Category: Iran

Iraq and Turkey: Regional cooperation will change the region

Agustos 12, 2008 tarihli bir TDN makalesi: Ilginize

Tuesday, August 12, 2008

While Iraq is in great pain because our eastern neighbor has decided to follow Saddam’s path to nihilism, our northern neighbor extends a hopeful hand of friendship, trust and promising prosperity

Hussain SINJARI

  The last visit by a Turkish PM to our country was in 1990. Eighteen years later, a different Turkish PM comes to Baghdad. Recep Tayyip Erdoğan is Islamic yet secular, a modern and open-minded leader who considers the sacred texts to be good for worshipping, more of cultural or spiritual values rather than to do with strategy, economics or the administration of the state. Moreover, he and his party do not interfere in the lifestyle of the people or their choices of belief. He and his party respect the individual freedoms of women and men.

  The government of our country did very well when it received our guest and his delegation in the most welcoming way Baghdad has ever seen so far. This visit made history when both sides signed The Iraqi-Turkish High Strategic Cooperation Counci, which is due to meet three times a year chaired by both PMs. The sectors of the cooperation are vitally important and include energy, military industry, security and politics.

A historic visit:

  We know this historic visit was the fruit of good efforts of both President Jalal Talabani and Prime Minister Nori al Maliki. It came after the obvious success on the ground of the latest military/security operations in different places in Basrah, Baghdad, Ramadi, Mosul and elsewhere where criminal gangs used to terrorize the civilians.

  The visit of Erdoğan could not possibly take place without this security success. The writer of this article is a witness to this improvement through a number of tours and walks during the day and night in Baghdad. In Abu Nawas, the famous Baghdadi avenue with cafes and restaurants on the bank of the River Tigris, universally known for its mesguf, or grilled fish, I was very surprised to see hundreds of families out there. A private security company, The Sandi Group, is in charge of the security of the place, checking cars, watching for terrorists and keeping order.

  Turkey is a semi-European country with its democratically elected parliament; free, independent and critical media; active and genuine civil society organizations; and the progress it has made in the fields of agriculture, industry, education, tourism or services. All of this and more shall help to create a unique regional cooperation between Turkey and our country, which has the largest oil reserve in the world and the best human resources in the Middle East. Yet, due to the long decades of dictatorship under which we wasted our national wealth on armaments, the liberation of Palestine, lies of propaganda and other destructive practices, our country is almost a wasteland. This is a sad reality but must be changed. To change it we need this kind of strategic regional cooperation to put energies together to rebuild and reconstruct.

  The Kurdish element:

  Along the Iraqi-Turkish border, the Kurdish people live. This existence could be of a great help and serve as the bridge between Turkey and Iraq. The armed insurgency must come to an end and people must follow civilized practices and methods to express themselves, demand rights and demonstrate grievances. The State is not innocent and policies must be revised. And people listened to and cared for.

  The Turkomen in Iraq and Arabs in Turkey are other examples that diversity could and should be an element for strength and wealth.

  While Iraq is in great pain because our eastern neighbor has decided to follow Saddam’s path to nihilism, our northern neighbor extends a hopeful hand of friendship, trust and promising prosperity.

Basrah-Istanbul railway system:

  Here I come up with my proposal to both governments of Iraq and Turkey: Put as a top priority to run a most technologically modern and monumental railway between Basrah and Istanbul. And then a very modern highway for transport trucks and personal cars to connect Basrah to Istanbul. These two giant projects will attract large companies to invest while small businesses will flourish along the rail and the highway.

  In this way, Iraq will be linked to Europe via Istanbul and Turkey will be linked to the Gulf via Basrah.

  One does not need more than a glance to realize what a creation of wealth this should bring to the people of the two countries and for beyond — the Gulf and Europe.

  In our globalized world we need more tolerancy diplomacy. This new approach and concept means to find out common grounds according to mutual benefits regardless of differences in faiths, ideologies, ethnic or linguistic backgrounds. Iraq and Turkey and other states should explore the benefits of the acceptance of each other and recognition of each other’s rights. This is an application of the The Turkish-Iraqi High Strategic Cooperation to set an example for many others who are crippled by the evils of ideology.

