Tag: Kerry

Davutoglu Invokes Ottomanism As a New Order for Mideast

U.S. Secretary of State Kerry shakes hands with Turkish FM Davutoglu at Ankara Palas in Ankara

US Secretary of State John Kerry (L) shakes hands with Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu after their news conference at Ankara Palas in Ankara, March 1, 2013. (photo by REUTERS/Umit Bektas)

Speaking of the international order or lack thereof has always been controversial. For Turkey to challenge the international order, however, carries some real risks — simply because it’s a NATO member country, and its objections raise questions as to whether it’s proposing an alternative foreign policy to this military bloc’s generally perceived worldview, and if so, whether it is diverging in its perception of security issues from the rest. NATO is also the most significant alliance Turkey has, anchoring it in the West.

About This Article

Summary :

Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu’s suggestion of an Ottoman model for a new Middle East order is likely a misreading of regional politics that could prove hard for Turkey to back away from, writes Tulin Daloglu.

Author: Tulin Daloglu
Posted on : March 10 2013

The ongoing criticism that comes out of Ankara to the international order is not news. The Erdogan government has been vocally asking for the enlargement of the UN Security Council, especially since the Russian and Chinese veto power has been presented as the main stumbling block before the international community to establish no-fly zones in the war-torn Syrian battlefield for the past two years.

As setting a no-fly zone literally means for the international community to decide to go to war against Syria — since they need to knock down all the radar systems to do that, Ankara therefore has also been rallying for war against the Assad regime. While Turkey’s initiatives on that were not realized, NATO responded positively to Turkey’s request to install Patriot missiles on its territory as a precaution against an escalation of the Syrian fighting into Turkey. Yet Ankara has been tirelessly complaining about the lack of the international community’s moral obligation to Syrians, while being dreadfully dependent on it, maybe more than ever, for the protection of its eastern borders — not only with the Assad regime, but potentially with Iraq and Iran as well. And not that all this cooperation has to be about military engagement, but Ankara needs the political support of the countries that it criticizes to keep things under control and to its benefit.

The reason for this entire introduction is simply this: It’s more than likely now than ever that Ankara has been misreading the current developments in its neighborhood, and the making of the new world order.

Like Henry Kissenger, Ahmet Davutoglu, the Turkish Foreign Minister, is also coming from academia — but it’s very likely that he is finding it way too difficult to admit that his academic theories actually has not been practically working on the ground — yet he keeps on dwelling in the same direction without any hope. Kissinger, a former secretary of state, was more practical in that sense.

Take Davutoglu’s recent remarks on two consecutive days, March 3 and 4 — as an example. First he claims that Turkey for the first time has finally been back to the lands that were lost during the Ottoman times, and he suggests that it’s time for Turkey to take the lead to set an order for these lands and re-connect them once again — “Without going to war, we will again tie Sarajevo to Damascus, Benghazi to Erzurum and to Batumi.”

Before continuing with his following remarks though, two quick observations need to be made. First, there is nothing against these cities or countries to feel against being connected to one another. The world is a village, and who ever likes to join hands and work together may do that. Therefore, his remarks as such invite questions as to whether he is proposing an alternative foreign policy, and what that means exactly. Second of all, it may not be the place of Turkey’s foreign minister to suggest that Sarajevo to be tied to Damascus — especially at a time like this, when Syria is drowning in an unfortunate civil war, one needs to wonder as to what the people of Sarajevo think about such a proposal!

But, let’s not linger on that point and get lost in the conversation. After all, Davutoglu is wondering why people use an accusatory rhetoric, as if his policy suggestions mean to suggest the refurbishment of Ottoman era.

Here is why in his own words: “Last century was only a parenthesis for us. We will close that parenthesis. We will do so without going to war, or calling anyone an enemy, without being disrespectful to any border, we will again tie Sarajevo to Damascus, Benghazi to Erzurum to Batumi. This is the core of our power,” he said. “These may look like all different countries to you, but Yemen and Skopje were part of the same country 110 years ago, or Erzurum and Benghazi. When we say this, they call it ‘new Ottomanism.’ The ones who united the whole Europe don’t become new Romans, but the ones who unite the Middle East geography are called as new Ottomanists. It’s an honor to be reminded with the names of Ottomans, Seljuks, Artuklu or Eyyubi, but we have never or will ever have our eye on anyone’s land based on a historic background.”

