Category: Iran

  • US embassy cables: US fails to dissuade Turkey from Iran ‘meddling’

    US embassy cables: US fails to dissuade Turkey from Iran ‘meddling’

    Tuesday, 17 November 2009, 17:08

    S E C R E T SECTION 01 OF 02 ANKARA 001654

    SIPDIS

    DEPARTMENT ALSO FOR EUR/SE

    EO 12958 DECL: 11/17/2019

    TAGS KNNP, PREL, TU, IR

    SUBJECT: TURKEY: A/S GORDON PRESSES FM DAVUTOGLU ON IRAN

    REF: ANKARA 1626

    Classified By: Ambassador James Jeffrey, for reasons 1.4(b,d)

    Summary

    In a clearly difficult meeting, senior US diplomat Philip Gordon tries to persuade the Turkish foreign minister, Ahmet Davutoglu, that his efforts to mediate a compromise over Iran’s nuclear programme may not be entirely helpful or wise – and are effectively enabling the Iranians to play for time without serious negotiations. Gordon’s efforts do not meet with success. Key passage highlighted in yellow.

    Read related article

    1. (S) Iran dominated A/S Gordon’s 40-minute meeting November 12 with Foreign Minister Davutoglu. The FM had just gotten off the phone with El-Baradei and had discussed in detail the IAEA proposal to send Iran’s low enriched uranium to Turkey. El-Baradei had said he would “call Washington” that same morning. This had followed two long “harsh” sessions with the Iranians in Istanbul on Sunday evening. The Iranians have said they are willing to meet with Solana, but have told the Turks that they have serious problems with Cooper and the British. They have “more trust” in the U.S. The Iranians would also prefer to get fuel from the U.S. rather than the Russians.

    2. (S) Davutoglu said the Iranians: a) are ready to send a delegation to Vienna to work out the specifics on this proposal; b) have given their “full trust” to Turkey; c) continue to face serious domestic problems inside Iran. He said the Turks actually see Ahmadinejad as “more flexible” than others who are inside the Iranian Government. Ahmadinejad is facing “huge pressure” after statements from some P5 members to the effect that a nuclear deal would succeed in weakening Iran,s nuclear capability — which is interpreted by some circles in Iran as a virtual defeat.

    3. (S) Given this context, the Turks had asked Ahmadinejad if the core of the issue is psychological rather than substance. Ahmadinejad had said “yes,” that the Iranians agree to the proposal but need to manage the public perception. Accordingly, the Iranians are proposing that the first 400 kilos be transferred to Kish Island — thereby keeping it on Iranian soil — and would receive right away an equivalent amount (30-50 kilos) of enriched fuel. The second stage would focus on the management of Iranian public opinion, after which Tehran would proceed with the Turkey option for the remaining 800 kilos, probably in two tranches. Davutoglu said Baradei agreed to consider this.

    4. (S) Davutoglu noted that he had spoken to NSA General Jones Wednesday, who had said that we should perhaps suggest to the Iranians that they transfer 600 kilos to Kish Island and 600 kilos to Turkey simultaneously. A/S Gordon said he could not give an official response to the proposal as this is the first time we heard it, but that he anticipates much skepticism about providing fuel to Iran before all the LEU has been taken out. It would be better to get all 1200 kilos out right away.

    5. (C) Davutoglu noted that these are two different proposals. The first is Iran’s request for fuel for its nuclear reactor. Even if this takes place, he said, we still need to work on limiting Iran’s nuclear enrichment capability. If we succeed with this proposal, he said, it will create “confidence” and a “new momentum” and would allow room for negotiation.

    6. (C) Noting that Davutoglu had only addressed the negative consequences of sanctions or the use of military force, Gordon pressed Davutoglu on Ankara’s assessment of the consequences if Iran gets a nuclear weapon. Davutoglu gave a spirited reply, that “of course” Turkey was aware of this risk. This is precisely why Turkey is working so hard with the Iranians. President Gul himself had spent two hours Sunday with Ahmadinejad in Istanbul.

