The government of Turkey with its absolute majority in the Turkish Parliament is in a real predicament as a result of conflicting international political variables.
The first of these variables is the duality of the Turkish position. Moving closer to the West in order to join the EU or closer to the Arab and Islamic organizations for the sake of the interests and historic ties that bind the two as well as the strategic importance of the Arab region.
Second, Turkey’s military alliances and its membership of NATO commit it to moving in the direction of policies drawn up by the US-led alliance, which could conflict with Turkey’s interests.
Third, the revival of the Cypriot case is used as an ace against Ankara. The Greek portion was promised membership of the EU at a time when Turkey’s application was rather tepidly received.
Fourth, there is the obvious conflict between Turkey and the US regarding the Kurdish issue. Turkey categorically refuses to allow the existence of a self-governing Kurdish entity on its borders, while the US backs the Kurdish separatists in the north of Iraq.
Added to these variables is the Iraq problem, where the Turkish government found itself caught right in the middle of the issue.
Would it go along with the US-driven invasion of Iraq or along with international law rejecting war? The anti-war sentiment inside Turkey, whether from politicians or the general public has reached 90 percent, a significant number, and one which the political decision-makers in Turkey should consider.
Turkish President Ahmet Necdet Sezer first refused the American request to join in the war against Iraq during the NATO conference in Prague in November last year. Thus the bargaining began.
The refusal was repeated during US Undersecretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz’s visit to Turkey. Reservations over any military action over Turkish territory, especially without a clear and direct resolution from the Security Council, was restated. Naturally, the Turkish refusal led the US to pressure Ankara using a carrot-and-stick approach. Wolfowitz announced that his country stands by Ankara in its efforts to join the EU, commits itself to solving the Cypriot case in accordance with Turkish demands and is prepared to help Ankara surmount its economic and financial crisis.
On the other hand, officials in the American administration announced that Turkey’s continued refusal to allow American forces to be deployed in its territory would mean that Ankara loses a significant amount of money in loans.
In addition, Turkey would not participate in the political reconstruction of Iraq or the re-charting of the Middle East, which would severely affect Turkey’s position in a highly important and sensitive region.
Despite these complications, the Turkish government’s strong parliamentary majority enabled it to direct the crisis, until now. It distributed the roles. The government headed by Abdullah Gul, under pressure from military organizations, prepared a memorandum agreeing to the deployment of American forces. Parliament rejected the memorandum. Turkey’s stance is as a result much like that of the French: The country will not make any decision with regard to the war against Iraq until the issuance of a clear resolution from the Security Council.
The Turkish government has given priority to Turkish national interests while it continues its efforts to avoid war.
Further, it arrived at an arrangement that allows for the deployment of American forces after getting the most it could from the American administration without backing the war and while waiting for a decision from the Security Council — thus protecting Turkish interests and national Turkish security.
War then is no longer linked to principles or international law — it has become pure business.
In the end, the Turkish/American bargaining revealed that Washington is attempting to establish an international alliance based — not on ideology or persuasion of the merits of the case — but on money, enticements and threats. Perhaps this is the basic principle that Washington wishes to entrench in a new world order that it alone administers.
