Turkish Forum

Tag: missile-defense negotiations

  • Senators to Clinton: Don’t sign Turkish missile defense agreement

    Senators to Clinton: Don’t sign Turkish missile defense agreement

    Posted By Josh Rogin Wednesday, July 13, 2011 – 5:05 PM Share

    When Secretary of State Hillary Clinton gets to Istanbul on Friday, senators and their staffs will be watching closely to see if she moves the ball forward on an agreement to station U.S. missile defense radar there, an agreement many Republicans oppose.

    “We write with concern over recent reports that the administration may be nearing completion of a bilateral agreement with the Turkish Government to base a U.S. AN/TPY-2 (X-Band) radar in Turkey,” wrote Sens. Jon Kyl (R-AZ) and Mark Kirk (R-IL) in a July 12 letter to Clinton and Defense Secretary Leon Panetta obtained by The Cable.

    The senators want the radar to be based in either Georgia or Azerbaijan, which they argue are better locations for defending against a missile attack from Iran. But more broadly, they are concerned that Ankara will place a number of onerous restrictions on the radar, such as demanding that no data be shared with Israel. The senators have also accused Turkey of violating U.S. sanctions against Iran, which they said calls into question their reliability as a partner in organizing a missile defense system aimed at Tehran.

    In a May 12 meeting with Principal Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Policy James Miller, a senior Missile Defense Agency representative told the senators that “a forward-deployed X-Band radar in either Georgia or Armenia would have significant advantages for the missile defense of the United States,” the senator wrote.

    The senators wrote a May 16 letter to Miller asking for a complete analysis of alternative sites, but they said that they have yet to receive any response.

    Kyl and Kirk also suggested that they will attempt to thwart any missile defense agreement with Turkey unless the Turks agree to share data with Israel, stop violating Iran sanctions laws, and keep the system under the control of U.S. personnel.

    For both the Obama administration and the George W. Bush administration preceding it, international missile defense deployment has always been based on both security and diplomatic considerations. The Bush administration plan to place missile defense infrastructure in Poland and the Czech Republic was a key aspect of strengthening relationships with those two countries, until the Obama administration scuttled it.

    A senior GOP Senate aide explained the insider rationale to The Cable.

    “Secretary Clinton knows the Congress well and she knows that support for a radar in Turkey will quickly collapse on both sides of the aisle if the Turks get any control over its operational activity or veto rights over sharing data with Israel,” the aide said. “Given Turkey’s strained relationship with Israel and non-compliance with U.S. sanctions against Iran, there’s a strong feeling that if the Turks have any operational control over the radar we can be sure it will be turned off the day we need it most.”

    via Senators to Clinton: Don’t sign Turkish missile defense agreement | The Cable.

  • ‘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

  • Turkey seeks shield amid missile-defense negotiations

    Turkey seeks shield amid missile-defense negotiations

    a2

    Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu says it’s not so and American officials are mum, but according to a top defense lobbyist, “negotiations are ongoing” over U.S. plans to deploy a missile-defense shield in Turkey, a possibility floated last week by a Polish newspaper.

    Riki Ellison, chairman of the U.S.-based Missle Defense Advocacy Alliance, or MDAA, insisted to the Hürriyet Daily News & Economic Review that claims by the Polish newspaper are valid.

    The stir began last week when the Warsaw-based daily Gazeta Wyborcza reported that U.S. President Barack Obama has “all but abandoned” plans to locate parts of a controversial U.S. missile shield in Poland and the Czech Republic. The newspaper said the Pentagon has been asked to explore switching planned interceptor-rocket launch sites from the two Central European states to Israel, Turkey or the Balkans.

    U.S. plans to deploy a missile-defense system in Poland and the Czech Republic have created serious tension between Russia and the United States in the past. Russia has repeatedly responded to U.S. missile-defense plans with countermeasures.

    It is no secret that the Obama administration’s promise to “reset” relations with Russia prompted Obama to launch a strategic review of the defense shield.

    Amid the Pentagon’s search for a new strategy, last week’s reports turned heads toward Turkey. Foreign Minister Davutoğlu immediately responded to the claims, saying that the government has not received any request from the United States or NATO regarding the missile-defense project.

    Ellison said he hopes to see a working missile-defense shield in operation by 2013. Ellison’s MDAA is a nonprofit organization launched in 2002 to advocate deployment of an anti-missile program.

    Ellison said he believes there will be a concerted effort from the United States to work with the Turkish government to install missile shields at four bases in Turkey. “Negotiations are happening already and they will continue to go forward,” he said.

    Ellison is evidently well informed on the strategy. However, Turkey’s acceptance of the missile-defense plan may not be realistic, given the risk to its relations with Russia, already frayed by other tensions. Turkey may be a U.S. ally, but Russia supplies the majority of its energy and has a hand in Turkey’s future in the Caucasus.

    Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin’s Aug. 6 visit to Ankara for talks with his Turkish counterpart Recep Tayyip Erdoğan secured some 20 agreements covering energy, trade and other areas, including nuclear cooperation. Russian authorities have also agreed to scrap regulations requiring the full inspection of Turkish goods at customs.

    Turkey has been playing a very careful game for some time when it comes to its relations with Russia. Ankara does not want to make an enemy out of Moscow.

    Accepting the deployment of U.S. defense shields in Turkey would be a major step toward a whole new round of tense Turkish-Russian relations at a critical and vulnerable time. Russia would probably play its energy card against Turkey and could even annul this year’s previous agreements.

    The deployment could also have a negative impact on Turkey’s relations with its neighboring countries in the Middle East. Starting with the Turkish Parliament’s March 2003 decision to prevent the United States from invading Iraq through Turkish territory, Turkey has been trying to follow a relatively independent line in its foreign policy. Acceptance of the missile shield would destroy most of Turkey’s diplomatic capital among Middle Eastern countries, which perceived Turkey as making its own decisions after the 2003 bill.

    There is another scenario that sounds more realistic: Turkey currently has no defense against ballistic missiles. According to past news reports, Turkey has been planning to purchase a missile-defense system for some time. Turkey has begun “preliminary talks with the United States, Russia, Israel and China with regard to its plans to buy its first missile defense system, worth more than $1 billion,” wrote the Daily News last year.

    This invites the question: Is missile defense a matter of packaging? Might Turkey avoid allowing the United States to install a missile-defense system on her soil? Rather, might the rumors circulating stem from a bid by Turkey to buy a missile-defense system for herself?

    It is hard to imagine the difference would calm Russia. It is known that Russia is firmly against any U.S. missile shields in Turkey, just as it is against the installations in Central Europe. And despite its determination to expand its military capabilities, Turkey would probably like to stay out of the struggle between Washington and Moscow.

    Hurriyetdailynews