  ………

  Hussain Sinjari is an Iraqi commentator based in Baghdad and the president of Tolerancy International. (www.tolerancy.org)



© 2005 Dogan Daily News Inc. www.turkishdailynews.com.tr

August 12, 2008
DALOGLU: Turkey’s regional influence

Perhaps too much to handle

Tulin Daloglu
Tuesday, August 12, 2008

OP-ED:

Nearly two weeks after Iran refused to yield to the demand by Germany, France, Britain, Russia, China and the United States that it stop developing nuclear technology that can lead to a nuclear weapon, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad will travel to a NATO country for the first time. Turkish President Abdullah Gul will meet the Iranian leader on Thursday in Istanbul. While Iran’s influence as a regional power has undeniably been enhanced by standing against the threats of new sanctions and continuing its nuclear program, Mr. Ahmadinejad’s visit to Turkey will further that image.

But what will Turks gain from it? At best, nothing. Furthermore, this visit is likely to cause trouble for Turkey.

Technically, the U.N. Security Council’s five permanent members and Germany unanimously agree that Iran should not have nuclear weapons. They differ in their tactics, but they agree that it is absolutely vital that Iran sees no positive side to trying to further its nuclear aims. Turkey’s political leaders, however, have chosen to see these high-level “talks” as a show of “good will” in the name of peace. Mr. Gul has also hosted Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir, who ordered genocide in Darfur, for the same reason. But a Turkish proverb suggests that talking is not always a virtue. Knowing when and how to stay “silent” is.

It’s one thing for Turkey to nurture relationships with its neighbors. No one, be they friend or foe of the ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) or any other Turkish political party, would deny that, at minimum, a civil relationship with other countries in the region can only be good for Turkey. But this current situation with Iran and the threat of it obtaining nuclear weapons is serious. And Turkey’s leaders, simply, may well be in over their heads.

Curiously, though, AKP is strongly supported by the Bush administration. The U.S. certainly did not remain silent about a Constitutional Court case that decided the future of the AKP. Now that the court has decided not to shutter the AKP, the Bush administration has complimented the strength of Turkish democracy. In fact, there is speculation in Turkey that the AKP must have been in contact with Washington about Mr. Ahmadinejad’s visit – though no evidence of such a communication exists. Turkey seems to be acting completely independent. While the White House is likely unhappy about the visit, U.S. officials continue to praise AKP leadership for its pro-active engagement with its neighbors.

In another scenario, it’s also possible that Turkey could sign a natural gas deal with Iran, violating America’s Iran Sanctions Act. If that happens, one can only wonder how Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice would react. Alas, she has been an exceptionally strong defender of AKP policies. Yet if Turkey signs that energy deal with Iran, the U.S. could end the November 2007 agreement that opened a new chapter of cooperation and intelligence sharing in the fight against PKK terrorism.

Furthermore, Mr. Gul often boasts that Turkey and Iran have not fought a war since the early 17th century. The facts of the Turkish history, however, suggest differently, like Turkey’s invasion of Tabriz during World War I. Yet Mr. Ahmadinejad has made it clear that unlike every other visiting dignitary, he will not visit the mausoleum of Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, Turkey’s founder, who created a secular republic in a Muslim nation. So Mr. Gul capitulated and instead invited him to Istanbul. So while these two leaders represent different forms of governments, they in fact seem to have much in common.

Turkish Foreign Minister Ali Babacan says that Turkey cannot stay silent on matters related to Iran, especially when fighting could be possible. Turkey refused to be used as a way into Iraq for the United States, and it certainly won’t be used to attack Iran either, Mr. Babacan says. However, Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan may be indicating a different circumstance. Mr. Erdogan admitted during a visit to Washington that he wished Turkey had cooperated with the U.S., because it would have made it easier for Turkey to defend its national security interests.Also, he blamed the opposition Republican People’s Party, CHP, for defeating the measure that proposed cooperation with the United States.

Surely, politicians tend to gravitate toward populist demagogy. We cannot know whether Mr. Erdogan really meant that Turkey should have cooperated on the invasion of Iraq. It is unclear whether he really opposes Iran having nuclear weapons. Those same leaders who argue against the West pressuring Iran say that it’s no different than Israel or Pakistan having nuclear weapons.

