Category: Iran

  • Turkey’s Veteran Islamist Erbakan Visits Iran

    Turkey’s Veteran Islamist Erbakan Visits Iran

    Publication: Eurasia Daily Monitor Volume: 6 Issue: 76
    April 21, 2009
    By: Saban Kardas

    Following the restoration of his political rights, veteran Islamist politician and former Prime Minister Necmettin Erbakan, 83, returned to active politics, raising questions about the leadership of the Islamist Felicity Party (SP). Erbakan, the legendary leader of the National Outlook Movement (NOM) advocated a political Islamist platform in Turkish politics, and formed a succession of political parties since the 1970’s -training activists who became influential figures within Turkish political life. He skillfully mobilized the Turkish electorate behind his Welfare Party (RP) in the 1990’s and succeeded to rule the country in a coalition government between 1996 and 1997. His policies while in power irked Turkey’s powerful generals who perceived the RP as a direct threat to secularism and staged a campaign to force Erbakan out of power, known as the “February 28 process.” Erbakan was forced out of office, and subsequently the Constitutional Court closed down the RP in 1998, suspending political rights of Erbakan and other RP officials. The crackdown on Islamic social networks during the “February 28 process” led to a crisis within the Islamist movement, whereby the new generation questioned the platform and strategies of the NOM instilled by Erbakan. The split between the pro-Erbakan old-guard and the reformist wing became visible when the Constitutional Court shut down the WP’s successor Virtue Party (FP) on similar grounds in 2002. The two groups separated, with the reformists organizing themselves around the leadership of Recep Tayyip Erdogan, whose Justice and Development Party (AKP) came to power following a landslide election victory in 2002 and continues to rule Turkey. In contrast, the FP’s traditionalist offshoot, the SP, was defeated.

    Although he took over the SP leadership after his five-year ban came to an end in 2003, Erbakan faced political restrictions in another RP-related case. He was found guilty of forgery in the so-called “lost trillion case’ concerning the loss of more than one trillion Turkish Liras in Treasury grants to the RP. In addition to his political ban, he was sentenced to two years and four months, which he began serving under house arrest in May 2008. Citing Erbakan’s ailing health, in August 2008 President Abdullah Gul pardoned him, paving the way for the removal of his political restrictions (Today’s Zaman, April 6).

    Erbakan constantly expressed his opinions on political developments through his public appearances in the SP’s election rallies and other platforms. He acted as a vocal opponent of the governing AKP, criticizing it for following pro-Western policies and betraying the NOM spirit. After the restoration of his political rights in April, Erbakan’s press briefing in the SP headquarters was interpreted as marking his return to “active politics.” Despite his advanced age, he set himself an ambitious timescale for putting the SP on the political map, voicing the same anti-Western and confrontational discourse he had been advocating for decades (ANKA, April 10). Following his press briefing, Erbakan visited Iran, where he received a warm welcome from Iranian officials including President Mahmoud Ahmedinejad. Erbakan and Iranian leaders vowed to continue their struggle against “Western imperialism and Zionism” and pursue the establishment of a pan-Islamic union (www.saadet.org.tr, April 19; Hurriyet, April 20).

    Erbakan’s return to politics has raised questions about the future leadership of the SP. Though his political socialization took place within the NOM tradition, the current party leader Numan Kurtulmus, a professor of economics, in many ways distinguished himself from traditionalists. Distancing himself from the doctrinaire outlook of the NOM cadres, Kurtulmus is known as a person who has embraced broader segments of society (www.cafesiyaset.com, December 16, 2008). He declined invitations from the governing AKP to join their ranks, and instead continued his political career within the SP, and eventually took on the challenging task of revitalizing the NOM tradition in Turkish politics. He overcame opposition from traditionalists and was elected as the new SP leader in October 2008 -succeeding Erbakan. He maintained his allegiance to Erbakan’s ideals but avoided being viewed as his caretaker (www.timeturk.com, October 22, 2008).

