14 January 2009, Resource : Panarmenian |
Enraged by the abrasive tone of Turkey’s condemnation of Israel’s attack on Gaza, Israeli officials and Turkish analysts are now raising the possibility that Tel Aviv may retaliate either by recognizing the Armenian Genocide or refusing to help Turkey to lobby against a congressional resolution on the genocide, according to the Publisher of The California Courier. “This unexpected turn of events was in response to Turkish Prime Minister Recep Erdogan’s continued harsh criticisms, accusing Israel of “perpetrating inhuman actions which would bring it to self-destruction. Allah will sooner or later punish those who transgress the rights of innocents.” Erdogan qualified Israel’s attack on Gaza as “savagery” and a “crime against humanity.” He also refused to take calls from Israel’s Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and rejected a request by Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni to visit Ankara. While it is unlikely that Israel would reverse its long-standing refusal to acknowledge the Armenian Genocide, it may decide not to accommodate future Turkish requests to have American Jewish organizations to lobby against a congressional resolution on the Armenian Genocide. Ankara has long depended on Israel to act as a conduit to Washington and to American Jewish organizations who have frequently acted as a kind of surrogate lobby for Turkey in Washington. In the past, Jewish organizations have been instrumental in helping Turkey block efforts to introduce resolutions in Congress recognizing the Armenian genocide of 1915,” Harut Sassounian writes. On December 27, 2008, Israel launched a military campaign codenamed Operation Cast Lead, targeting the members and infrastructure of Hamas. As of 12 January 2009, 13 Israelis and 898 Palestinians are estimated to have perished in the conflict. All but three of the Israeli casualties have been soldiers, while 333 of the Gaza casualties have been women and children. 257 children in Gaza have been killed, making up a third of Palestinian casualties. |
Category: Regions
-
THE CALIFORNIA COURIER: ANGERED BY TURKISH CRITICISM OVER GAZA, ISRAEL MAY RECOGNIZE ARMENIAN GENOCIDE
-
“Azerbaijanis, residing in Georgia, remain second-grade people in the eyes of official Tbilisi”
2008 has become a difficult year for the entire Georgia, including, Azerbaijanis, residing there. The thing is that the internal political crisis, which began in Georgia in 2007, was not settled though led to the conduction of urgent presidential and parliamentary elections in 2007, while the external political crisis in the relations with Russia led to the August war in South Ossetia, ending in a heavy defeat of Georgia and loss of Abkhazia and South Ossetia, said chairman of the Georgian Azerbaijanis Congress Ali Babayev, according to Novosti-Azerbaijan.
-
Hamas agrees to Turkish force at border between Gaza and Egypt
Hamas is set to announce that it is willing to allow a Turkish force to deploy at Rafah crossing between Gaza and Egypt, despite earlier insistence that it would treat any international presence along the border as an occupying force, according to a report on Tuesday. Turkey’s PM said there was a possibility that Israel would attend ceasefire talks in Egypt. (UPDATED)
Hamas would agree to a Turkish deployment of forces, because it “harbors respect to Turkey as an Islamic nation,” a Hamas source told the London-based Arabic daily Al Hayat; Israel’s Jerusalem Post reported.
Turkey has urged for the formation of an international monitoring force for Gaza and has said it is ready to participate. Turkey currently actively participates in peacekeeping missions in the West Bank city of Hebron and Lebanon in the Middle East, as well as in Afghanistan and Kosovo.
However, the details of the mission – where it would be located, what exactly it would do, who would be involved, what the role of the Palestinian Authority would be – were still being formulated. There is some talk about carving out a “neutral zone” along the border where the team would operate.
Hamas would only consent to the deployment of Turkish forces in the Strip if all of the crossings into Gaza are opened, Hamas sources told Al Hayat.
The group has resisted the idea of international monitors because it wants control of the Gaza border, and Egypt has opposed the presence of foreign forces on its soil as a violation of its sovereignty. Egypt would prefer that Fatah man the border on the Gaza side and does not believe it needs outside help to monitor its own crossing.
