Tag: nato summit

  • NATO Summit shows Erdogan’s turn to the West

    NATO Summit shows Erdogan’s turn to the West

    Erdogan Nato summit

    The NATO Summit held in Vilnius, Lithuania, last week was mostly about Ukraine’s joining the club. As a result, and a new NATO-Ukraine Council was established to help boost cooperation.

    However, there is one more important aspect on the Summit results that deserves attention is the role of Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, who gave the green light to Sweden to join NATO.

    Fresh and full of energy after the re-election, Erdogan seemed to meet everyone and be everywhere during the Summit and demonstrated his strong commitment to further collaboration with the West.

    To the surprise of many, the Turkish leader, after years of blocking the Sweden’s efforts to get a NATO membership, this finally shook a hand of his Swedish counterpart. Certainly, Erdogan got a decent reward for his decision – hours after his vote for Sweden’s joining NATO the U.S. approved a supply of F-16 fighter jets delivered to Turkey.

    For the first time since entering the White House, U.S. President Joe Biden also met his Turkish counterpart. Despite the relations of the two countries has been frosty recently due to Erdogan’s sharp comments towards the U.S., the European Union and the Western values in general, this time the Turkish leader seemed to have chosen the right tone to break the ice and described his American counterpart as “my dear friend” when giving his comments to the media.

    But with the surprise comes some disappointment, too. Some experts believe, Erdogan showed that he was buckling under the West’s pressure. Before the summit, the entire Islamic world looked at him as the leader of Great Turkey with a stern stance to the Islamic values.  But in fact, he changed his mind about Sweden and went along with it. The Turkish people were proud of their President for his steadfastness, character and ability to keep his word, but in fact he once again has shown he does not live up to expectations.

    Playing different cards with opposing sides has become a signature of the Erdogan’s policy. However, changing mind and sides often results with ending up with nothing.

  • No Progress On Sale Of US Drones To Turkey

    No Progress On Sale Of US Drones To Turkey

    (RTTNews) – Talks between Turkish President Abdullah Gul and his U.S. counterpart Barack Obama on the sidelines of the NATO summit in Chicago failed to make any progress on the sale of armed drones to Turkey.

    us air force drone 785837c

    Turkey seeks to buy armed drones from the United States, but the request has turned out to be controversial, with some in the U.S. Congress refusing to agree to a sale of the unmanned aircraft in the context of Ankara’s deteriorating relations with Israel, a close U.S. ally. The U.S. administration is reportedly willing to sell the drones to Turkey and is trying to persuade Congress not to block the sale, Turkish media reports said on Tuesday.

    Gül reportedly told Obama during the meeting that Turkey expected the U.S. to meet its needs for fighting terrorism. But the two leaders could not make any progress on the sale of American drones to Turkey. Obama reportedly told Gül that he understood Turkey’s needs and the sale of the drones was in his administration’s agenda, but he made it clear that he could not strike a deal on the issue bypassing the Congress, the reports said.

    Debate over the planned sale has heated up lately after a U.S. report claimed that American drones provided wrong information on the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK), resulting in the killing of 34 civilians in bombings by Turkish warplanes across the Turkish-Iraqi border after mistaking them for PKK rebels.

    Gül told a group of journalists ahead of his talks that the proposed sale would come up at the meeting with Obama. He argued that “if the sale of reapers is sensitive,” that same should hold true for F-35 jet fighter, which are even “more dangerous.” The U.S. has agreed to share F-35 technology with Turkey, the reports said.

    Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu, Defense Minister Ismet Yilmaz, and Turkish Ambassador to Washington Namik Tan were also present during the 30-minute talks.

    Gül asked Obama to be on the front lines in the international community to help put an end to the 14 months of violence in Syria, and Obama assured Gül that the U.S. was doing what was necessary on the issue. He also said Foreign Ministers of both countries and relevant bodies were working together on the Syria crisis.

    Syria is facing serious challenges because of an influx of refugees from neighboring Syria because of continued crackdowns by the Assad regime on anti-government protesters there. Turkey is now sheltering more than 25,000 Syrian refugees on its territory.

    by RTT Staff Writer

    via No Progress On Sale Of US Drones To Turkey.

  • The NATO Monitor: Turkey Stands up for Itself in NATO

    The NATO Monitor: Turkey Stands up for Itself in NATO

    Turkey Stands up for Itself in NATO

    Martin Butcher 3Turkey came close to blocking EU reps Jose Manual Barroso and Herman van Rompuy from attending the Summit in Chicago. The two received very invitations, but even now they are restricted to sections of the Summit dealing with Afghanistan, reports VOA.