Turkey is blundering its way in this complicated relationship, unsure which side it wants to take or how big a threat it sees Iran to be. Turkey’s political leadership believes they can dance with Iran and simultaneously become a major regional player. Let’s hope they’re right. Otherwise, the Turkish people will be merely a casualty of a reckless policy.

Tulin Daloglu is a free-lance writer.

August 12, 2008
Israel, Iran and the new neocons

August 9, 2008

ANP: Neocons say Bush should let Israel attack Iran after election day before new president takes office.

American News Project: Washington’s neocons are alive and well, advising both John McCain and President Bush. Now many are saying Bush should permit Israel to attack Iran’s nuclear facilities after Election Day before the new president takes office. ANP investigates as we chase down John Bolton, Bill Kristol and Frank Gaffney to see how far ahead these hawks are thinking. And a new report says the whole plan could backfire.

August 9, 2008
Ahmadinejad’s visit to Turkey “unfortunate” – Israel

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad

By Zerin Elci

ANKARA (Reuters) – Israel has expressed its “discomfort” to Turkey over its decision to invite Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to Istanbul next week, an Israeli diplomatic official said on Friday.

Ahmadinejad will discuss Iran’s disputed nuclear programme and growing bilateral ties with Turkey during a one-day working visit on Aug 14, which comes after months of lobbying by Tehran.

Predominantly Sunni Muslim Turkey, which has good ties with Israel, has offered to help resolve a dispute between Iran and the West over Tehran’s nuclear programme, which the West fears is aimed at producing atomic weapons.

“We see this visit as unfortunate, especially in the sensitive and crucial time in which Iran is not giving a direct reply to the West about its nuclear programme,” the Israeli diplomatic official based in Ankara told Reuters.

“The Iranian president keeps calling for the destruction of the Israeli state and denies the Holocaust, so this visit is unfortunate because it gives legitimacy to Iran,” the official said, adding Israel had relayed its position to the Turkish Foreign Ministry.

Turkey and Iran have growing trade ties and are negotiating expanding energy cooperation. President Abdullah Gul and Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan have also sought to boost Turkey’s role as a regional problem solver in the Middle East.

Turkey is also acting as mediator in indirect talks between Israel and Syria, but the Israeli diplomatic official said Ahmadinejad’s visit will not affect those negotiations.

Major powers fear Tehran wants to build an atomic bomb. Iran, the world’s fourth-largest oil producer, insists it is only seeking to master nuclear technology to generate power.

August 8, 2008
Israel irked over Iranian leader’s planned visit to Turkey

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad

ANKARA (AFP) — Israel has conveyed its misgivings to Turkey over a planned visit to the country by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, an Israeli diplomat said Friday.

“We are concerned about this visit because we think it is not the appropriate time to host the Iranian president,” the diplomat, who asked not to be named, told AFP.

Israel voiced its concerns Thursday when the Turkish ambassador in Tel Aviv was summoned to the Israeli foreign ministry and the Israeli ambassador in Ankara visited the Turkish foreign ministry, the official said.

“It is not a good idea to give legitimacy” to a leader who has called for the destruction of Israel and denies the Holocaust, moreover at a time when Western powers are mulling fresh sanctions against Iran over its controversial nuclear programme, he said.

Non-Arab and secular Turkey has been Israel’s main regional ally since 1996, when the two signed a military cooperation accord, much to the anger of Arab countries and Iran.

It is currently acting as mediator in indirect talks between Israel and its arch-foe Syria.

But mainly Muslim Turkey has recently improved ties with Iran, its eastern neighbour, and argues that its close dialogue both with the West and Tehran could be an asset for a peaceful resolution of the international standoff over Iran’s nuclear programme.

Turkish officials have said Ahmadinejad will soon visit the country, without giving a date.

The visit is reportedly expected to take place on August 14.

The media have said Ahmadinejad is expected to meet with Turkish leaders in Istanbul rather than the capital Ankara, where the protocol would have required him to visit the tomb of Turkey’s secularist father Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, which the head of the Islamic state was reportedly reluctant to do.