ISRAEL MAY ATTEND TALKS
Turkish Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan said Tuesday Israel is also expected to join ceasefire talks in Egypt, adding this could make it closer to reach a solution.“Talks are at a better phase when compared to two weeks ago. It is distressing that there is such a negative process despite the U.N. Security Council,” he said when asked about some news reports that parties were coming closer to an agreement and that Turkish troops would ensure security of the tunnels.
“However, talks in Egypt progress at a positive direction in the past 3 days,” he was quoted by the Anatolian Agency as saying.
Turkish officials are engaged in ongoing shuttle diplomacy in the region in a bid to reach a ceasefire in Gaza.
A Turkish delegation led by Ahmet Davutoglu, chief advisor to Erdogan, met both Egyptian and Hamas officials in Cairo and Damascus.
Diplomatic sources say Turkey is playing a key role in the talks because Hamas, due to its tensions with Egypt, currently has more confidence in Turkey than it does in Egypt.
According to the Israeli sources, in the current talks Turkey is acting as the mediator between Egypt and Hamas, and not between Hamas and Israel. One Israeli source said Israel’s relationship with Turkey has been set back considerably because of Erdogan’s extremely harsh criticisms of the Israeli military operations.
-
Can Egemen Bagis Revive Turkey’s Stalled EU Accession Process?
Can Egemen Bagis Revive Turkey’s Stalled EU Accession Process?
Publication: Eurasia Daily Monitor Volume: 6 Issue: 6January 12, 2009Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan selected Istanbul parliamentary deputy Egemen Bagis as the new chief negotiator for Turkey’s membership negotiations with the European Union. Erdogan also moved the Secretariat General for EU Affairs (ABGS) from the Foreign Ministry to the Prime Minister’s office under Bagis, who was promoted to the rank of state minister (www.cnnturk.com, January 9, 10). The move came amid criticism that the Justice and Development Party (AKP) government had stalled the EU accession process.
The post of chief negotiator was previously held by the current Foreign Minister Ali Babacan, who had filled that position at the same time as his other ministerial appointments in the successive AKP governments. Since the beginning of the memberships talks with the EU in 2005, Babacan acted as the chief negotiator parallel to his positions as economics minister and later foreign minister. The government’s reluctance to appoint a “full-time” negotiator had been a constant source of criticism and was taken by the pro-reform circles as a sign of the low priority that the government attached to the EU project. Especially since Babacan’s assumption of the post of foreign minister, it has been clear that this double assignment was unsustainable, as it became increasingly difficult for Babacan to fulfill his responsibilities as chief negotiator. At the beginning of 2008, Babacan said “2008 will be the year of the EU; you will be surprised [by our reforms]” (Sabah, February 3, 2008). As 2008 closed, however, Turkish-EU relations hit a low point, with no major reform recorded on critical issues. For reformists, 2008 was a lost year (Taraf, December 31, 2008).
Indeed, myriad international crises taking place in Turkey’s neighborhood engulfed Babacan’s agenda. Turkey’s policy of asserting itself as a major actor in the Middle East, Central Asia, and the Caucasus coincided with its new role as a nonpermanent member of the United Nations Security Council. Leading Turkish experts interpreted this growing foreign policy activism as essentially detrimental to the EU project.
Having identified a trend among Turkey’s political elite of declining enthusiasm for “full membership” and a growing preference for “privileged partnership,” Ziya Onis, a professor of international relations, argued that “The counterpart of this in the foreign policy realm is an approach based on ‘soft Euro-Asianism’ in which … an attempt is made to develop a friendly relationship with all neighboring countries but without the EU providing the main axis or the reference point for foreign policy” (“Recent Foreign Policy Attitudes in Turkey,” DIIS Brief, November 2008).