    Clearly Turkish anger at continued blocking of their negotiations to join the EU was behind this move, but it wasn’t their first piece of muscle-flexing in the run-up to Chicago. Previously AFP had reported that Turkey refused Israel a place at the Summit:

    The Turkish official, who requested anonymity, told AFP earlier Monday: “We have not agreed to this. We don’t think Israel should take part in such a forum,” adding: “NATO is an alliance to which Israel does not belong.”

    Turkish press reports said Israel wanted to take part in the key summit as a participant in the Mediterranean Dialogue cooperation programme with NATO.

    This was denied by NATO spokespeople who claimed that there had never been any intention to invite Israel, despite their place in the Alliance’s Mediterranean Partnership. However, it is clear that there was at least the possibility that Israel would be represented at the Summit, even if no official invitation was ever sent. This row is the latest manifestation of the declining relationship between the two previously close partners.

    It has also been reported recently that important Turkish politicians have publicly advocated Macedonian membership of NATO in the face of continued Greek refusal to countenance such a move.

    It seems that these might be signs of Turkey’s importance to the Alliance in a vital neighbourhood, and of the increasing confidence of the current government in NATO.

    Posted by Martin Butcher at 21:24

    via The NATO Monitor: Turkey Stands up for Itself in NATO.

  • Turkey blocks EU from NATO summit unless OIC also attends

    Turkey blocks EU from NATO summit unless OIC also attends

    eu

    European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso (L), EU President Herman Van Rompuy (R) (Photo: EPA)

    30 April 2012 / SERVET YANATMA, ANKARA

    Ankara says it will block EU participation in an upcoming NATO summit unless the Organization of the Islamic Cooperation (OIC) is also allowed to be present.

    EU member states had proposed participation by some of the top EU bureaucrats, including European Commission President José Manuel Barroso and President of the European Council Herman Van Rompuy, who are now unsure whether they will be able to attend the summit taking in Chicago on May 20-21 as representatives of the union due to the objections from Turkey, the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) reported on Friday. Raising the EU’s commitment to a NATO peace mission in Afghanistan, EU member countries including France had argued that the EU should be represented, while Turkey is maintaining that there should only be member state participation in the summit, the WSJ claimed.

    “If non-NATO members will also participate, the OIC should be represented [in the Chicago summit] first and foremost,” Turkish diplomatic sources said in explaining Ankara’s position, speaking to Today’s Zaman on Sunday. The sources claimed that the OIC’s commitment exceeded the EU contribution in the Afghanistan peace mission.

    The EU has exerted efforts for the reconstruction and democratization of Afghanistan in preparation for the post-NATO-mission period in the country. The EU launched a rule of law mission (EUPOL) under the banner of the European Security and Defense Program (ESDP) in June 2007. The union has also initiated a program for justice reform and is helping to fund civilian projects in NATO-run Provincial Reconstruction Teams (PRTs).

    Meanwhile, the OIC, a bloc of 56 countries, is also taking a growing interest in the situation in Afghanistan and Pakistan, and in 2010 it accepted a proposal by member states Turkey and the United Arab Emirates to appoint an OIC permanent representative for Afghanistan.

    The US administration has joined the push for greater OIC involvement in Afghanistan for the last couple of years, which would bring benefits in efforts towards reconciliation between the Afghan government and the Taliban.

    The Turkish diplomatic sources also noted that the different proposals coming from NATO members on who will participate are still being discussed and there is not an ultimate decision yet. They added that there are also objections from other non-EU NATO members to the proposed EU participation in the Chicago summit.

    The background to Turkey’s objection to EU participation in NATO activities involves a more long-standing dispute. Greek Cyprus, representing the entire island as a full member of the EU, blocks Turkish participation in European defense institutions such as the European Defense Agency (EDA). Turkey, a NATO member, has responded by obstructing the EU’s integration in NATO activities.

    Rejection of Israeli partnership in NATO

    Turkey has also blocked Israel’s participation in the summit in a sign of Turkey’s determination to prevent its new foe from cooperating with the alliance following a deadly ship raid.

    Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu said during a NATO meeting in Brussels on April that Turkey will not allow Israel, a member of the Mediterranean Dialogue, a NATO outreach program including seven non-NATO nations, to take part in the alliance’s new “Partnership Cooperation Menu (PCM).

    Turkish-Israeli relations worsened in May 2010 and have remained strained since then after Israeli naval commandos stormed the Mavi Marmara, a ship carrying humanitarian aid to breach Israel’s Gaza blockade, killing nine Turkish civilians.

