Tweet
Mideast Mirror
May 13, 2005
Erdogan looks to Washington via Tel-Aviv
Under pressure from all sides, the Turkish PM's visit to Israel was
intended to recoup lost ground with Washington, says Fahmi Houeidi in
Asharq al-Awsat
Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan's recent trip to Israel
was met with widespread indignation in the Arab world, writes
Islamist commentator Fahmi Houeidi in the Saudi daily Asharq
al-Awsat.
DIMINISHED POPULARITY: Many Arabs had expected the Islamist Erdogan
to deal more harshly with the Israelis than his predecessors. That is
why it is no exaggeration to say that the popularity of Erdogan and
his Justice and Development Party (AKP) has diminished considerably
among Arabs as a result of his recent sojourn.
And since I was in Istanbul at the time, I can vouch that his
popularity has plummeted even inside Turkey itself-especially among
his core constituency.
I have to confess that Erdogan's visit to Israel came as a shock to
me at first; I simply did not expect him to take such a step, leading
a top-level delegation of government ministers, senior officials, and
businessmen to Jerusalem. It was common knowledge that the Turkish
prime minister was reluctant to travel to Israel, despite the many
invitations he had received in the past. When Erdogan won the last
Turkish election, the Israeli ambassador to Turkey hurriedly
contacted his office to arrange an appointment for him to
congratulate the new prime minister. But Erdogan refused to meet with
the Israeli envoy until after he had met with all Arab and Muslim
ambassadors. On his last trip to Russia, Israeli Prime Minister Ariel
Sharon asked to stop over in Ankara and meet with Erdogan, but the
latter declined, citing prior commitments.
When Israel assassinated Hamas leader Sheikh Ahmad Yassin, Erdogan
described it as a 'terrorist state.' The separation fence Israel is
building has been described by the Turkish prime minister as a 'wall
of shame.'
These episodes led to a chilling of ties between the two countries, a
fact that was reflected in the decision by the Turkish national
Security Council to cancel a joint military industrialization project
(because of its unfeasibility), and by the Israeli decision to
abrogate an agreement to purchase 50 million cubic meters of water a
year from Turkey (because of high costs).
At the time, the Israeli press reported that importing water from
Turkey would cost twice as much as desalination. Tensions between
Ankara and Tel Aviv grew when it was disclosed that Israeli
intelligence was active among the Kurds in northern Iraq; the Turks
were so incensed that they threatened to break off a deal to
modernize weaponry they had signed with the Israelis.
So it can be clearly seen that Erdogan's trip to Israel bucked a
trend that had established itself over some time. What was behind it?
I traveled to Turkey to find out, and this was what I came up with:
The Americans are still angry with Erdogan and the AKP government;
administration hawks have still not forgotten how the Turkish
government refused to allow U.S. forces access through Turkey at the
time of the Iraq war. The Americans have not forgiven Turkey for
rejecting an offer of USD 1 billion as compensation for the damages
they sustained as a result of the conflict in Iraq (Turkish
politicians rejected that offer because they felt that conditions
attached to it constituted interference in their country's internal
affairs).
In addition, Washington has repeatedly expressed dissatisfaction with
Turkey's growing ties with Syria especially at a time when the U.S.
was exerting pressure on Damascus.
In spite of efforts to repair relations between Washington and
Ankara, it seems that ties have not been restored to normal. Erdogan
asked to meet with President Bush three months ago, but has not
received a reply from the White House yet-although Bush did meet with
the Turkish leader as soon as his party won the last Turkish general
election even before Erdogan became prime minister.
In addition, Erdogan and the AKP are facing mounting domestic
pressures from so many quarters that it is difficult to believe that
they are unconnected. In fact, a senior AKP official recently
remarked that a certain party outside Turkey had pressed a button and
set off in motion the following developments:
-More than 20 AKP MPs have resigned their positions in the party.
While these resignations had not practical implications on Erdogan's
grip on power, they were serious nonetheless.
-Chief of Staff Gen. Hilmi Ozkok broke his silence to warn of the
growth of 'Islamic Reactionism' in Turkey. Ozkok stressed that Turkey
is not an Islamic but a secular state. He reminded Turks that the
army has not abandoned its sole as the guardian of the country's
secular constitution.