In a December 2008 Report, the International Crisis Group maintained that 2009 would be the “make or break” year. The report expected both sides’ attitude at this critical threshold to determine the future direction of Turkey’s European Union vacation, and presented two alternative paths: a breakthrough or a collapse of membership talks. Though recognizing the EU’s own mistakes, the report put the blame for the poor status of relations on the Turkish government’s failure to keep up with the EU’s reform expectations (“Turkey and Europe: The Decisive Year Ahead,” International Crisis Group, Report No: 197, December 15, 2008, www.crisisgroup.org).
The urgency placed on the year 2009 stems from the fact that the EU will review Turkey’s progress on the issue of ports this year, which is viewed by some as a de facto ultimatum. In 2006 the EU suspended negotiations on eight chapters, because Turkey refused to open its air and sea ports to Greek Cypriot vessels. Babacan had earlier played down the EU pressure and rejected treating this review as an ultimatum. He instead pointed his finger at the EU for stalling in the accession process (Zaman, December 19).
The appointment of a state minister whose sole responsibility it is to lead membership negotiations, along with the new institutional arrangement, is taken as an indicator of the government’s decision to refocus its attention on the EU project. EU representatives welcomed Bagis’s appointment. Erdogan is scheduled to visit Brussels on January 19, the first such trip in four years (Milliyet, January 10).
It remains to be seen, however, whether the resumption of the EU project will be geared toward full membership or whether Turkey will settle for some sort of “privileged partnership.” Erdogan’s appointment of the chief negotiator from the AKP’s own ranks, instead of a bureaucrat, and bringing the ABGS under his authority indicate his determination to maintain full control over the membership talks and proceed at the AKP’s own pace. Some observers are critical of this decision: “independent of Mr. Bagis’s appointment, [the danger] is that the government was trying to politicize its relationship with Europe and move the process away from the bureaucracy to its own appointees,” Today’s Zaman wrote (January 11).
Since it is no secret that Euro-skeptic arguments enjoy popularity within Erdogan’s own cabinet, Bagis will have to bargain with other ministers to revitalize the accession process. One advantage he will have in this battle will be his close association with Erdogan. Since joining party before the 2002 elections, Bagis, 38, had been a member of parliament and served in the party and government in many capacities. Most importantly, he was renowned as one of Erdogan’s top advisors in foreign relations. Since the 2007 elections, he also has been the AKP’s deputy chairman for foreign affairs. With his fluency in English, Bagis has taken part in negotiations on many international problems. He received his education in American schools and worked in the United States prior to joining the party. Given this experience, he has played a major role in the conduct of Turkish-American relations. Bagis has been one of the staunchest advocates of Erdogan and has commanded his respect and support. Although Erdogan has occasionally replaced his other top aides because of political disagreements or public pressure, Bagis has managed to maintain his place in Erdogan’s close circle (Hurriyet Daily News, January 10).
The future of Turkish-EU relations might depend on what role Bagis foresees for himself and whether he will cave in to the growing anti-EU sentiment. If he can chart an independent role as the chief negotiator and develop an assertive portfolio to revitalize the membership talks, he might be the new hero of liberal-reformists. In this case, he could use his ties to Erdogan as leverage to overcome intra-cabinet obstacles. He might as well continue to act as Erdogan’s man, in which case he is more likely to maintain the same populist attitude, continuing to blame the EU for the shortcomings in the process and avoiding major reforms.
https://jamestown.org/program/can-egemen-bagis-revive-turkeys-stalled-eu-accession-process/
-
A New Russia Upon a Hill
By Igor Panarin
The United States, which is at the epicenter of the global financial tsunami, will suffer the most damage in 2009. In a worst-case scenario that has a roughly 50 percent chance of coming true, the dollar and the entire U.S. economy will crash by November. As a result, the country’s dire political and economic problems could lead to fierce competition between the states in which wealthier states will withhold funds from the federal government and threaten secession and civil war. This in turn could lead to disintegration of the country into six parts by the summer of 2010 as the leading foreign powers take their pieces of the fallen giant. Under this scenario, California and six western states would fall under Chinese influence; Alaska would go to Russia; Hawaii would go to Japan or China; 15 states in the Midwest and Great Plains would be under Canadian influence; Texas and eight other southern states would be under Mexican influence; and the eastern seaboard states might join the European Union.
