ATC annual conference with twist of a perception or reality

http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/n.php?n=atc-annual-conference-with-twist-of-a-perception-or-reality-2010-10-22

Friday, October 22, 2010

Dr. Philip Gordon, assistant U.S. secretary of state for European and Eurasian affairs, who also oversees the Turkey portfolio in this capacity, made the most memorable remarks and gestures at this week’s 29th annual Conference of the American-Turkish Council Meeting in Washington, DC. Gordon joined Feridun Sinirlioğlu, undersecretary of Turkey’s Foreign Ministry, Robert Wexler, president of the Center for Middle East Peace Cooperation and former Congressman and two Turkey experts at Monday’s opening plenary session of the conference, and drew heavy analogies while analyzing the U.S.-Turkey relations.

While referring to the image problem of both countries in the others’ public opinion, Gordon reminded the audience that at the end of the day, both countries have democracies, therefore public opinion plays a major role in the process of adjusting or making policy decisions towards one another. According to Gordon, U.S. approval ratings are at historic lows in Turkey and Turkey’s close relations with Iran are worsening the perception of Turkey both in the U.S. and especially its Congress, which creates an environment in which it is very difficult for the U.S. administration to get anything done.

The U.S. Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs Alexander Vershbow, in another panel on the sidelines of the conference, gave an example what Gordon wanted to say, stating that the U.S. Congress has an important role in arms sales, and unfortunately some remarks and attitudes Turkey both made and took last spring regarding Israel and Iran created a political climate that made U.S. progress difficult in some significant projects in the short term.

Gordon also said “it does not matter that it is not true about Turkey’s turning to the East; if people think it is true, then we have a problem.” Gordon opposed Wexler’s arguments and said “we don’t do any favor to us if we say it [the discussions over Turkey’s turning to East] doesn’t exist.”

Ömer Taşpınar, another participant of the same panel and Turkey expert at the Brookings Institute, a liberal-leaning Washington think tank which was Gordon’s home before he moved to the State Department, defined the current Turkish administration as “mercantilist,” and stated that when the U.S. spends much of its time trying to figure out how best to isolate Iran, Turkey aims to triple its trade volume with it. And these very different goals in both countries towards Iran make things very hard to manage.

Gordon, when he was making his closing remarks, picked up the topic where Taşpınar left over Iran, (both co-authored a book on Turkey a couple of years back titled “Winning Turkey”) and recognized this discrepancy, labeling it as the perception of having “cross purposes” on the policies that are taken by the both sides towards Iran.

While Gordon’s “cross purposes” remarks lingered in the room, he did not wait for other participants’ closing remarks and left the panel early for a speech he was to deliver at the Johns Hopkins’ SAIS. The curious part of the SAIS speech is that the speech was only added to Gordon’s schedule a few days ago, and the Turkish press was told about it on Friday with a special announcement by the State Department, whereas the invitations for the ATC meetings reached Gordon’s offices three months in advance.

According to the ATC, Gordon, himself, made it clear that he does not want to take questions either from the audience, which is not well suited for such high level panel in front of an audience, whose significant part came from Turkey, seemed as if he “snubbed,” according to one conference attendee.

Robert Gates who initially rejected the ATC invitation to participate the council meetings, changed his position and told Richard Armitage, the ATC Chairman, 3 weeks before the meetings that he would have 40 minutes window to speak at the summit, but again will not have time to take questions.

During his remarks, Wexler, who seemed to be playing a referee role between the administrations, first vigorously argued against the notion that suggests Turkey is turning its face to the east, an argument that was opposed by Gordon right after, then turned back and sternly warned Turkey that “there will be never another U.S. President that makes a greater effort to reach out to Turkey, to the Muslim world... This doesn’t mean everything the U.S. does is right... however if we cannot make it work with this president, then heaven forbids, because I don’t think [the Turkish side] will ever see any commitment that this president has shown in terms of spending time and energy to nurture the relationship with Turkey.” Wexler, someone who personally invested much in Obama presidency and has close links to this administration, deserves to be taken seriously on this matter.