-State President Ahmed Necdet Sezer mirrored Ozkok's views, warning
of the threat of 'creeping Reactionism.'
-Constitutional Court chief justice Mustafa Bumen declared that even
if the constitution were to be amended, it would still be illegal for
women to wear scarves in government institutions.
These attacks surprised even secular Turks, such as Ertugrul Ozkok,
editor in chief of Hurriyet. The Armenian question is another sword
hanging above the Turkish government's head. The Armenians are
energetically trying to designate the massacres carried out by the
Ottomans against them in 1915 as genocide-which will entitle them to
compensation and will lead to Turkey being censured. They succeeded
in persuading the European parliament to pass such a resolution back
in the late 1980s. A similar resolution is now pending in the U.S.
congress. Designating the Armenian massacres as genocide would be
catastrophic for Turkey, because it would then have to pay
astronomical sums in compensation. Should that happen, a political
earthquake will undoubtedly hit Turkey, which would conceivably lead
to the fall of the government.
The Armenian genocide bill has been stagnant in Congress largely
thanks to the efforts of the Jewish lobby in Washington. Moreover,
the Turkish government, upon reopening Ottoman files closed by
Ataturk in the 1920s, discovered that many documents refute the
Armenians' allegations and seem to absolve the Ottoman authorities of
culpability in the massacres.
I was not surprised to hear from many Turkish friends who maintain
ties with senior AKP officials that confronted with such pressures,
Erdogan had no choice but to improve ties with Israel. According to
the Turkish prime minister's calculations, traveling to Israel would
(a) satisfy the United States, (b) improve ties with the Jewish
state, and (c) express gratitude to the Jewish lobby in Washington.
Moreover, Erdogan also believes that the visit would ease some of the
domestic pressures exerted upon him by Turkish friends of the United
States and Israel.
However, an Ankara insider told me that had the Arab world been more
supportive of the AKP government, Erdogan would have had more options
to choose from. As it was, he did not have any.
May 13, 2005
Erdogan looks to Washington via Tel-Aviv
Under pressure from all sides, the Turkish PM's visit to Israel was
intended to recoup lost ground with Washington, says Fahmi Houeidi in
Asharq al-Awsat
Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan's recent trip to Israel
was met with widespread indignation in the Arab world, writes
Islamist commentator Fahmi Houeidi in the Saudi daily Asharq
al-Awsat.
DIMINISHED POPULARITY: Many Arabs had expected the Islamist Erdogan
to deal more harshly with the Israelis than his predecessors. That is
why it is no exaggeration to say that the popularity of Erdogan and
his Justice and Development Party (AKP) has diminished considerably
among Arabs as a result of his recent sojourn.
And since I was in Istanbul at the time, I can vouch that his
popularity has plummeted even inside Turkey itself-especially among
his core constituency.
I have to confess that Erdogan's visit to Israel came as a shock to
me at first; I simply did not expect him to take such a step, leading
a top-level delegation of government ministers, senior officials, and
businessmen to Jerusalem. It was common knowledge that the Turkish
prime minister was reluctant to travel to Israel, despite the many
invitations he had received in the past. When Erdogan won the last
Turkish election, the Israeli ambassador to Turkey hurriedly
contacted his office to arrange an appointment for him to
congratulate the new prime minister. But Erdogan refused to meet with
the Israeli envoy until after he had met with all Arab and Muslim
ambassadors. On his last trip to Russia, Israeli Prime Minister Ariel
Sharon asked to stop over in Ankara and meet with Erdogan, but the
latter declined, citing prior commitments.
When Israel assassinated Hamas leader Sheikh Ahmad Yassin, Erdogan
described it as a 'terrorist state.' The separation fence Israel is
building has been described by the Turkish prime minister as a 'wall
of shame.'
These episodes led to a chilling of ties between the two countries, a
fact that was reflected in the decision by the Turkish national
Security Council to cancel a joint military industrialization project
(because of its unfeasibility), and by the Israeli decision to
abrogate an agreement to purchase 50 million cubic meters of water a
year from Turkey (because of high costs).
