Today’s Zaman, Turkey
Sept 15 2013
Former FM Türkmen: Ankara has not calculated well regarding Syria
Former Turkish Foreign Minister İlterk Türkmen speaks to Today’s Zaman
in an exlusive interview. (Photo: Today’s Zaman, İsa Şimşek)
15 September 2013 /YONCA POYRAZ DOĞAN, İSTANBUL
This week’s guest for Monday Talk has said that Ankara has not made
its calculations well in regards to Syria, although the government’s
standing has been righteous, and it was a mistake that Ankara has
built all of its policies on the assumption that Syrian President
Bashar al-Assad will fall.
“But there is also the need to take into consideration the national
interests; that’s how politics work. Talking about democratic
governance in Syria is quite righteous, but how this democracy is
going to be put into practice is another question,” said Ambassador
İlter Türkmen, former foreign minister of Turkey.
After days of intense negotiations, the United States and Russia
reached agreement on Saturday in Geneva on a framework to secure and
destroy Syria’s chemical weapons and impose UN penalties if the Assad
government fails to comply.
“If Syria really cedes control of its chemical weapons to the
international community, Assad will gain certain legitimacy. There
will be less willingness to use force against Assad. In reality, the
Russian initiative, in one way or another, will create a larger field
of maneuver for Syria and to a certain extent demoralize the
opposition,” he also said.
Reports of a chemical attack in a Damascus suburb on Aug. 21 marked a
turning point in the attitude of the United States and its allies
toward the Syrian government. According to US-based Human Rights
Watch, evidence strongly suggests that Syrian government forces were
responsible for a poison gas attack that killed more than 1,400
people, contradicting repeated denials by Syrian President Assad.
Meanwhile, Turkey deployed tanks and anti-aircraft guns to reinforce
its military units on the Syrian border. Prime Minister Recep Tayyip
Erdoğan vowed to respond to any attack from its southern neighbor.
Turkey, which has sided with the opposition to oust Assad, has a
border with Syria that stretches for more than 900 kilometers (559
miles). More than 100,000 people have died in the conflict and
millions have fled their homes for Turkey, Lebanon, Jordan and Iraq
since March 2011.
Answering most of our questions before Moscow and Washington reached
agreement on Syrian chemical weapons arsenal, Türkmen elaborated on
the issue.
As people all over the world have been holding their breath for an
expected US air strike against the Syrian regime, diplomatic efforts
have intensified towards placing Syria’s chemical weapons under
international control. How have we come to this point?
The United States administration has not been willing to interfere in
Syria from the beginning, but because of the use of the chemical
weapons by the Syrian regime, the Obama administration felt like it
had to respond to the Assad regime. President Barack Obama first gave
the impression that the US will interfere in the situation, and then
he referred the issue to the US Congress. And recently a diplomatic
initiative emerged. It is not clear if it was Moscow or Washington
that created this opportunity. [US Secretary of State John] Kerry made
a statement about the planned attack on Syria responding to a question
from the press, and he said that if the chemical weapons can be put
under international observation, there may be no need to do that.
Russia jumped on this idea immediately — a very successful initiative
for the Russian diplomacy as Moscow has been supporting the Assad
regime, which has already killed 100,000 of its citizens. We will see
how this initiative will develop, whether or not Assad will surrender
its chemical weapons. Meanwhile, Obama said important things.
You refer to his speech to the nation in Washington on Syria.
Yes, he said the United States cannot be the world’s policeman. This is true.
He also said that the US can save Syrian children from being gassed to death.
Yes, he is trying to do something, trying not to use force, and the
Russian initiative gave Obama this chance. We have to remember what
Obama’s position was in regards to the war in Iraq. When he was a
senator, he was among few politicians in the US who opposed the war in
Iraq. His stance proved to be right. The war in Afghanistan seemed
more legitimate because of 9/11. The United States has understood now
that it cannot pull its forces easily from a country once it sends its
troops there. The US should have understood this after the Vietnam
War, but there have been more lessons after that.
‘Elections do not necessarily bring democratic rulers’
Prime Minister Erdoğan has said the Russian initiative has given Assad
the opportunity he was seeking. Do you think that’s what’s happened?