    Now that Erbakan has returned to the party, Kurtulmus’ position appears vulnerable. Kurtulmus was not present at the Erbakan press briefing, which triggered speculation that there might be an underlying leadership struggle within the party (www.habervitrini.com, April 11). Fuelling these rumors, Erbakan avoided telling reporters what his future role will be within the party. Kurtulmus ruled out such a contest, arguing that “we do not have a leadership problem. Mr. Erbakan does not harbor such goals… he has valuable views and we will continue to benefit from them” (Anadolu Ajansi, April 12).

    Alternatively, Erbakan might portray himself as an “intellectual guide” for the NOM, enabling him to exert influence over the SP. Though he may not assume the party chairmanship directly, given his personality, he is unlikely to disengage entirely from the SP and its policy making, not least for the purpose of consolidating his son’s position in the party. Since many analysts attributed the SP’s success in last month’s local elections to its new leader Kurtulmus, who was able to imbue a sense of dynamism through his moderate political discourse, the return of the old-guard Erbakan might damage the party’s future performance within Turkish politics.

     http://www.jamestown.org/single/?no_cache=1&tx_ttnews%5Btt_news%5D=34886

  • DID PRESIDENT SARGSYAN BLAZE A TRAIL TO THE SEA VIA IRAN?

    DID PRESIDENT SARGSYAN BLAZE A TRAIL TO THE SEA VIA IRAN?

    Haroutiun Khachatrian 4/15/09

    Armenian President Serzh Sargsyan’s two-day visit to Iran produced a potential breakthrough deal that could ease Armenia’s economic isolation.

    Sargsyan and Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad signed eight agreements during the Armenian leader’s two-day stay in Tehran on April 13-14. Two of those pacts stand to give a big boost to Armenian foreign trade. The first provides a blueprint for the construction of a 470-kilometer railroad between the two countries and the second would lower Iranian trade barriers to Armenian exports.

    At present, Armenia’s only viable overland routes to the outside world run through Georgia. That conduit has proven unreliable for Yerevan in recent years, though, given the long-running tension between Russia and Georgia. [For background see the Eurasia Insight archive]. Turkey and Azerbaijan currently maintain an economic blockade against Armenia, and although there has been much talk lately of a re-opening of the Turkish-Armenian frontier, the normalization of Turkish-Armenian ties, as well as a political settlement to the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, do not appear imminent. [For background see the Eurasia Insight archive].

    The proposed outlet to Iran would not bring immediate economic benefits to Armenia. Under terms of an agreement finalized April 15 by the transport ministers of Armenia and Iran, construction of the railway would take an estimated five years, and cost upwards of $1.8 billion. The first stage of the construction process involves a feasibility study, which is due to be completed by the end of the summer.

    Almost seven-eighths of the railway would lie on Armenian territory, stretching from the northern city of Sevan to Meghri on the Iranian border. The question of financing evidently was not addressed during Sargsyan’s Iran visit.

    In another potentially significant deal, the two countries agreed to cooperation on the construction of a hydropower station on the Arax River.

    One political analyst, Garnik Asatrian, an Iranian studies expert at the Yerevan State University, characterized President Sargsyan’s visit as a “historic step” for Armenia. But other experts were more circumspect. The global economic downturn, they emphasized, makes it impossible to say whether promises made today can be fulfilled tomorrow. Alexander Iskandarian, the director of the Caucasus Institute in Yerevan, pointed out that already some erstwhile financial heavyweights in the Caucasus, especially Russia, are now finding it difficult to come up with the cash to meet assistance obligations. “Some previously adopted programs are now short of money,” he told EurasiaNet.

    Sevak Sarykhanan, an expert with the Noravank Foundation, a Yerevan-based think tank, suggested that the Iranian rail project is, in effect, an insurance policy for Yerevan. If the Turkish-Armenian border reopens in the near future, then Yerevan would have rail access to the Middle East and Gulf regions via the existing Gyumri-Kars rail link. In that case, the Sevan-Meghri-Iran rail route would not make financial sense.

     

    Editor’s Note: Haroutiun Khachatrian is a freelance writer based in Yerevan.