Russia must take advantage of the U.S. crisis by expanding its influence and power both domestically and globally in the following areas:
•Pacific Doctrine
Russia needs regions that can produce breakthrough technological innovations, and Primorye is a leading candidate to fulfill this role. While preserving its military and political importance, Primorye should become a powerful financial and economic outpost in the Asia-Pacific region in the 21st century. By 2012, it can and should become one of the main centers of international business activity, a hub for investment and innovation.
The political future of Russia’s leaders, as well as its ability to become a leader in innovation, will largely depend on whether Primorye’s political elite can — with Kremlin support — adapt to the reality of world politics.
This primarily means supporting the concept of a fifth “I” — intellect — in addition to President Dmitry Medvedev’s four I’s of institutions, infrastructure, investment and innovation. This would entail developing a partnership between government and the private sector that will ensure Russia’s position as a world leader.
•Former Soviet Republics
A U.S. collapse would lead to a political and military vacuum among former U.S. allies in Eastern Europe, the Caucasus and Central Asia. Russia should declare its intention to return to the foreign policies of Catherine the Great.
•The Middle East
Russia should start by building a strategic partnership with Turkey, which supported Russia in its war with Georgia in August. Russia should take over all of the former U.S. military bases on Turkish territory. In addition, Russia should take full advantage of the U.S. withdrawal from Iraq and Afghanistan by deploying forces from the Shanghai Cooperation Organization to provide peace and stability.
•South Asia
Russia should try to become the main arbiter in the dispute between India and Pakistan. It would also make sense to include Iran and China in the settlement process.
•South America and the Caribbean
Moscow should focus on strengthening its ties and influence in Brazil, Venezuela and Cuba. Russia should direct colossal economic and military resources to those three countries.
The year 2010 should see the re-establishment of Russia’s radar station at Lourdes in Cuba that Moscow abandoned in 2001 with 750 technicians and 2,000 troops. At a December meeting of leaders from 33 South American states — which was held without the participation of the United States for the first time — Mexican President Felipe Calderon proposed creating an organization called the Union of South American and Caribbean Basin States that would facilitate political and economic change on the continent. If such an organization is established, Russia should strive to become a strategic economic and informational-ideological partner.
By expanding its influence in the above areas, Russia can integrate Eurasia and strengthen its political, economic and military influence in the world. The U.S. decline offers Russia a golden opportunity to replace the United States as the world’s leading superpower.
Igor Panarin, former analyst with the KGB, is dean of the international relations department at the Foreign Ministry’s Diplomatic Academy.
Monday, January 12, 2009
Updated at 12 January 2009 1:39 Moscow Time. -
Armenia denies receiving $800 mln worth of Russian arms
YEREVAN, January 12 (RIA Novosti) – Armenia’s Defense Ministry on Monday denied a report from Baku alleging that Russian arms had been handed over to Yerevan.
Azerbaijani media previously reported that arms worth a total of $800 million had been transferred to Armenia from a Russian military base in the country.
“That is yet another piece of disinformation by Azerbaijani propaganda. I don’t think there is a need to comment on it,” said the Armenian defense minister’s press secretary, Col. Seiran Shakhsuvaryan.
Azerbaijan’s Foreign Ministry said earlier on Monday that it was studying the report.
“As soon as the necessary information is obtained, the Foreign Ministry will formulate its position,” said Elkhan Polukhov, first secretary of the Azerbaijani Foreign Ministry.
Relations between Azerbaijan and Armenia became strained when Nagorny Karabakh, a region in Azerbaijan with a largely Armenian population, declared its independence from Azerbaijan to join Armenia in 1988. The enclave has been a source of conflict ever since.