Of course, the Turkish government wanted Assad to take a hit. Ankara
has built all of its policies on the assumption that Assad will fall.
Was this the right approach?
This was not the right approach. Assad has blood in his hands, it
could have been better if he fell, but we should have seen that he
would not fall easily. Turkey’s assumption was that Assad would fall
and be replaced with the Muslim Brotherhood of Syria.
There are a lot of countries fearing the rule of radical Islamists in
the Middle East. How has Ankara been so sure that a new government in
Syria will not be malignant?
I don’t think Ankara has made its calculations well. The Turkish
government’s standing has been righteous. But there is also the need
to take into consideration the national interests; that’s how politics
work. Talking about democratic governance in Syria is quite righteous,
but how this democracy is going to be put into practice is another
question.
If Assad falls, shall we expect a democratic government in Syria?
Some kind of democratic process will probably be applied, but we can
expect an autocratic rule. Elections do not necessarily bring
democratic rulers. Politicians who can garner more than 50 percent of
the votes come to power and tend to rule autocratically pressuring the
rest of the population. Some democracies are not truly democratic.
After the Arab Spring, we have seen parties with strong religious
affiliation taking prominent roles in governments. This was the case
in Egypt. Egypt is a homogenous society, but Syria is different; there
is a possibility that the Syrian society could disintegrate. In Syria,
there are Kurds, Alevis and Sunnis. When we look at the Middle East,
we should also take into account the considerations of the countries
of the Middle East. For most of the Arab countries, Iran is the most
important threat. Even the Palestinian issue does not seem to take
priority. However, for Turkey, the Palestinians are important. No
country in the Middle East places this much importance on the
Palestinians. When it comes to Syria, its regime is considered a
threat to other Arab countries because it is allied with Tehran.
If the US chooses to strike Syria at the end, do you think this will
force Assad to leave?
The US plans to strike Syria seemed to be limited in time and scope
aiming at punishing Assad for the use of chemical weapons. Even if the
US hits some military targets of the Assad regime, these are not
likely to force Assad to leave. Assad has had military gains; he has a
regular army, weapons and fighter planes. On the other hand, the
opposition is divided. If Syria really cedes control of its chemical
weapons to the international community, Assad will gain certain
legitimacy. There will be less willingness to use force against Assad.
In reality, the Russian initiative, in one way or another, will create
a larger field of maneuver for Syria and to a certain extent
demoralize the opposition.
‘Turkey has long been ignoring its relations with EU’
How would you evaluate Turkish foreign policy of recent years?
There have been areas in which Turkey has followed the right policies
and there have been some areas in which the policies have not been
successful. Until very recently, Turkish foreign policy decisions have
been good in many areas — until the Arab Spring — except the
European Union. Turkey has long been ignoring its relations with the
European Union – in particular, Turkish EU Affairs Minister [Egemen
Bağış] obviously does not have much sympathy for the EU. Turkey’s
Middle East and Africa policies have been good and led to economic
presence in those countries. After the Arab Spring started, Turkey has
not been able to evaluate the developments rationally. In regards to
Egypt, Erdoğan had taken a good step by going to Cairo and calling for
secularism. We still have somewhat good relations with Tunisia. But
when it comes to Syria, we failed; we could not see what was coming.
How would you analyze this? Some observers put the blame on Erdoğan’s
advisors, and especially on Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu, for some
foreign policy decisions which have not been wise. What do you think?
There have been some grave mistakes such as not being in good terms
with Israel. This mistake was done before the Arab Spring. Turkey was
an influential country in the Middle East because it was on good terms
with both Israel and the Arab countries, so it could play an important
role. After the Arab Spring, Turkey started to get too much involved
in the domestic policies of the countries of the Middle East. One of
the most important problems that Turkey needs to solve is its Kurdish
issue; Turkey cannot be perceived as a strong country as long as its
Kurdish problem persists. Additionally, having good relations with the
EU is very important. The rhetoric among some Turkish politicians in
Turkey is that the EU has been failing economically, but this is not
true; both the EU and the United States still hold 50 percent of the
world trade. We’ve almost forgotten about our membership process in
the EU. Yes, the EU has not been opening some of the chapters in the
negotiations process, but there is the issue of Cyprus waiting to be
solved. Yes, the Cyprus issue has no urgency, but there are new
developments in the area. Important gas deposits have been found in
the Mediterranean Sea near Cyprus, and if the Cyprus dispute had been
solved, the Turkish Cypriots would have been able to take advantage of
the economic benefits of exporting the gas.