At the time, the Israeli press reported that importing water from
Turkey would cost twice as much as desalination. Tensions between
Ankara and Tel Aviv grew when it was disclosed that Israeli
intelligence was active among the Kurds in northern Iraq; the Turks
were so incensed that they threatened to break off a deal to
modernize weaponry they had signed with the Israelis.
So it can be clearly seen that Erdogan's trip to Israel bucked a
trend that had established itself over some time. What was behind it?
I traveled to Turkey to find out, and this was what I came up with:
The Americans are still angry with Erdogan and the AKP government;
administration hawks have still not forgotten how the Turkish
government refused to allow U.S. forces access through Turkey at the
time of the Iraq war. The Americans have not forgiven Turkey for
rejecting an offer of USD 1 billion as compensation for the damages
they sustained as a result of the conflict in Iraq (Turkish
politicians rejected that offer because they felt that conditions
attached to it constituted interference in their country's internal
affairs).
In addition, Washington has repeatedly expressed dissatisfaction with
Turkey's growing ties with Syria especially at a time when the U.S.
was exerting pressure on Damascus.
In spite of efforts to repair relations between Washington and
Ankara, it seems that ties have not been restored to normal. Erdogan
asked to meet with President Bush three months ago, but has not
received a reply from the White House yet-although Bush did meet with
the Turkish leader as soon as his party won the last Turkish general
election even before Erdogan became prime minister.
In addition, Erdogan and the AKP are facing mounting domestic
pressures from so many quarters that it is difficult to believe that
they are unconnected. In fact, a senior AKP official recently
remarked that a certain party outside Turkey had pressed a button and
set off in motion the following developments:
-More than 20 AKP MPs have resigned their positions in the party.
While these resignations had not practical implications on Erdogan's
grip on power, they were serious nonetheless.
-Chief of Staff Gen. Hilmi Ozkok broke his silence to warn of the
growth of 'Islamic Reactionism' in Turkey. Ozkok stressed that Turkey
is not an Islamic but a secular state. He reminded Turks that the
army has not abandoned its sole as the guardian of the country's
secular constitution.
-State President Ahmed Necdet Sezer mirrored Ozkok's views, warning
of the threat of 'creeping Reactionism.'
-Constitutional Court chief justice Mustafa Bumen declared that even
if the constitution were to be amended, it would still be illegal for
women to wear scarves in government institutions.
These attacks surprised even secular Turks, such as Ertugrul Ozkok,
editor in chief of Hurriyet. The Armenian question is another sword
hanging above the Turkish government's head. The Armenians are
energetically trying to designate the massacres carried out by the
Ottomans against them in 1915 as genocide-which will entitle them to
compensation and will lead to Turkey being censured. They succeeded
in persuading the European parliament to pass such a resolution back
in the late 1980s. A similar resolution is now pending in the U.S.
congress. Designating the Armenian massacres as genocide would be
catastrophic for Turkey, because it would then have to pay
astronomical sums in compensation. Should that happen, a political
earthquake will undoubtedly hit Turkey, which would conceivably lead
to the fall of the government.
The Armenian genocide bill has been stagnant in Congress largely
thanks to the efforts of the Jewish lobby in Washington. Moreover,
the Turkish government, upon reopening Ottoman files closed by
Ataturk in the 1920s, discovered that many documents refute the
Armenians' allegations and seem to absolve the Ottoman authorities of
culpability in the massacres.
I was not surprised to hear from many Turkish friends who maintain
ties with senior AKP officials that confronted with such pressures,
Erdogan had no choice but to improve ties with Israel. According to
the Turkish prime minister's calculations, traveling to Israel would
(a) satisfy the United States, (b) improve ties with the Jewish
state, and (c) express gratitude to the Jewish lobby in Washington.
Moreover, Erdogan also believes that the visit would ease some of the
domestic pressures exerted upon him by Turkish friends of the United
States and Israel.
However, an Ankara insider told me that had the Arab world been more
supportive of the AKP government, Erdogan would have had more options
to choose from. As it was, he did not have any.