On March 4, Davutoglu continued with his remarks: “The people who lived together throughout the history in this region were torn apart from each other in the last century; they grew distant from each other. Turkey was the central country at the time when borders were diminished, geography was divided, and economic spheres were separated. As if these are not enough, a new seed of division started to be planted in our country.”

This new seed Davutoglu is referring to is the Kurdish nationalism that seeks some form of autonomy or recognition. He calls on everyone to grasp the importance of the moment, and be alert for those who might attempt to prevent Turkey from growing stronger as a country that has solved its Kurdish problem.

“This current labor pain is the pain of gaining back that old historical nature. We have to get our act together both domestically and abroad. Surely, we have to first cure our own problem,” he says. “It’s time to think big. When I was an academician, I used to observe this country feeling scared of communism during winter, and division [of its land] during summer [i.e., creation of a Turkish Kurdistan]. It’s now time to solve our own problem. If this gets delayed, the traumas from the outside will inevitably play a negative impact on us, and that it will be likely that the opposite may also happen.”

“What I have observed in foreign policy practice is that if you have a right reading, and presented a firm position, you may receive criticism in the first place, but you will get results in the mid- and long-term. What is important is to stand firm there. If you are confident of your policy, you should not give any concessions. What is important is not to be indecisive at a critical, decision-making moment.”

Fair enough, but Turkey has not accomplished anything solid with Davutoglu’s policy except strengthening its trade ties with the Arab Muslim countries. That said, Europe still remains Turkey’s major trading partner. Yet for things where Turkey has put its political capital on the line in the region — whether siding with Hamas against Israel, or rallying the international community to use military force to end the Assad regime in Syria, it has not scored anything concrete to show as a Turkish victory. In that perspective, one has to ask — what happens if Davutoglu’s policies are actually wrong, and that his insistence on wrong policies exposes Turkey to new and unprecedented threats? Who would actually bear the responsibility for that?

May he be humble enough to understand that he, or anyone else for that matter, won’t be able to bear the responsibility for it all when things get rough.

It’s time for the Erdogan government to listen to the critics of its policies, and at the very least begin toning down these arrogant suggestions that Turkey be the core country for setting a new order for those once-Ottoman lands.

That said, it may already be too late for Turkey to take a new direction.

Tulin Daloglu is a columnist for Al-Monitor’s Turkey Pulse. She has written extensively for various Turkish and American publications, including The New York Times, International Herald Tribune, The Middle East Times, Foreign Policy, The Daily Star (Lebanon) and the SAIS Turkey Analyst Report. She also had a regular column at The Washington Times for almost four years. In the 2002 general election, Daloglu ran for a seat in the Turkish parliament as a member of the New Turkey Party.

Read more: http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2013/03/turkey-davutologu-ottoman-new-order-mideast.html#ixzz2NDrCWEvk

March 11, 2013

John Kerry Roasts Turkey

On his first trip abroad, the new secretary of state criticized Erdogan’s comments about Israel. It’s about time.

By Lee Smith

Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan is not a man who minces words. He has called Israel a “terrorist state” and has suggested that “Allah would punish” Israel for its inhumane actions in Gaza. Usually, the United States pretends not to hear Erdogan’s rants—but not on Friday, when John Kerry, while visiting Ankara during his first trip abroad as secretary of state, denounced Erdogan for calling Zionism “a crime against humanity.” In response to Erdogan, Kerry said: “We not only disagree with it, we found it objectionable.”

On Monday at AIPAC, Vice President Joe Biden praised Kerry for standing up to the Turkish prime minister—and Kerry deserved the props. Kerry’s comment is as critical as State Department language gets regarding a NATO ally—and it’s about time. Policymakers from the Bush and Obama Administrations have sweet-talked and protected Erdogan since his Justice and Development party, known by its Turkish acronym AKP, came to power in 2003. Both White Houses saw Turkey as the model for moderate Islamism, a political current ostensibly willing to embrace democratic norms and project friendly power abroad, including the continuation of its strategic relationship with Israel. They believed Erdogan held the future of U.S. Middle East policy in his hands.

But for Erdogan and the AKP that vision has come undone. Domestically, some of his key allies have become powerful and dangerous domestic rivals. Abroad, the uprising in neighboring Syria has shown Ankara’s limits, incapable of shaping even its own immediate sphere of influence. These days, Turkey is looking less like an Anatolian tiger than the mouse that roared. The prospective pillar of Obama’s Middle East policy—the regional power that the White House might have hoped would replace Israel as a strategic ally—is now in meltdown.