Then there is the issue of Armenia. Even though good steps were taken
in regards to Armenia, efforts failed. Having good relations with
Armenia was important for Turkey as it would have to a certain extent
reduced the zeal of Yerevan regarding the propaganda campaign against
Turkey. Turkey would have been also able to play a more active role on
the search for a solution to the Karabakh problem.
________________________________
‘No Kurds in Turkey should be envious of lives of other Kurds in region’
Do you think Turkey has been taking the necessary steps to solve its
Kurdish issue?
There is a debate going on for the government’s new democratization
package. We will see very soon what substance the democratic package
has. People of the Southeast have been optimistic in regards to the
recent process and the government should take advantage of it and
speed up the solution process. Regardless of what the Kurdistan
Workers’ Party [PKK] does, whether or not it pulls out, Turkey needs
to take the democratic steps it needs to take, such as reducing or
removing the election threshold, providing within certain limits
education in mother tongue, etc. Solving Turkey’s Kurdish problem is
also important with regards to its relations with its immediate
neighbors in the Southeast. If Syria disintegrates, there may be a
Kurdish state at Turkey’s southern border and there is already the
Kurdish Regional Government [KRG] in northern Iraq. No Kurds in Turkey
should be envious of the lives of their fellow Kurds in those areas.
Plus, Turkey’s Kurds live all over Turkey, especially in the west of
Turkey.
There are some conspiracy-theory holders in Turkey saying that the
United States has long desired to establish an independent Kurdish
state in Turkey’s South, and this is what is happening. Do you agree
with this view?
Why the US would like to have an independent Kurdish state is hard to
understand. The US is trying to withdraw entirely from the Middle
East. Now the US has more gas and oil, it does not even need the oil
it used to need from the Middle East. If Israel were not there, the US
would not even have the presence it has now in the Middle East.
________________________________
‘Turkey cannot act as if there is no Egypt’
A delegation from the main opposition Republican People’s Party (CHP)
paid a visit to Egypt to mend ties with officials from the coup
administration and leaders of various political groups. Their visit
was criticized by Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan. Both opposition
and government had called what happened in Egypt to oust the Muslim
Brotherhood a military coup d’état. What is your comment on the CHP
delegation’s visit?
It’s been a very good initiative by the CHP officials. It shows
Turkey’s interest in Egypt. The Turkish government has been a harsh
critic of the military regime in Egypt, but the visit shows that
Turkey has interest in Egypt and the Egyptian people. We need to have
really good relations with Egypt. Turkish businesspeople have serious
investments in that country. Turkey and Egypt have mutual interests in
the region. There is no need to have tension between Turkey and Egypt.
Turkey has had harsh reactions in regards to the coup, recalled the
Turkish ambassador in Egypt, called for [ousted President Mohammed]
Morsi’s immediate release, etc. These are interferences into Egypt’s
internal politics. In the world there are many democracies, but it can
be discussed how much democracy is practiced in many countries. We
have to see that in Egypt there has been strong opposition to the
Muslim Brotherhood, but it may be small. Even Saudi Arabia was not
happy with the Muslim Brotherhood. Egypt is a country of 85 million
people with historical ties to Turkey. Turkey cannot act as if there
is no Egypt because the government has changed there, but of course,
we can call for a return to democratic governance in Egypt; we have a
right to say that, too.
PROFILE
Ambassador İlter Türkmen
A former Turkish foreign minister (1980-1983), Türkmen was general
commissioner of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for
Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) from 1991 to 1996.
Previously he was Turkey’s ambassador to France. He also represented
Turkey at the UN in New York (1975-1978 and 1984-1988). He was
ambassador to Greece from 1968 to 1972 and to the former Soviet Union
from 1972 to 1975.
From: Baghdasarian
http://www.todayszaman.com/news-326450-former-fm-turkmen-ankara-has-not-calculated-well-regarding-syria.html