|
The deadly raid on a Gaza-bound humanitarian flotilla by the Israeli commandoes, on May 31, drew strong international condemnation. As the result of this raid more than ten relief workers, mostly Turkish citizens, lost their life. This event although tragic, like many other international political incidents, had its winners and losers.
The first loser of this incident, of course, was the Israeli government itself. While Israel claims that the blockade of Gaza has security purposes, in reality its aim has been, as what the human rights groups call it, “collective punishment” of Palestinians. According to the international organizations, including the UN and the International Human Rights Organization, the siege of Gaza has created miserable condition for its population. Israel’s strategy in Gaza is to punish its Palestinian population who voted Hamas, more militant Palestinian Organization, into office in 2006 election. By pressuring Gaza, Israel believed it can turn its population against Hamas. Thus far this Israeli policy has been a failure. After the attack on the flotilla, under the international pressure, it was Israel who had to change its policy by easing the blockade. Israel also damaged its relation with its only regional ally Turkey. Eight of the aid workers, killed during the raid were Turkish citizens and the relief work itself was partly organized by the Turkish humanitarian organizations.
The other loser was the U.S., particularly the Obama administration. A year ago President Obama in his famous Cairo speech promised a “new beginning” in the U.S-Arab world relations. However, Washington’s cautious reaction to the Israeli naval attack, represents the continuation of the same old pro-Israel policy by the new administration.
Many would argue that Iran’s Islamic Republic gained the most out of the flotilla incident, since it portrayed Israel as the real bully in the region. But Iran’s gain was not as much as Turkey. Within the past few years, Turkey, more than any other Muslim country, has been able to draw the World’s attention to the Palestinian problems. This has to do due with Turkey’s Non-militant approach to the Palestinian-Israeli crisis, its close relation to the West and adherence of Turkish leaders to democratic values. Iran’s President Ahmadinejad’s anti –Israel slogans, such as “wiping Israel off the map” or his denial of the holocaust has not only been unhelpful to the Palestinian cause but it has damaged Iran’s own image, especially in the West.
Unlike Ahamdinejad, the Turkish Prime Minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, has always focused on Israel’s policies or its leaders, not on Israel’s existence. He sharply criticized Israel’s late 2008 military attack on Gaza and the economic blockade that followed. It is hard to forget his famous walk out at the Davos Conference, after his heated debate with President Peres of Israel over the Gaza offensive. In addition, on numerous occasions Erdogan has stated, “When it comes to killing, Israel knows very well how to kill.” Nevertheless, Erdogan, in his latest interview with Charlie Rose of PBS, claimed that Turkey still considers Israel a friend. This obviously, explains how important the military and strategic cooperation between the two countries is for Turkey. Turkey also values its long time alliance with the Western world. Turkey has been a member of North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) for Sixty years, associate member of the European Union (EU) for fifty years, and member of Group of 20(G20) economic entity. All these are too important for Turkey to ignore.
Of course Turkey’s highly strategic location has made it an important partner for the West. Turkey has been considered a “bridge” that connects the West and the East. Its location on the southern border of former Soviet Union was the major reason for its inclusion in the NATO. Not to mention its proximity to the two major oil and gas reach regions of the Persian Gulf and Central Asia. In addition, because of its parliamentary democracy system, Turkey has been a much more attractive partner for the West than its neighbors with authoritarian and outdated political systems. Because of Turkey’s higher standing in the West, it should not come as a surprise if Turkey replaced Iran as the new mentor to Hamas and Hezbollah.
It has been said, by some experts, that Turkey’s foreign policy, under Erdogan, is turning to the East. But it would be more accurate to claim that Turkey is also considering the East. This has to do with the new geo-political realities of the region. The collapse of the Soviet Union, in the early 1990’s, provided an opportunity for Turkey to find new alliance in the newly independent Turkish speaking Central Asian republics. On the other hand, the post-Sadam Iraq has been problematic for Turkey, due to the growing autonomy of the Iraqi Kurdistan and its possible move for secession.
This fear has lead to the strengthening of ties between Turkey and its neighbors Iran and Syria, but at the Washington’s dismay. Like Turkey, both Iran and Syria are concerned about the rise of Kurdish nationalism, since it may influence their own Kurdish population. In addition, Erdogan as the leader of a Moslem country cannot be indifferent to the Palestinian or Lebanese casualties during their conflict with Israel. Neutrality, in the Arab-Israeli conflict can certainly damage his popularity at home and diminish Turkey’s influence in the region.
In summary, Turkey’s growing ties with its eastern neighbor s and Israel’s adversaries, Iran and Syria, does not mean that Turkey is giving up on its long term relation with the West. Turkey is turning to the East due to the changing political condition in the region and due to Turkey’s aspiration to become a major player in the world. To become a major player, Turkey needs to have influence in both the East and the West.
|