***

It all looked like it was going Turkey’s way just two years ago. Erdogan had positioned himself as a power broker, and Barack Obama considered him one of his closest friends among world leaders. From the White House’s perspective, Erdogan seemed like he had the best possible shot at bridging the distance between Washington and Tehran. The administration hoped he might strike a deal over the Iranian nuclear program that would satisfy both sides. Moreover, the White House believed he would serve as an intermediary between the Americans and the Middle East’s increasingly powerful Sunni Islamist movement, especially the Muslim Brotherhood, in Egypt and elsewhere.

All this was made possible by the fact that Erdogan had radically re-oriented Turkey. Ever since Mustafa Kemal Ataturk had founded the Turkish republic in 1923, Turkey had looked westward for inspiration and friendship, distinguishing itself as a key NATO ally and bulwark against Soviet encroachment. But in spite of American entreaties, the EU kept deferring Ankara’s membership throughout the 1990s, justifying Europe’s obvious contempt of Turkey by conditioning EU accession on a healthy human-rights record. (And indeed, today Turkey has more journalists in jail than China does.)

Hence Erdogan looked elsewhere, forsaking Europe in favor of that vast and oil-rich region stretching from the Persian Gulf to western North Africa once ruled from Istanbul by Ankara’s storied ancestors the Ottomans. The new watchword was “zero problems with neighbors,” a foreign-policy strategy cooked up by an Islamist intellectual who in 2009 became Erdogan’s foreign minister, Ahmet Davutoglu.

In order to show his seriousness, Erdogan played a hand guaranteed to win him the approbation of Muslims and Arabs: the Israel card. In the wake of Operation Cast Lead, Israel’s winter 2008-09 military campaign against Hamas in Gaza, he confronted Israeli President Simon Peres at Davos and told him: “When it comes to killing, you know well how to kill”—and then stormed off the stage. In May 2010, when Israeli commandos boarded a Turkish ship, the Mavi Marmara, to stop it from breaking the naval blockade of Gaza, they were attacked by ship passengers, nine of whom were killed. Erdogan demanded Israel make amends. “As long as Israel does not apologize, does not pay compensation, and does not lift the embargo on Palestine,” he said, “it is not possible for Turkey-Israeli ties to improve.”

Obama worked on Turkey’s behalf to secure an apology, in the apparent belief that the burden for fixing a relationship that Erdogan had set out to trash was on Israel. (Israeli Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu refused to apologize.) The White House also gave the Turkish leader a pass when the AKP and its allies in the Gulenist movement, a cultlike political trend associated with the charismatic preacher Fetullah Gulen, started prosecuting journalists and military officers on charges stemming from the so-called Ergenekon plot. As I wrote in this column in 2010, Ergenekon was largely a political fiction cooked up to intimidate and silence opponents of the AKP and the Gulenists.

The White House ignored the obvious signs of Erdogan’s problematic character because the role for which it had cast him was too important. With American troops out of Iraq and scheduled to depart from Afghanistan, and Obama determined to avoid committing more resources to the Middle East, the administration sought a partner capable of keeping the order and doing the work it no longer wanted to do itself. In other words, Obama wanted to switch Israel for Turkey. Jerusalem would remain a U.S. ally, but the heavy lifting and the diplomatic outreach would be done by Ankara, which, unlike Israel, was a Muslim power in a Muslim region and, also unlike Israel, prided itself on its zero problems with its neighbors’ policy.

***

But the sticking point is that if you live in the Middle East you are always going to have problems with your neighbors. Erdogan found this out the hard way, with the outbreak of the Syrian uprising. The Turkish prime minister considered Bashar al-Assad a “good friend,” but after watching the Syrian president fire on what were then peaceful demonstrators for more than half a year, Erdogan finally called for Assad to step down in November 2011. With refugees flowing across the border, Erdogan tried to enlist the Obama Administration in a more pro-active policy to topple Assad, but he was ignored.

Hung out to dry by Obama, Erdogan was left vulnerable to Assad as well as domestic criticism. In June, the Syrians, with Russian help, downed a Turkish jet, and the White House sided with Damascus’ account of the incident, blaming it on Ankara. In October, Syriashelled Turkish villages, and all Erdogan could do was complain.

Erdogan’s Syria policy, according to Turkish journalist Tolga Tanis, marks the first time that Turkish public opinion has tilted against the AKP’s foreign policy. “At least 60 percent according to the polls are against Erdogan’s Syria policy,” said Tanis. “The security risk is skyrocketing, and Turks are losing money.”