    7. (C) Gordon noted that while we acknowledge that Turkey can be helpful as a mediator, some of the Prime Minister’s recent public comments raise questions about how Turkey sees this issue. Davutoglu said he is aware of these concerns, but contended that the Guardian newspaper had not accurately presented its recent interview with the Prime Minister. The PM’s comments had been taken out of context. Erdogan had been asked if he views Iran as a friend. If he had said “no,” it would not have been possible to convince Tehran to cooperate on this latest proposal. Only Turkey can speak bluntly and critically to the Iranians, Davutoglu contended, but only because Ankara is showing public messages of friendship.

    8. (C) Gordon pushed back that Ankara should give a stern public message about the consequences if UN resolutions are ignored. Davutoglu countered that Erdogan had given just such a statement in Tehran when he visited. He emphasized that Turkey’s foreign policy is giving a “sense of justice” and a “sense of vision” to the region. Turkey has provided a “third option” in addition to Iran and the Saudis (who he contended are viewed as “puppets” of the US). The result, he said, is that we “limit Iranian influence in the region.” We

    ANKARA 00001654 002 OF 002

    need a “pro-Western approach AND a sense of justice.”

    9. (C) A/S Gordon has cleared this cable.

    JEFFREY

    “Visit Ankara’s Classified Web Site at gov.gov/wiki/Portal:Turkey”

    via US embassy cables: US fails to dissuade Turkey from Iran ‘meddling’ | World news | guardian.co.uk.

  • US diplomats suggest Turkey’s Erdogan is ill informed – Monsters and Critics

    US diplomats suggest Turkey’s Erdogan is ill informed – Monsters and Critics

    Berlin – US diplomats believe Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan is ill-informed and advised by a foreign minister with little appreciation of politics outside Ankara, leaked cables claimed Sunday.

    In a summary of despatches dealing with Turkey, the German news magazine Der Spiegel said the Americans believed many leading figures in Erdogan’s ruling AKP party were members of a Muslim brotherhood.

    They reported that Erdogan mainly read the news from newspapers sympathetic to the Islamist movement and was surrounded by an iron ring of flattering but stuck-up advisers.’

    Other cables charged that Erdogan had promoted Islamic bankers into prominent positions and said Turkey’s leadership was feuding, according to the Spiegel summary.

    Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu, the key contact for the US embassy in Ankara, was also criticized in the despatches, with diplomats saying he had a ‘neo-Ottoman’ vision and little awareness of what went on outside Ankara, according to Der Spiegel.

    It quoted a senior Turkish official who told a US diplomat in a chat that Davutoglu exercised Islamist influence on Erdogan and added about Davutoglu, ‘He’s dangerous.’

    The London newspaper The Guardian quoted cables that quoted Davutoglu giving a ‘spirited’ answer in November 2009 to visiting US Assistant Secretary of State Philip Gordon, who visited Ankara to ask Turkey not to meddle in diplomacy over Iran’s nuclear programme.

    The despatch said the US official warned of the danger to Turkey if Iran obtained a nuclear weapon.

    ‘Davutoglu gave a spirited reply, that ‘of course’ Turkey was aware of this risk. This is precisely why Turkey is working so hard with the Iranians,’ the cable said. ‘Only Turkey can speak bluntly and critically to the Iranians, Davutoglu contended.’

    However at talks in Paris, Gordon chided the French for blocking Turkish efforts to join the European Union.

    ‘Gordon said that Turkey was caught in a vicious cycle and it is not completing necessary reforms because the Turks do not believe that their EU candidacy will be allowed to progress,’ the cable said.

    via US diplomats suggest Turkey’s Erdogan is ill informed – Monsters and Critics.

  • US Warned Turkey Not to Publicly Question Allegations on Iran

    US Warned Turkey Not to Publicly Question Allegations on Iran

    Recep Tayyip ErdoganIn late 2009 the Obama Administration, it was revealed today, privately warned the Turkish government not to criticize unsubstantiated allegations against Iran’s civilian nuclear program, in particular warning that Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s comments made Turkey “vulnerable to international community criticism.

    The documents, revealed today as part of the WikiLeaks Cablegate release, centered around Prime Minister Erdogan’s criticism of Obama’s allegations as “gossip,” and advised top Erdogan aides and Turkish President Gul to “rein in” the prime minister.

