Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

ANKARA: The Washington Scene For The New Ankara

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

  • ANKARA: The Washington Scene For The New Ankara

    THE WASHINGTON SCENE FOR THE NEW ANKARA
    by Ali H. Aslan

    Zaman
    June 27 2011
    Turkey

    [translated from Turkish]

    The Arab Spring, which is continuing with thunder, lightning,
    and downpours of rain, has also greatly increased the interest in
    Washington towards Turkey, the influence of which has been increasing
    in the region.

    We saw the most recent example of this at the annual Turkey conference
    held on Thursday by the Middle East Institute (MEI) think-tank. The
    organizers closed the registrations two days earlier because of the
    intense demand. There were those who used intermediaries to be able to
    attend, and there were even people who were turned away despite having
    turned up at the door. It was noteworthy that, despite the fact that
    at least five separate think-tanks have had open meetings on Turkey
    following the 12 June elections, there was still appetite for more.

    Increasing Interest in Turkey Noteworthy

    The interest in Turkey in Washington is not only changing
    quantitatively, but also qualitatively. To the "usual suspects,"
    a large number of new faces have been added. Young Americans whom I
    do not recognize at all come up to my side at meetings and suddenly
    start speaking with me in Turkish. The number of those who ascribe
    importance, in terms of their personal careers, to knowledge of
    Turkey and the Turkish language, is increasing. Turkey experts are
    being invited more frequently than before to provide their views in
    closed meetings within the government and in think-tanks.

    In the US capital, the topic of the Middle East, in particular, can no
    longer be taken up without discussing "what might Turkey say?" and
    "what will it do?" And heading up those asking these questions
    is no doubt President Barack Obama. Obama, following his election
    congratulation phone-call, telephoned Prime Minister Recep Tayyip
    Erdogan once again last Monday. In the discussion, an exchange of
    views took place regarding Syria. For the White House to keep the
    contact with Ankara warm does not, in my view, derive merely from
    its considering it important to listen. The desire to eliminate the
    possibility of encountering a surprise that might come from Turkey,
    whose foreign policy is becoming more independent, is also influential
    in this. Turkey's voting "no" on UN sanctions against Iran, when its
    abstaining had been expected as the worst-case possibility, very much
    astonished the White House. The Americans do not want to get another
    unpleasant surprise like this. The statement of Assistant Defence
    Secretary Alexander Vershbow, who expressed the views of the Obama
    administration in the MEI conference, which can be summarized in the
    form of "we can live with your independent foreign policy, as long as
    we do not encounter surprises," can be assessed from this standpoint.

    At the head of the areas in which the Obama administration does not
    want to encounter a Turkish surprise comes Syria. They are pleased,
    on the one hand, that Ankara has shown that the credit it was offering
    the [Bashar] Al-Asad regime was not unlimited, and that it has begun
    to follow a policy that is much more in tune with Washington's. On the
    other hand, and particularly due to the increase of military activity
    on the Turkish-Syrian border, they are looking into the question of
    "might the Turks at some point make a military move?" Secretary of
    State Hillary Clinton, by stating that she considered the actions
    of Syrian units near the Turkish border "very worrisome," indicated
    that this would increase the likelihood of a border clash and could
    negatively impact the situation of refugees.

    Military activity on the border of a NATO member will no doubt be
    closely followed by the Western allies, and particularly the United
    States. But for so much concern to be felt in Washington regarding
    Ankara's entering into a hot conflict is really a bit excessive. And
    one likely reason for the insistent proposals of support that the
    United States has been making to Ankara in terms of aid to the Syrian
    refugees is a desire not to remain outside developments, and in fact to
    control them. Meanwhile, one of the most problematic issues occupying
    the heads of people dealing with Turkey in Washington these days is
    that of the problems that have been experienced with Israel.

    Ambassador Vershbow, in his speech in which the messages were very
    finely crafted, stressed the importance of finding a "political
    solution" to the Israel-Turkish dispute. A general air of pessimism
    on this issue predominates in American foreign policy circles. The
    fact that the Mavi Marmara is not taking part in the Gaza flotilla
    has allowed everyone to relax a bit. And Israeli President [Benjamin]
    Netanyahu's sending an election congratulation message to Erdogan was
    also received positively. Ankara, even it does not back down on [its
    demands for] an apology and compensation, is expected to continue,
    at least in terms of rhetoric, the careful line it has displayed in
    the recent period.

    Anti-Turkish Circles Engaged

    Some Armenian and Greek groups, finding the conditions more propitious
    due to the fact that the Israel lobby, whose anger at Turkey continues,
    has not gone into action on our behalf, and is even covertly engaging
    in activities against us, have gotten encouraged.

    Two critical resolutions, on the "Armenian Genocide" and on Christian
    rights, have been introduced in the House of Representatives. Although
    the Turkish lobby in America is gradually growing stronger, it is
    not strong enough to be able to deal with hostile and dissatisfied
    lobbies in the foreseeable future. The Embassy is trying to do all
    that it can, but the new Ankara, particularly with the atmosphere
    of the 2012 election beginning in the United States, needs to pay
    attention to the Congress with the utmost sensitivity and gravity.

    Despite the advancing democracy and increasing freedoms in Turkey,
    propaganda being conducted such as to bring back to life the horrific
    message of the film Midnight Express, and with the contributions
    of the "White Turks'" intelligentsia as well, still maintains its
    influence in Washington. Moreover, we also cannot say that some
    problems cited in the human rights and religious freedom reports
    compiled by the US State Department, and which are also confirmed by
    respected international organizations as well, do not in fact take
    place. A Turkey that has eliminated its deficiencies in democracy
    and human rights would yet further increase its capability of action
    and providing inspiration in the international arena, including in
    its relations with the United States and the EU. It would deprive
    its opponents of important ammunition. In this regard, the new TBMM
    [Turkish Grand National Assembly] and cabinet, regardless of whether
    or not the constitution changes, should begin immediately to amend
    all the laws and provisions that give rise to human rights problems.

    Washington is slowly moving from the stages of denial, ridicule, and
    rejection of the process of the Turkey's re-emergence on the stage of
    history, after a lengthy interval, with their own identity, to the
    stage of acceptance, respect, and utilization. And this is giving
    rise to new opportunities with the United States for the new Ankara...




    From: A. Papazian
Working...
X