Supporting the anti-Assad rebels has exposed Turkey to retaliation from a longstanding Syrian ally and Turkish enemy, the Kurdish Workers’ party. Also, Turks don’t want a refugee problem on their hands, especially when some of those refugees crossing the Syrian border are Islamist militants. Moreover, with Syria consumed by civil war, Turkey has lost a major trade route to the rest of the region.

Then there’s the failure of Erdogan’s once-vaunted soft power. The Obama Administration tasked out much of its Arab Spring diplomacy to its man in Ankara, and in the immediate aftermath of the upheavals that brought down dictators, Erdogan was greeted by throngs in Cairo praising him as the region’s great new leader. But two years on, Muslim Brotherhood parties allied with the AKP, itself a Brotherhood party, have failed to deliver on the promises that brought them to power around the region. Were Erdogan to show his face today in the Egyptian capital, it would likely serve as a target for an unhappy, unemployed shoe-thrower.

At home, Erdogan’s AKP is now at odds with the Gulenists, who seem to have taken charge of the Ergenekon trials in order to secure their hold over what Turks call the “deep state,” which includes the judiciary and police. When the army’s former chief of staff Ilker Basbug was arrested last year even Erdogan thought this was going too far. “I think claims that he is a member of a terrorist organization are very ugly,” said Erdogan.

Undermined at home and exposed abroad as a weakling—it’s hardly any wonder Erdogan is ranting against Israel again. “It was not improvised, but scripted,” said Tanis. “He was anticipating Kerry’s visit.” The difference between now and Davos in 2009 or the Mavi Marmara in 2010 is that Erdogan is projecting not power but neediness. He wants to know if the White House still loves him and needs him more than Israel. The evidence is not in his favor.

***

Like this article? Sign up for our Daily Digest to get Tablet Magazine’s new content in your inbox each morning.

Lee Smith is a senior editor at the Weekly Standard , a fellow at the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, and the author of The Strong Horse: Power, Politics, and the Clash of Arab Civilizations.

March 7, 2013
Dear Mr. Kerry and Mr. Erdogan: Shut Up

by Suzan Boulad (Syria)

Dear Mr. Secretary of State John Kerry and Mr. Prime Minister Recip Tayyib Erdogan,

It is perhaps not with the utmost respect but with some respect when I sincerely ask of you both to just shut up.

Lately Mr. Kerry, you’ve managed to baptize your new term as Secretary of State with a a few headlines about how you gave Mr. Erdogan a stern talking to. You see, Mr. Erdogan committed a faux pas when he declared that Zionism was a crime against humanity, words which personally resonate with my support of the Palestinian people. (We’ve heard lots of great words from Turkey before, though, without nearly as many actions) But as Israel’s unilateral ally, the United States could not let these scary words go unanswered, and thus Mr. Kerry scolded Turkey, and by the way, the cameras caught your good side.

Mr. Erdogan, I’m sure you’ve been enjoying some cameras yourself. Such a strong, noble leader, taking a stand against the Middle East’s biggest bully in support of Palestinian rights. It’s funny that you should mention Palestinian rights.

Lately a protest was suppressed in Palestine violently using water cannons and tear gas, and many people were arrested. Palestinian politicians were also attacked by racist Israelis hurling stones and epithets at these distinguished figures. Palestinians are wasting away in Israeli prisons, charged unjustly and with little hope of release.

Oh wait.

That’s in Turkey. And those are Kurds, not Palestinians.

Of course, Palestinians are also suffering from all of these things, and this is not to compare two long and hard struggles for justice for two peoples. This isn’t to pit Palestinian vs. Kurd, but to reveal you, Mr. Erdogan, for the hypocrite you are. Because these injustices that you condemn when they happen to a Palestinian, also happen on a regular basis right under your nose and with your blessing to the Kurds. So, it’s great that you think you’re this wonderful protector of human rights, but I recommend looking a little closer to home. I know of a few cases of human rights abuses that should appeal to your philanthropic side.

As for you, Mr. Kerry, well. In your rush to take a strong stance against Turkey you seem to have forgotten that it is your government’s policy to support Turkey when it comes to certain interests, such as “fighting terrorism” and “surveillance”. In fact, it was your government’s assistance that helped Turkey “fight terrorism” when they slaughtered 34 innocent civilians in December of 2011 in the Roboski Massacre, using U.S. sponsored surveillance drones.

And so, Mr. Kerry, forgive me if I don’t take your umbrage at Turkey’s comments too seriously. You and I both know that Turkey is a valuable ally to the U.S., even if it accidentally says something too strongly in the way of human rights and justice.