    Another document expressed concern at Turkey’s interest in a working relationship with Iran, saying Turkey was missing an opportunity to weaken the Iranian government by not condemning the 2009 election and saying Turkey was motivated by a desire to avoid a region-wide war.

    Though US officials have repeatedly accused Iran of making nuclear weapons they have never provided evidence of this assertion, and the IAEA has continually verified the non-diversion of Iran’s nuclear material.

    Interestingly, the US mocked Turkey’s claims of “influence” with Iran by saying Turkey was unable to even convince Iran to sign the third party enrichment deal sought by the P5+1. Just months after the cable Turkey did succeed in getting Iran to sign the deal, sparking public US condemnation of Turkey and a refusal by the US to complete the proposed deal.

    via US Warned Turkey Not to Publicly Question Allegations on Iran — News from Antiwar.com.

  • ‘Turkey does not regard Iran as a threat to the region’

    ‘Turkey does not regard Iran as a threat to the region’

    By Mohammad Amin Mokarrami

    BANDAR ABBAS – Turkish political analyst Bilgehan Alagoz says Turkey does not regard Iran as a threat to the security of the region.

    “Turkey does not perceive Iran as a threat to Turkey or to NATO, so that is why Turkey made a great effort to not name Iran in this document (the NATO proposal for deployment of a missile defense system in Turkey),” Alagoz said in an interview with the Tehran Times on November 23 on the sidelines of the 20th international conference on the Persian Gulf in Bandar Abbas, in the southern province of Hormozgan.

    The 20th international conference on the Persian Gulf, entitled Comprehensive Cooperation in the Persian Gulf: Mechanisms for Development and Regional Stability, was held on the shores of the Persian Gulf from November 22 to 23.

    Alagoz presented an article entitled “An opportunity or threat for Iran: Turkey’s improving relations with the (P)GCC” to the conference and gave a presentation on her article at one of the four expert panels held at the conference.

    Alagoz holds a B.A. degree in international relations from Istanbul University and an M.A. degree in Middle Eastern studies from Marmara University. She is currently a Ph.D. candidate at Marmara University and a full-time faculty member as a lecturer at the Institute of Middle East Studies of Marmara University.

    Following is the text of the interview with Ms. Alagoz:

    Q: Some people in Iran criticize the government for expanding relations with Turkey because it is a U.S. ally and a NATO member. At the same time, there are some Turkish secularists that do not approve of the expansion of relations with Iran because Iran has a religious system. How do you assess this situation?

    A: Actually, we have allayed these concerns in both of the parties because we are not living in the Cold War period. Turkey is part of the Western world in terms of being a NATO member and in terms of being a candidate to (join) the European Union. The reason which makes Turkey a unique country is that it can create a mutual dialogue between the West and Iran. So we need to compromise at international levels in terms of relations with the international system and Iran. Turkey seems to be a unique partner for creating this kind of platform, so I guess we have allayed all of these concerns. Yes, there are some secularists in Turkey who are skeptical about relations with Iran, but it is not a great part of the population. Even in the Turkish military, there are generals who are motivated to enhance relations with Iran… So I guess we don’t have those kinds of doubts recently.

    Q: Governments try to adopt foreign policies that serve their national interests. How is aligning with Iran beneficial to Turkey?

    A: Recently we have had many bad experiences. I mean the Iraq war. We have experienced that when something happens in our region like a destabilizing event, it affects all of the countries in this region. Turkey and Iran, as the most important countries in this region, can play a major role in terms of creating stability in the region. Turkey also believes that if something happens in Iran, it will directly affect its external relations and also internal stability. I mean, you all know that Turkey is struggling against the PKK (Workers’ Party of Kurdistan) terrorist activities. Also, we experience great economic problems. So if anything happens to Iran, it will affect our political stability and economic stability. So Turkey believes that Iran should be part of the international community and not be excluded from the international community. That is why Turkey stands with Iran.