  • When your neighbor and enemy chum up…

    When your neighbor and enemy chum up…

     

     
     

    [ 16 Apr 2009 17:51 ]
    Armenian-Iranian economic partnership: reality or myth

    No sooner had Azerbaijan got out of the tension after notorious tittle-tattle in Turkish circles on the probability of opening borders with Armenia, one more neighbor moved to kiss on the lips of the aggressor country.

    The question is Armenian leader Serzh Sargsyan’s official visit to the Islamic Republic of Iran.

    During the visit from April 13-14, the two Presidents expressed satisfaction with the current level of political dialogue and their willingness to further expand intergovernmental relations.

    At a meeting with Iranian counterpart, Serzh Sargsyan didn’t seem to conceal his country’s emergency need for relations with Iran.

    In this regard, he thanked Iranian President for allowing essential goods through Iran during economically hard times – in the early years of independence and during hostilities between Russia and Georgia in August.

    The parties also focused on major infrastructure programs as the best indication of the further expansion of the Armenian-Iranian relations….

    Under memorandums and documents signed, Export Development Bank of Iran would open a credit line to Armenia, the parties agreed to build a hydropower plant on the Araz River, lay a railroad between the two countries, deliver Iranian gas to Armenia and study the prospects of re-exporting to Europe, create Iran-Armenia-Georgia-Black Sea Highway….

    The bilateral documents appeared to be part of strengthening Iran-Armenia-Russia triangle economically and politically against the backdrop of well-cemented strategic partnership among Turkey, Georgia and Azerbaijan in the region.

    In favor of the formation of Iran-Russian-Armenian alliance, this is a call for Iran to sit as an observer in the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO).

    Another point is that Armenia will get Iranian gasoline and diesel fuel refined in Tabriz, an Azeri-populated city.

    In fact, the expensive joint projects, including a rail link may come online in 3-4 years.
    The railway line is believed to allow Armenia to reach the outside world without Georgia let alone transportation and cargo shipment. Armenia and Iran are lucky this time because this project also interests Russia.

    With Russia uninvolved, it is obvious that progress in any sphere of economic cooperation between Armenia and Iran will willy-nilly “hang in the air”.

  • Iran offers Armenia energy line of credit

    Iran offers Armenia energy line of credit

    TEHRAN, April 14 (UPI) — Meeting with the visiting Armenian energy minister Tuesday, Iranian finance officials pledged to support the energy sector in Armenia with a line of credit.

    Armenian Energy Minister Armen Movsisyan met with Iranian Finance Minister Shamseddin Hosseini to discuss trade issues and Iran’s offer of economic assistance, Iran’s official Islamic Republic News Agency reports.

    Movsisyan expressed his gratification for a line of credit offered through the Export Development Bank of Iran, saying the move was part of an expanding trade relationship between both countries.

    Armenia in March announced it had begun construction on a 186-mile pipeline to bring oil products from the Tabriz refinery in northern Iran in exchange for electricity.

    The project would bring 81 billion cubic feet of natural gas from refineries in Tabriz each year, which is about the same amount Armenia imports from Russia currently through Georgia.

    Movsisyan was part of a high-level delegation from Armenia that arrived in Tehran on Monday to discuss bilateral ties.

    https://www.upi.com/Energy_Resources/2009/04/14/Iran-offers-Armenia-energy-line-of-credit/UPI-27631239717538/

  • The Dream of a Kurdish State

    The Dream of a Kurdish State

    By Hewa Aziz

    Sulaimaniyah, Asharq Al-Awsat- Throughout its long history, the forty-million strong Kurdish nation has never had its own independent state. Since the decline of the Median Empire some 3000 years ago, the Kurds have remained part of other states or, at the best, managed to establish scattered principalities as part of larger empires dominating the region such as the Islamic and Ottoman Empires.

    The Kurds established the principalities of Baban in Sulaimaniyah, Ardalan and Botan, and later founded the province of Sharazor, the capital of which was Kirkuk, and Mosul and other cities.