August 8, 2008
The Israeli-Saudi common interest

By Moshe Maoz

The interfaith conference King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia convened in Madrid on July 17 is the first such conference held by this religiously strict kingdom. Jews were among the participants, including a rabbi from Israel. In 2002, when Abdullah was still crown prince, he made a significant move toward Israel that was adopted by the Arab League’s 22 members: recognizing Israel, including diplomatic relations, if Israel withdraws to the 1967 borders and a Palestinian state is established with East Jerusalem as its capital.

Make no mistake, Saudi Arabia, a Wahhabi Islamic kingdom that controls Islam’s holiest places – Mecca and Medina – has not fundamentally changed its ideologically negative attitude toward Jews and the Jewish state. But like other Islamic and Arab regimes, the Saudi regime has changed and improved its attitude out of strategic, political and security considerations and out of a long-term realistic approach.

Indeed, the Saudis’ realistic attitude toward Israel’s existence is not new. Back in May 1975, King Khaled told The Washington Post that his country was prepared to recognize Israel’s right to exist within the 1967 borders on condition that a Palestinian state was established between Israel and Jordan (Haaretz, May 26, 1975).

This move was apparently influenced by Israel’s victory in the Yom Kippur War in 1973, after which Egypt and Syria accepted UN Security Council Resolution 338 (which also included Security Council Resolution 242 from November 1967 that was accepted at the time by Egypt and Jordan). Resolution 338 meant indirect recognition of Israel

In 1981, at the Arab summit that convened in Fez, Morocco, Saudi Prince Fahd (who became king in 1982) proposed recognition of Israel in exchange for a return to the 1967 (1949) lines, the establishment of an independent Palestinian state in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, and compensation payments to the Palestinian refugees or repatriating them. The Arab summit rejected the proposal, but accepted it in 1982 after amending it to include the recognition of the Palestine Liberation Organization’s leadership.

Twenty years later, in 2002, Saudi Arabia once again proposed peace and recognition of Israel in exchange for a return to the 1967 borders and the establishment of a Palestinian state with its capital in East Jerusalem and an agreed-on solution to the refugee problem (based on UN Resolution 194 from December 1948). This proposal, approved again in 2007 by the Arab League, was apparently influenced by the Saudi need to please the United States after the September 11, 2001 terror attacks, and particularly out of the fear the Saudis and other Sunni Arab countries had of Shi’ite Iran, which threatened them more than Israel did. However, successive Israeli governments rejected or ignored these initiatives. They may have missed chances to advance comprehensive peace with Arab countries.

Moreover, it may be assumed that the solution to the Palestinian problem and the issue of Jerusalem could have also motivated quite a few Muslim countries to recognize Israel and improve their relationship to Jews. Evidence of such trends has been voiced by Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf, former Indonesian president Abdurrahman Wahid and other Muslim leaders. The invitation of Jewish delegates to the Madrid interfaith meeting also attests to an important Muslim trend to advance peaceful coexistence and religious dialogue with Judiasm. This trend has also been evident recently in Jordan and Qatar at the government levels, and in the United States and Europe in public and academic bodies.

It is important to encourage these pragmatic Muslim trends, which represent a centrist stream in Islam. This is a way to combat new extremist Islamic streams represented by the Shi’ite Iranian regime and Hezbollah on the one hand, and Al-Qaida and other radical Sunni groups on the other. These seek to destroy Israel and strike at Jews; in their actions and writings they embody anti-Semitic Muslim tendencies drawn from old Christian anti-Semitism and from tendentious interpretations of the Koran and the Hadith.

These fanatic Islamic elements endanger not only Israel and Jews, but also pragmatic Arab and Muslim regimes like Saudi Arabia. Accordingly, Israel and Saudi Arabia (and other Arab and Muslim countries) have a common interest in neutralizing and limiting the extremist Islamic influence and its deadly attacks.

One of the main ways of doing so is Israeli-Saudi cooperation toward a fair and agreed-on solution to the Palestinian problem and the question of Jerusalem.

The writer is professor emeritus in Islamic and Middle Eastern Studies at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem.

Source: Haaretz, 03/08/2008

August 7, 2008