So lets summarize these events, shall we? Mr. Erdogan calls Zionism a crime against humanity, then acts completely oblivious towards his own crimes. Israel gets its feathers ruffled and the U.S. via Mr. Kerry rushes to defend it bravely, while continuing to supply Turkey with weapons. Meetings are held, diplomats are soothed, and a lot of talking happens.

And in the meantime, Palestinians and Kurds continue to suffer.

Thank you for your time, Mr. Kerry and Erdogan,

Sincerely,

Suzan.

via Dear Mr. Kerry and Mr. Erdogan: Shut Up | Alliance for Kurdish Rights.

March 5, 2013
Kerry’s Ankara visit to bridge the rift in US-Turkey ties

Photo: EPA

A planned visit of U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry’s to Turkey on Friday is meant to heal the rift between Ankara and Washington and smooth out differences over a number of issues between the two NATO allies, Turkish analysts said.

New US Secretary of State John Kerry is visiting Turkey for talks expected to focus on the conflict in Syria.

The two Nato allies both oppose Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, but differ on how best to support the opposition.

The visit is being overshadowed by a row over comments by Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, who called Zionism a “crime against humanity”.

US officials said Mr Kerry would raise the remarks directly with Mr Erdogan.

Israel’s relations with Turkey have deteriorated in recent years.

Yasin Aktay, the president of the Institute of Strategic Thinking (SDE), said that there are various issues need to be discussed between the two sides.

“During Kerry’s visit, all the pending issues in the region and on the bilateral level, including situation in Syria and Iraq will be put on the table,” he said.

“The US-Turkish relations are generally good, but not without even a thorny issue. There are differences in the approaches in Syria, Iraq, Israel and Iran, but both the United States and Turkey share the same goals,” Mehmet Sahin, a professor of international relations at the Ankara-based Gazi University, told Xinhua.

Voice of Russia, Xinhua, BBC

via Kerry’s Ankara visit to bridge the rift in US-Turkey ties: Voice of Russia.

March 2, 2013
Turkey’s Recep Tayyip Erdogan under fire for Zionism remarks

Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan Photo: AP

By Robert Tait, Jerusalem4:05PM GMT 01 Mar 2013

The comment, made at a United Nations conference to promote religious tolerance, earned a rebuke from Israel, the United Nations and the US, overshadowing a visit by John Kerry, the secretary of state, in Ankara for talks with Mr Erdogan on Syria.

Speaking to the global forum of the Alliance of Civilisations in Vienna on Wednesday, Mr Erdogan said: “As is the case for Zionism, anti-Semitism and fascism, it is inevitable that Islamophobia be considered a crime against humanity.”

Mr Kerry said he found the remarks “objectionable”.

“We not only disagree with it, but we find it objectionable,” he said, during a joint press conference with Ahmet Davutoglu, his Turkish counterpart. “I raised the speech with the foreign minister and I will raise it with the prime minister.”

A senior US official travelling with Mr Kerry’s party condemned the remark as “offensive” and said Turkish officials would be left in no doubt about Washington’s annoyance.

“This was particularly offensive, frankly, to call Zionism a crime against humanity … It does have a corrosive effect (on relations),” the official said. “I am sure the secretary will be very clear about how dismayed we were to hear it.”

“The Turkey-Israel relationship is frozen. We want to see a normalisation … not just for the sake of the two countries but for

the sake of the region and, frankly, for the symbolism,”

The Obama administration has sought to maintain close ties with Turkey — a majority Muslim country that is also a NATO ally — despite its deteriorating relationship with Israel partly because of its potential ability to be a broker in the civil war in Syria.

Mr Erdogan’s remark had earlier been denounced by the White House and by Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister, who called it “a dark and mendacious statement the likes of which we thought had passed from the world”.

Ban Ki-moon, the UN secretary general, who was present during Mr Erdogan’s speech and heard it on simultaneous translation, said it breached the spirit of the Alliance of Civilisations, which was formed in 2005 — with Turkey as a co-sponsor – to promote east-west understanding and combat extremism.

“The Secretary-General believes it is unfortunate that such hurtful and divisive comments were uttered at a meeting being held under the theme of responsible leadership,” a statement from his office said.

“If the comment about Zionism was interpreted correctly, then it was not only wrong but contradicts the very principles on which the Alliance of Civilizations is based.”

Mr Ban had earlier come under attack from UN Watch, a Geneva-based group proclaiming affiliations to the US Jewish community, for failing to criticise Mr Erdogan’s speech immediately after it was made.

