perhaps
    produce the most dramatic consequences for the region. It must
    be because so many are looking at the matter in this way that it
    suddenly became a sectarian issue. Everybody knows that dividing the
    region into ethnic and sectarian camps spells suicide and everybody
    is issuing warnings against this. It might not take on this dimension
    but many countries are seriously taking advantage of these divisions
    in their own politics.

    When Iran added Iraq to its long-existing line of solidarity with
    Syria and established a line that was strong enough to sever all of
    Turkey's ties with the south, this perhaps caused the Syria issue
    to become more intense. From its own perspective Turkey is thinking
    this: This line of solidarity extending from Iran to the shores of the
    Mediterranean is largely being shaped on sectarian identities. This
    future might well be powerful enough to sever Turkey's ties with the
    Middle East entirely. Just like with Turkey's ties to Central Asia.

    Ankara's ties with Central Asia are limited to Nahchivan and this
    is one of the serious outcomes of Iran's proximity to Armenia and in
    particular centuries of solidarity with Russia.

    Turkey's relations with Iran have developed significantly in recent
    years. Serious partnerships have been forged in economic and security
    terms. But the Syria issue could threaten these relations. There
    is silence in the way Tehran views the internal conflict in Syria,
    but tacit support could well sabotage relations.

    The general's statement shows that Iran's position on the developments
    in Syria and the way it regards Turkey could well become a problem.

    Maj Gen Yahya Rahim Safevi can openly say that Turkey received billions
    of dollars from the Qatari administration to create a problem for
    Syria. According to him, "The United States gave Turkey, Qatar and
    Saudi Arabia roles to play so that developments in the region would
    play out to the detriment of Iran but in favor of US interests.

    According to some reports, the Qatari administration gave Ankara
    billions of dollars in aid to create problems for Syria."

    Immediately afterwards, the Farsi News Agency attempted a correction
    in its English language section and made no mention of Safevi's
    allegations of "money" for Turkey. I think that Tehran is going to
    refute this conversation. That is what usually happens. A statement
    is made then it is immediately refuted saying things like, "a personal
    opinion not binding on the Iranian administration."

    The problem here is not the allegation that the United States gave
    roles to Turkey and a few other countries to play. These kinds of
    allegations can and do occur, and are debated. Ultimately, the Syria
    question is being discussed in many forms from the Greater Middle
    East Initiative to the Nusayri minority regime.

    However, to allege that one country took millions of dollars to create
    a civil war in Turkey is extremely faulty, malicious, prejudicial
    and unseemly.

    We can slam every one of Turkey's policies, question them and pour
    scorn on them. A good many people do that anyway. However, it is a
    very ugly situation to look at this country as one that sold itself
    for a few billion dollars.

    Even if that comment is refuted it is clear that Tehran has an axe
    to grind with Turkey over Syria. It needs to address this problem
    rather than issue a denial.

    [translated from Turkish]

Working...
X