    Turkey insists that NATO-Israel relations cannot be restored until Turkey-Israel relations are normalized.

    via Turkey blocks EU from NATO summit unless OIC also attends.

  • Istanbul Calling: Cat Fight

    Istanbul Calling: Cat Fight

    Cat Fight

    In the end, Ankara decided to use the recent NATO summit in Lisbon not as an opportunity to make a De Gaulle-style break with the alliance, but rather as a chance to reaffirm Turkey’s commitment to the concept of collective security and to fend off those who were looking for another piece of evidence to prove the alleged Turkish drift eastward.

    The Turkish government was able to bring home the goods on the issue it fought hardest on, which was to not name any country (i.e. Iran) as the reason behind the new NATO missile defense shield program that was agreed upon at the summit. On the other hand, as the Wall Street Journal reported, “Most of a series of other demands Turkey had made in the weeks leading up to the meeting were either dropped or, as in the case of a demand for the control center to be located in Turkey, pushed into the future. Turkish President Abdullah Gul didn’t press these issues on Friday, say people attending the summit.”

    Without any drama or showdowns at the summit itself, things got more interesting once it ended. As Burak Bekdil writes in a typically acerbic column in Today’s Hurriyet Daily News:

    “In France, we call a cat a cat. We all know we are talking about Iran,” President Nicholas Sarkozy said after the NATO summit in Lisbon. Apparently, the French president dislikes verbal contortions surrounding the proposed missile defense architecture. “We, too, call a cat a cat,” Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan replied in Turkey, while vigorously avoiding calling a cat a cat.

    Meanwhile, President Abdullah Gül was proud because Turkey’s efforts to not call a cat a cat had succeeded at the Lisbon summit. Now we have a cat at our east door, but neither we nor our NATO allies would call it a cat. All the same, Mssrs. Sarkozy and Erdoğan claim that they would call a cat a cat.

    In September, NATO’s Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen had also called a cat a cat. The missile shield system, Mr. Rasmussen said, would be against possible attacks from rogue states. It was apparent that his definition of rogue states did not imply Singapore or New Zealand. The secretary general named Iran’s nuclear program as one of the reasons justifying the missile shield. The cat?!

    I think the question is not so much Turkey refusing to “call a cat a cat,” but rather how it perceives the feline. To some of Ankara’s allies (most crucially, the U.S.), the cat is a growling one that often tries to claw those reaching out to stroke it. To Turkey, on the other hand, the cat is a potentially cuddly stray that simply needs to be brought in from the cold (perhaps, as Semih Idiz points out in a recent column, that’s why one of the first things Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu did after the summit was call his Iranian counterpart to update him on developments).

    At the end of the day, though, by joining the missile shield agreement, it appears that Ankara is not taking any chances one way or another. In a good analysis of what the Lisbon summit means for Turkey and transtlantic relations, the German Marshall Fund’s Ian Lesser points out that:

    ….the approach to ballistic missile defense architecture, agreed in principle in Lisbon, suits Turkish security interests to a surprising degree. Turkey’s close political and commercial relations with Tehran, and Ankara’s “no” vote on UN Security Council sanctions, contributed to an atmo- sphere of friction with Western partners on Iran policy. Yet, beneath the differences on Iran diplomacy, Turkey shares — or should share — some concerns about Iran’s nuclear and missile programs. In a technical sense, Turkey is the most exposed member of the alliance when it comes to the growing reach of ballistic missile systems deployed or under development in the Middle East. Ankara may wish to keep an open line with Tehran, but the defense of Turkish territory, including key population centers, still matters.

    Lesser’s analysis paints a fairly positive picture of the post-summit Turkey-NATO/western alliance dynamic, writing:

    ….the Lisbon experience suggests that some aspects of Turkish foreign policy remain cautious and traditional, and the NATO connection still matters when it comes to working with Ankara.

    On the other hand, in his conclusion, Lesser looks ahead, offering this thought:

    The dynamics in Lisbon do not reverse recent trends in Turkish strategy, nor are they irrelevant to future prospects. For the United States and Europe, the Lisbon summit underscores the reality that Turkey’s foreign and security policy is increasingly diverse, in character as well as direction.

    Clearly, many more opportunities to see who calls a cat a cat await Turkey and NATO down the road.

    via Istanbul Calling: Cat Fight.