    Q: It is clear that instability in the region will negatively affect Turkey, but it doesn’t seem that this concern is the only reason behind Turkey’s policy of establishing closer relations with Iran. It seems that Turkey is seeking to raise its profile in the international arena by mediating between Iran and the West. What is your view?

    A: I guess the main reason is to eliminate the destabilizing factors in the region. Furthermore, Turkey and Iran also have deep cooperation in terms of energy and trade, so excluding Iran in any platform will also affect Turkey’s economy. These can be mentioned as the reasons why Turkey is standing with Iran.

    Q: Can Turkey’s improving relations with the (Persian) Gulf Cooperation Council ({P}GCC) countries be considered a threat to Iran?

    A: Actually, during the (PGCC) summit in 2009, a declaration was issued, and in this declaration there were some articles which could be (considered to be) critical about Iran’s situation… maybe Iran could get the impression that Turkey is trying to confront it through these Arab countries of the Persian Gulf. I don’t get that sense. But Iran may be concerned in terms of Turkey’s membership in NATO and in terms of the improvement in relations with these Arab countries, so this could be perceived as a kind of threat, but I believe that it does not pose a threat.

    Q: As you know, Israel is the only player in the Middle East that possesses nuclear weapons. What can Iran and Turkey do to compel Tel Aviv to sign the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and to allow International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors to visit its nuclear facilities and to convince it to dismantle its nuclear weapons?

    A: Several times, the current prime minister, Mr. Erdogan, emphasized that Israel should also think about its nuclear activities… I believe that in order to take Israel to mediation, it would be better to act with the Western world not with Iran, because Israel directly perceives Iran as a threat. At the moment, we have some problems with Israel, but in general, Turkey also has important relations with Israel. Israel should not be confronted by Turkey and Iran together. Israel’s nuclear situation is a great problem for the region, but for Turkey it is not good to act together with Iran in terms of Israel. For Turkey, it would be better to take the European Union and the United States to the same platform and not Iran.

    Q: As the last question, Iranian officials are concerned about the proposed NATO missile defense shield that is going to be deployed in Turkey. What is your view?

    A: I had the opportunity to listen to our president, Abdullah Gul, before I came to Iran, and he put great emphasis on the fact that Turkey does not perceive Iran as a threat to Turkey or to NATO, so that is why Turkey made a great effort to not name Iran in this document. But you should accept that Turkey is a NATO member… and has the right to conduct various activities with NATO. Maybe this missile system will raise some concerns for the Iranian side, but Iranians should keep in mind that Turkey has stood with Iran in many important platforms and Turkey has always confronted (Iran’s adversaries) during all these discussions

    Tehran Times

  • Mehr managing director meets Istanbul mayor

    Mehr managing director meets Istanbul mayor

    Mehr managing director meets Istanbul mayor

    Tehran Times Political Desk

    ISTANBUL – Reza Moqaddasi, managing director of the Mehr News Agency, held a meeting with Istanbul mayor Kadir Topbas on the sidelines of the general assembly of the Organization of Asia-Pacific News Agencies (OANA) in Istanbul on Friday.

    In the meeting, the mayor of Istanbul announced that he will pay a visit to Iran next year to finalize a sisterhood agreement between Istanbul and Isfahan.

    Moqaddasi also said the Mehr News Agency will spare no effort in increasing cooperation between the two neighboring countries of Iran and Turkey, the MNA correspondent reported from Istanbul

  • Iran rejected Turkey’s support

    Iran rejected Turkey’s support

    “Iran annulled Istanbul long ago”, “Iran rejected negotiations in Istanbul”…These and similar stories appear in Turkish media to describe fresh disposition of official Tehran.

    Tehran rejected the idea to hold nuclear project related negotiations in Istanbul by the UN 5 permanent representatives (USA, Russia, France, England, China) and Germany. It was expedient to hold those negotiations in Geneva on December 5.

    Turkish “Radikal” writes that on behalf of UN Security Council Katherine Ashton, EU foreign affairs commissioner, will hold negotiations with Iran.

    Except of Uranium enrichment project, the Iranian side is supposed to bring into agenda issues related to the regional security and Israeli’s nuclear weapon.

    Source: Panorama.am