    The idea of establishing an independent Kurdish state was not a priority for the Kurds, nor was it a matter of necessity. This is because the concept of the modern state was yet to emerge or appear in the region until the late nineteenth century when states began to emerge according to a modern system.

    At the time, despite their potential, Kurdish leaders were preoccupied with minor issues that took their attention away from realizing the dream of establishing an independent Kurdish state, a dream that the Persian and the Ottoman Empires, and modern-day Iran and Turkey have fought against.

    After World War I, an opportunity arose for the Kurds to outline the features of their independent state within the framework of treaties and the international and regional coalitions that dominated that period. However, the Kurdish leader Sheikh Mahmoud al Hafid in particular, was content with establishing his small kingdom in Sulaimaniyah. The kingdom soon collapsed following bloody wars with the British occupation forces that brought down the Ottoman Empire and with it all its allying bodies including al Hafid’s kingdom. He failed to make the most of Kurdish sentiment at the time regarding the Kurdish right to establish a homeland.

    Sheikh Mahmoud al Hafid was unaware of the fact that the new age required a new a vision and conduct, and as a result, the Turks established their own state and the Kurds were dispersed between four of the regional countries: Turkey, Iran, Iraq and Syria.

    Almost a century has elapsed since then. That experience was followed by other attempts to establish a Kurdish state such as the Republic of Mahabad by Qazi Mohammed in Iranian Kurdistan back in 1946. This attempt was short lived and was brought down by the army of the Pahlavi regime. The dream of establishing an independent Kurdish state is yet to be realized. But the main question is: will this dream ever come true?

    Many Kurdish politicians, intellectuals and decision-makers agree that this dream is possible and can be realized in the right political regional and international circumstances. Others are of the view that the dream is unattainable for geopolitical reasons whereas others predict that more than one autonomous or semi-autonomous state will emerge in the four parts of Kurdistan shortly in view of recent developments and the potential political shifts in the new Middle East over the next two decades.

    Fareed Asasard, a leading figure at the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan [PUK] party and the director of Kurdistan’s Strategic Studies Centre based in Sulaimaniyah, believes that the idea of forming or founding an independent Greater Kurdistan comprising of Kurdistan’s four areas continues to be a hypothetical issue.

    “The basic components required for establishing any state are still unavailable [to the Kurds] at the present time and I believe that they will not be available in the long term for several reasons, the most important of which is that the world will witness a shift in the decades to come causing it to rely on geo-economics instead of geopolitics as the case is at present,” said Asasard.

    Asasard, who has conducted a lot of research on this topic, stresses that the idea of founding a greater independent state has failed a number of times. For example the Turks failed to found the Greater Turkish Empire from China to the Mediterranean to ensure the existence of the Turkish race everywhere. Asasard adds, “In the mid-1990s, I presented a research paper on the geopolitics of Kurdistan in which I made clear that establishing an independent Kurdish state in Iraqi Kurdistan would be very difficult as it requires changing the map of a significant part of the world. Besides, even if this state were established, it would remain isolated from the world as it would have no seaports.”

    Asasard expects that there will be several small Kurdish statelets in other parts of Kurdistan in the long term especially as the initial step in this direction has already been taken in the sense that the political and administrative structure of Iraqi Kurdistan is quite independent. However, he stressed that the link between these Kurdish states on the economic level in the future will be very weak and that these states will remain linked to the central systems in Tehran, Turkey and Baghdad.

    Asasard stated that he believes that international politics will be subject to the logics and authority of the economy in upcoming decades. Therefore, the Kurdish statelets, if they emerge, will be economically weak and this will be their biggest problem, not to mention their unfortunate location, which will always tip the scale in favour of their neighbours, making it subordinate to these neighbouring countries. Therefore, the idea of founding an independent Kurdish state is an unachievable dream.