  • Turkey Scores Diplomatic Victory as NATO Declines to Name Its Enemies

    Turkey Scores Diplomatic Victory as NATO Declines to Name Its Enemies

    Missile shield moves forward, but alliance policy statement doesn’t mention Iran as its object

    turkey missileThe North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) is getting ready to build a defensive shield of missiles based in Turkey and eastern Europe but, thanks to Turkey and its new policy of fast friendships in the Middle East, the missiles’ officially have no enemy to aim at.

    As originally conceived, the $270 million U.S.-backed missile system was designed to protect Europe against possible attacks by “rogue states,” a code word for Iran. But intensive lobbying by Ankara at NATO’s Lisbon summit over the weekend pushed the alliance into adopting a neutral stance on targeting. “The alliance does not consider any country to be its adversary,” NATO’s Strategic Concept declared in an end-conference statement.

    The compromise formula, which was opposed by France and other NATO members, is the latest sign of Turkey’s efforts to distance itself from the West and warm up to its neighbors in the Middle East, including Iran and Syria — two states the U.S. regards as hostile. Analysts say Ankara remains committed to the alliance, but they see continued friction ahead.

    ”It seems neither side is listening to the other before these problems emerge. There is a growing sense of distrust between Turkey and its traditional Western allies. Both sides have to do much more to overcome this distrust,” said Hugh Pope, Turkey-Cyprus project director for the International Crisis Group.

    Last September, NATO Secretary-General Anders Fogh Rasmussen named Iran’s nuclear program as one of the reasons that justify the necessity of a missile system. “If Iran eventually acquires a nuclear capability, that will be very dangerous, and a direct threat to the allies,” he told a conference.

    As the date for the NATO summit approached and Turkey’s opposition appeared implacable, Rasmussen backed down, saying the final plans of the missile system “need not mention the names of any particular country.” He said some 30 countries possess ballistic systems that could hit Europe. “This is reality; you don’t need to mention names,” he told Germany’s Welt am Sonntag newspaper last week.

    Europe, and Turkey in particular, have reason to be concerned about Iran’s arsenal. Tehran’s longest-range ballistic missiles, including the Shahab-3 and the Qiam-1, have ranges of around 2,500 miles, putting NATO allies Turkey and Greece in their line of fire. Europe’s anti-missile defenses now consist of American-made SM-3 missiles, based on American warships. Concern about Iranian missiles is coupled with the West’s fear that Tehran is developing nuclear weapons to arm them.

    Turkey is opposed to Iran’s developing nuclear weapons but has sought to emphasize a negotiated solution to ending the program rather than engaging in threats, including labeling the missile shield as a measure to defend against Iran, Pope told The Media Line. He said Turkey remains committed to the Western alliance and, indeed, has pulled back from staking out more independent positions after an initiative it took with Brazil last May to reach a nuclear accord with Iran elicited an angry U.S. response.

    “Turkey found itself on a limb and found that uncomfortable,” Pope said.

    Nevertheless, the missile issue isn’t over. Although NATO allies agreed to the deployment in principle, they will only decide next June where to locate the weapons and command center. Ankara is angling to have NATO’s İzmir headquarters designated as the command center, instead of Germany’s Ramstein base, as the U.S. wants, Istanbul’s Hurriyet newspaper reported Monday.

    “It’s an agreement for now just to get the problem away, but it’s not the end of the problem,” Hüseyin Bagci, a professor of international relations at the Middle East Technical Univeristy in Ankara, told The Media Line.

    He said that Turkey’s move will do little to assuage Iran, but that Ankara believe the option it has created for itself as a bridge between the West and Middle East will help moderate the reaction.

    Some analysts in the West – and particularly in Israel, which has seen a sharp deterioation in ties with Turkey – say Ankara’s new orientation  reflects the tastes of Turkey’s ruling  Justice and Development Party (AKP), which is mildly Islamist. But Bagci discounted AKP’s ideology as being behind the shift, saying it was a function of economics.

    Two-way trade between Turkey in the Middle East grew to $40 billion last year from $7 billion in 2002 as the price of oil raised the cost of Turkey’s imoported indsutry. But just as importantly, Turkey’s growing indsutrial might is turning the Middle East into a key export destination for eveything from television sets to prepared foods, Bagci said.

    “Turkey is committed to the West, it won’t be on the side of Iran – but it will mediate, to cool down any Iranian reaction,” said Bagci, who is currently a visiting professor at Humboldt University in Berlin.

    He said that in the regional competiton between Turkey and Iran, Turkey is in the stonger position because it is economically dynamic and enjoys close trade ties with the European Union. By contrast, Iran, which is feeling the pressure of Westen sanctions and the failure to succesfully export its Islamic revolution.

    Copyright © 2010 The Media Line. All Rights Reserved.