Pro-Zionist groups frequently complain that the UN is biased against Israel — pointing to a 1975 resolution equating Zionism with racism.

The resolution was revoked in 1991 after the collapse of the Soviet Union.

Relations between Israel and Turkey — once close allies — have been strained since 2010, when nine Turkish activists were killed after Israeli commandoes stormed a flotilla heading for the Gaza Strip. Mr Netanyahu has resisted Turkish pressure to apologise and pay compensation.

Ties between the two nations were recently said to be undergoing a quiet revival, encouraged by the US, amid reports that Israel had resumed selling armament equipment to Turkey.

Mr Erdogan, a former Islamist, has sharply criticised Israel in the past, although he has refrained from attacks on Zionism. In 2009 he stormed out of a debate with the Israeli president, Shimon Peres, at the World Economic Forum in Davos, after telling him “you Israelis know how to kill”.

via Turkey’s Recep Tayyip Erdogan under fire for Zionism remarks – Telegraph.

March 2, 2013
John Kerry holds talks on Syria crisis in Ankara

US Secretary of State John Kerry met his Turkish counterpart Ahmet Davutoglu

New US Secretary of State John Kerry has been holding talks with his Turkish counterpart on the conflict in Syria.

At a news conference with Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu, Mr Kerry said the two Nato allies shared a common goal – to end the suffering of innocent civilians in Syria.

Turkey and the US both oppose Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, but differ on how best to support the opposition.

The visit has been overshadowed by the Turkish PM’s remarks about Zionism.

Recep Tayyip Erdogan earlier this week called Zionism a “crime against humanity” – remarks that have been widely condemned, and which Mr Kerry on Friday called “objectionable”.

On the subject of Syria, UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon said on Friday he was “personally pained and distraught” by the ongoing violence and suffering of civilians.

He said there was a “very small window of opportunity” for the Syrian government and the opposition to hold talks, and admitted that, for the UN, there was “not much political space”.

Mr Ban went on to say that, in his opinion, the only thing for the moment was to increase humanitarian assistance but it was “almost impossible” for aid agencies to provide enough relief, as they were continually “outpaced” by the need.

Frustration

The crisis in Syria has been a central issue in John Kerry’s first overseas trip as secretary of state, which is taking him to 11 countries in Europe and the Middle East.

He said in Ankara that the US and Turkey “both believe the first priority is to try and have a political solution. We would like to save lives, not see them caught up in a continuing war”.

Mr Davutoglu said their main objective was to “protect the innocent civilians of Syria”.

In Rome on Thursday, Mr Kerry promised direct aid to Syrian rebels in the form of food and medical supplies, but not the weapons they say they need to win.

Turkey has taken in more than 200,000 Syrian refugees and has been hit by deadly shelling across its 900km (560 mile) border with Syria.

Turkey wants the Syrian rebels to win the war as soon as possible and will be keen to convey its sense of frustration to Mr Kerry, the BBC’s James Reynolds in Istanbul says.

The US and other Nato allies have deployed Patriot missile interceptors to repel any possible attack by missiles or aircraft from Syria.

Mr Erdogan has been outspoken in his support for Syrian rebels and has advocated the creation of a buffer zone inside northern Syria to protect people fleeing the fighting.

Turkey began massing troops along the frontier in June last year after Syria shot down a Turkish reconnaissance jet off its coast.

In October the Turkish army fired on military targets in Syria in retaliation for cross-border mortar fire.

The rebel Free Syrian Army is thought to receive weapons and other supplies from Turkey.

‘Fuelling violence’

The US has refrained from arming the rebels, in part because of concerns the weapons could eventually fall into the hands of Islamist militants who might attack its interests.

On Thursday in Rome, Mr Kerry promised an additional $60m (£40m) in aid to the opposition Syrian National Coalition to help it deliver basic governance and other services in rebel-controlled areas.

He also promised direct support in the form of food and medical supplies to rebel forces, in what correspondents say was a shift in US policy on Syria.

Russia – a close ally of President Assad – has said the promises of aid to the opposition made by the US and other countries in the “Friends of Syria” group will encourage further violence rather than a negotiated solution.

“The decisions taken in Rome… directly encourage extremists towards precisely a violent seizure of power, despite the suffering of ordinary Syrians,” Russian Foreign Ministry spokesman Aleksandr Lukashevich said.

via BBC News – John Kerry holds talks on Syria crisis in Ankara.

March 2, 2013