    On the other hand however, Dr. Jaza Toufi Taleb, professor of geopolitics at the University of Sulaimani believes that all the basic constituents are available for an independent Kurdish state to be established on Kurdish land such as the geographical borders, nation, economy and seaports. However, the political atmosphere is completely unsuitable for outlining the features of the state at present, especially as the concerned countries continue to reject even marginal autonomy for the Kurds in their countries. Dr Taleb explained that even though several independent states around the world, such as Kosovo for example, do not have the potential that Iraqi Kurdistan enjoys.

    “I believe that if reformists in Iran and the moderates in Turkey gain power in the upcoming elections, and with the geopolitical changes in Syria that are taking place, this would allow for the rise of political bodies in the Kurdistan region, specifically in Turkey which wants to join the EU but a precondition is the acknowledgement of the rights of all minorities. In Iran, there are signs of such bodies emerging under the rule of reformists. These bodies will represent the initial step towards the establishment of the Kurdish state in the long term. Turkey will be the starting point towards this goal. However, geopolitically, the dream of establishing the greater Kurdish state remains a difficult dream to make come true,” explained Dr Taleb.

    But Hussein Yazdan Bana, Vice President of the Kurdistan Freedom Party headed by Ali Qazi Mohammed, the son of the founder of the Kurdish Mahabad Republic in Iranian Kurdistan, stressed that the Kurdish nation has the right to an independent state on its land in accordance with international law. He emphasized that Kurdistan possesses all the requirements necessary for establishing an independent state just like other countries in the world. “Conspiracies and international interests were, and still are, the major obstacles to the establishment of the Kurdish state. This is exemplified by what happened to Sheikh Mahmoud al Hafid’s kingdom and the Kurdistan Republic [of Mahabad] founded by Qazi Mohamed.”

    Yazdan Bana emphasized that the most important prerequisite for the establishment of any state is the will and resolution of the nation itself and the favourable external factors and circumstances that have not been agreeable to the Kurds until now.

    “If the British had not been present and the superpowers did not have their own interests, the Kurdish, Baban, Botan and Ardalan principalities would have been successful in establishing Greater Kurdistan. In addition, the very few opportunities that were made available to the Kurds throughout history, specifically after World War I, were not utilised well by Kurdish politicians to establish that state.”

    Yazdan Bana confirmed that international policies in the current age of globalization are not resistant to the aspirations of countries seeking to establish their own independent states. These conditions can be utilised to make the Kurdish dream come true provided that there is a unified political will among the Kurds.

    Yazdan Bana said, “The establishment of the Kurdish state is a goal that the Kurds and their political powers should act to achieve, and we can do this provided that a unified and a solid political will is made available. At present, the establishment of this state is not possible for several reasons, but once the Kurdish politicians abandon their personal dreams and ambitions for power and influence then forty million people will be able to establish their own state.”

    Abdul Baqi Yousef, member of the politburo of the Kurdish Yekiti Party in Syria highlighted that the establishment of an independent state is the right of the Kurdish nation and it is not an impossible dream. However, he explains that this is conditional upon future political developments in the region that will outline existing ties between the Kurds and the Middle East region and will result in establishing ties between all the parts of Kurdistan.

    “States are not established based on emotions or desires but basic factors such as geography, economy and others factors that are all available in Kurdistan. I believe that the future developments, in the long run, will allow for the establishment of several Kurdish statelets in the region, and this will lead to the establishment of independent greater Kurdistan.”

    But the issue differs for the Kurdistan Workers’ Party [PKK] in Turkey, which called for establishing greater Kurdistan since it began the armed struggle in 1984. The party reduced its demand to establishing a confederation system that ensures national and cultural rights for Kurds whose population exceeds ten million in Turkey’s Kurdistan region alone.

    Ahmed Deniz, the PKK’s foreign affairs officer, believes that the municipal elections that took place recently in Turkey were promising as they indicated fair democratic and political solutions to the Kurdish cause in Turkey.

    Deniz told Asharq Al-Awsat that the Kurdish nation, whose land was split between the four countries following the Treaty of Lausanne that was signed after World War I, is still the only nation with no independent state in the region despite that its population exceeds 40 million.

