2 March 2015
In Turkey, what political leaders say carries weight for a day. This is because they speak almost every day; address big crowds probably every couple of days. Public memory cannot cope. The language they use is, more often than not, combative and polarizing. Glaring contradictions are a recurring and popular theme for the media. But nobody really cares. Some say “it was then, this is now”. Mostly we don’t even bother to say that. Continue reading
1 March 2015
Turkey‘s security challenges have always been diverse and tough.
During the Cold War Turkey was NATO’s southern flank and shouldered heavy defense responsibilities. When the Cold War was over, Turkey found itself in the middle of three major conflict areas, namely the Balkans, the Caucasus and the Middle East.
The disintegration of Yugoslavia was a burden on Turkey because the Balkans are Turkey’s gateway to Europe. Our trade, transport and communication links were adversely affected. Thousands of Bosnian refugees came over. Following the signing of the Dayton Agreement, Turkey participated in stabilization forces (IFOR and SFOR) deployed in Bosnia and Herzegovina.
Instability in the Caucasus, the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict and Georgia’s war with Russia also created problems for us. These remain. Continue reading
24 February 201
Two days ago a large Turkish military column entered Syria to bring back to Turkey the remains of Suleyman Shah and evacuate the some 40 soldiers guarding his tomb.
Suleyman Shah was the grandfather of the founder of the Ottoman Empire, Osman Ghazi. He was drowned while trying to cross the Euphrates River in early 13th Century and buried nearby.
So long as Syria was part of the Empire his tomb was not a problem. But when the Ottomans lost the First World War and signed, on 10 August 1920, the Treaty of Sevres which carved up the Empire including most of today’s Turkey, other lands including Syria were gone. The Treaty of Sevres was the darkest page of our history. Continue reading
21 February 2015
The US is constantly trying to promote the impression that there is indeed a broad and solid coalition determined to “degrade and defeat” ISIL. The reality is somewhat different. For the time being all we have is a group of countries carrying out air strikes against ISIL targets. Some of these are Western countries not only participating in air strikes but also extending military assistance to ground forces, namely the Iraqi army and the Kurdish peshmerga. Others are regional countries participating in air strikes without much enthusiasm. These are keeping a low profile about their involvement because they fear a backlash at home. Their ambivalence may become more obvious if and when Baghdad starts a ground offensive. Nevertheless, their participation in such an offensive is essential to ensuring the broad, multi-faith nature of the coalition.
Continue reading
20 February 2015
The failure to declare an “immediate” cease-fire at the end of the last round of what one may call the “Minsk Process” was not a good sign. The fact that the “Package of Measures for the Implementation of the Minsk Agreements” left a lot of detail to be filled in later was also an indication of difficulties encountered during the seventeen hour negotiation marathon of the four leaders.
The situation in Debaltseve could not have been a detail because of its strategic value as shown by the intensity of the fighting around it. Now, there will be conflicting interpretations of what was agreed or not agreed and why in Minsk and of course mutual accusations. These have already started. Continue reading
13 February 2015
At the end of meeting in the Belarusian capital, Presidents Putin, Poroshenko, Hollande and Chancellor Merkel issued the “Declaration of Minsk in Support of the Package of Measures for the Implementation of the Minsk Agreements”. They reiterated their belief that there is no alternative to a peaceful solution.In spite of the mounting death toll this good to hear.
The situation on the ground favors the rebels. This is never going to change because Russia is right there, the US far away and Europe in the middle, trying to avoid further and costly trouble. Continue reading
12 February 2015
Iran is a country with an impressive historical and cultural heritage. It has rich natural resources, a strategic location and a population of 76 million.
Following the ousting of the Pahlavi dynasty in 1979, Iran’s principal concern was ensuring the survival of the regime and exporting the Revolution. Turkey was a particular target. This, however, did not close all doors to cooperation. Turkey maintained its political dialogue and economic links with Iran as a neighbor. Ankara followed a policy of “active neutrality” during the eight year Iraq-Iran war gaining the trust of both sides. So much so that, Turkey represented Iraqi diplomatic interests in Tehran and Iranian diplomatic interests in Baghdad. Continue reading
7 February 2015
A group of distinguished scholars and former practitioners from the Atlantic Council, the Brookings Institution, the Center for a New American Security, and the Chicago Council on Global Affairs have recently published a report (*) which outlines the background to the crisis over Ukraine and offers specific recommendations for steps that Washington and NATO should take to strengthen Ukraine’s defenses and thereby enhance its ability to deter further Russian aggression.
The most important of the group’s recommendations is that the U.S. government should immediately change its policy from prohibiting lethal assistance to allowing provision of defensive military assistance, which may include lethal assistance. The report also argues that since bolstering Ukraine’s defenses should not be a U.S.-only responsibility, NATO members should also increase their military assistance to Ukraine, with a view to meeting the priority needs identified above. It is suggested in this connection that NATO allies who have former Soviet/Warsaw Pact equipment and weapons systems similar to or compatible with those now operated by the Ukrainian military should consider contributing those to Kiev’s defense capabilities. Continue reading
7 February 2015
According to OIC’s official website, the Organization and its Secretary General issued twelve statements of condemnation during the past month. Five of these were related to developments in non-OIC countries such as the terrorist attack on Charlie Hebdo and its publication of cartoons of Prophet Mohammad. The Organization condemned both. The remaining seven pertained to developments within the Organization’s own domain, namely Moslem countries. These were the murders committed by ISIS, terrorist attacks in the Sinai, Nigeria, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia.
The second set of statements, beyond their immediate purpose, also underlined, though indirectly, the biggest challenge facing the OIC: Putting an end to the sectarian strife raging in the Middle East.
Is this within terms of reference of the Organization? This is what its Charter says: Continue reading
3 February 2015
Turkey’s traditional foreign policy, bitterly criticized by the present Government for having betrayed Turkey’s potential, stood on pillars. Our relations with the United States and the European Union constituted the first two. A third one was our relations with our neighbors and the region. Prominently among those was Russia. Since the world is in a constant process of transformation Turkey was searching for new pillars to add to the existing ones. Relations with China, India and other emerging powers offered new prospects. Continue reading
Diplomatic Opinion - Ali Tuygan 