    “In the PKK, we believe that a confederation system based on the freedom and rights of the Kurdish people is best suited to the Kurdish cause not only in Turkey but in the entire Kurdistan region as is the case with several advanced European countries. However, the PKK still believes in the right of the Kurdish people to an independent state. But the PKK’s political strategy at present does not aim to establish an independent state that requires a particular atmosphere that we lack at present, especially as an independent state does not necessarily mean freedom for nations. What is more important to us is that the Kurds gain their freedom, enjoy real democracy and human rights. Only then can the Kurds decide themselves the nature of the political identity they want,” said Deniz.

    As for the renowned Kurdish-Syrian writer Nouri Brimo, he said that “the [establishment of the] Kurdish state is not a dream but a political course and its supporters increase as it gains strength through the sacrifices of its people. In all cases, the Kurds have been able to prove throughout history that they have always been rational in their political discourse and presentation and that they have always respected their neighbours.”

    But Sami Davood, a renowned researcher at the Syrian Sardam cultural institution, stated that the establishment of the Kurdish state is related to geographical factors first and foremost. In other words, the issue requires the liberation of Kurdistan’s geographical region before an independent identity can be built.

    Due to the geographical nature of the Kurdish areas in Syria, there cannot be any armed struggle unlike in the Kurdish regions in Iraq, Turkey and Iran in addition to the population density of each of the four regions. Therefore, Davood believes that any attempt by the Kurds to establish their own state will be confronted with strong opposition from the regional states not so that they can keep the Kurds within the boundaries of their own countries by force, but because the majority of water and energy resources are situated in the Kurdish areas of the four countries.

    Source: aawsat.com, 10/04/2009

  • Tuesday 7 April 2009
  • It is an inconvenient truth that the two most influential countries in the Middle East are both non-Arab – Iran and Turkey. But some hope must lie in the fact that Barack Obama yesterday chose to make Turkey the focus of an attempt to bridge the gulf between Islam and the west. Alighting on Turkey as an example of the deal that can be struck between the US and the Muslim world is as bold in foreign policy terms as it is risky in domestic ones. There are plenty on the right who would seize on Mr Obama’s self-identification as an American who has Muslims in his family. But to choose the Turkish parliament as the venue to say that his country is not and never will be at war with Islam is the mark of a man who is showing increasing confidence on the world stage.

    The French president and the German chancellor, who have bolted the door to Europe, have dropped the ball on Turkey. They have yet to see what Mr Obama has already understood. Turkey’s biggest asset is its geopolitical role, and it is using it intelligently. The president, Abdullah Gul, has gone to Armenia on the first visit by a Turkish leader in the two nations’ bitter history. Ankara is also trying to transform its relationship with Iraqi Kurds. Turkey mediated indirect talks between Syria and Israel, and when the prime minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan stormed off the stage at the World Economic Forum in Davos, telling the Israeli president, Shimon Peres, that he was killing people in Gaza, Turkish flags went up all over Palestine.

    At a time when Washington is reviewing its policy on the stalled Israeli-Arab peace process, Mr Erdogan’s message that Hamas must be represented at the peace table carries weight. Not least it gives Israel, which maintains close ties with Ankara, cause for concern. If any country can reinforce the message to Mr Obama that the current status quo is untenable it is Turkey.

    Mr Erdogan is not without his domestic problems. His Justice and Development party won about 39% of the vote at recent local elections, well down on the 47% it got two years ago. It was 36% in Istanbul and the coastal cities, a clear sign that he must listen to the progressive areas of his country. He has relaunched moves to widen ethnic and religious freedoms, and promised to work on a new and less authoritarian civilian constitution. Turkey is always reforming and never reformed, and Mr Erdogan may have personally lost faith in the ultimate goal of seeking accession to the EU, no thanks to Mr Sarkozy. Turkey is not a model country, any more than any other is. But it is a telling example. It undermines the western notion that Islam and modernity are somehow fundamentally incompatible, and it does have useful regional contacts. Next stop Iran.

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2009/apr/07/barack-obama-turkey-east-west