The ATC meetings have been the most significant appearance for the Turkish business elite in Washington and the Turkish government, like in the past decades, keenly supports these annual gatherings with sending its high profile administration officials.

In this sense, latest remarks of the U.S. officials should be taken seriously and as early warnings to Turkey while still assessing NATO missile defense system proposal that the U.S. adamantly argues for and asks Turkey to accept.

Speaking of “cross purposes,” on Wednesday, Deputy Prime Minister Ali Babacan, who was also in town for the same conference, held a press conference with U.S. reporters and defended Turkish cooperation with Damascus, described Syria as a contributor to the Middle East peace process and to the stabilization of Lebanon, and of Iraq and added “Turkey is cooperating with Syria very strongly for regional issues.”

Ben Birnaum of The Washington Times cites that the U.S. State Department lists Syria as a state sponsor of terrorism for giving Hamas external headquarters in Damascus and for facilitating the shipment of Iranian rockets to Hezbollah in southern Lebanon and also it is reported that Babacan did not rule out the prospect of formal Turkish-Iranian military exercises, when asked twice.

The conference’s foremost aim is to strengthen U.S.-Turkey relations through the promotion of commercial, defense, technology and cultural relations. Though during this week’s conference, U.S. officials were not polite to their guests and their remarks were ‘perceived’ as if the tension continues between the countries.

Both Gates and Gordon’s very brief appearances at the conference, leaving the room without listening to their counterparts, and citing the thorny matters of Iran and Israel in the U.S. capital in front of a friendly audience also need to be vividly noted.

Gordon argued in the conference that the perception that Turkey is changing its direction would become reality if it persists.

In Washington this week, on the other hand, U.S. officials’ attitudes seemed not too friendly, if it was not a twist of a perception in reality.

 

10 Comments      PRINTER FRIENDLY

READER COMMENTS

Guest - Other 2010-10-24 21:05:39		@cautious: rep party has been out only less than 2 years, I don't think 'several. Years' qualifying depiction! Isn't it?

Guest - ILKER/CYPRUS 2010-10-24 20:22:03		Like i said in my comments before America use,s Turkey for her own interests she uses all the tools of a criminal would including blackmailing.What GORDEN Said was basicaly you not going to get a better president then Obama and if you dont stop trading with Iran and stop playing war games with China in other words if Turkey dont put on her dog collar and tow the line you wont get any more US weapons and you must say sorry for the Israeli,s killing your citizens.Turkey should tell the Americans bye bye leave Nato.

Guest - Cautious 2010-10-24 17:05:04		@Steve. In case you haven't noticed the Republican party has been out of the White House for several yrs and hasn't controlled Congress since Bush Jr. first term in office. As far as your Jews control America comment - it's popular among bigots who have limited knowledge - if this is true them why does America provide aid and sell weapons to Muslims - why does the USA oppose expansion of Israeli settlements, why does national public radio fire a commentator for making negative comments about Muslims, why is Jonathan Pollard still in jail - there is an endless list of similar questions which are conveniently overlooked by bigots.

Guest - ManInTheMiddle 2010-10-23 20:16:19		The US has never treated ANY Moslem nation with sincere politeness. In the US establishment's eyes Moslems have been tolerated as long as they seem to "know their place", any deviation from that causes the true face of the US government's true low opinion about the Moslem country in question to appear lickety split. What Turkey needs to do is to determine whether pursuing in long-term national interests trump a low place on the US "good boys" list. The choice is very clear, isn't it?

Guest - Katie 2010-10-23 20:02:29		As I'm neither Turkish or American, I can say without bias, that as long as your present 'regime' is in Government, Turkey cannot be relied on or trusted. That's where the problem lies.

Guest - Murat 2010-10-23 19:47:39		It is perfectly normal for allies or friendly states to have disgreements where interests collide, but what is disturbing the is the way this is carried out so openly in the media when it comes to US-Turkey relations and the level of rhetoric. If US can claim interests in the region from 10K miles away, surely Turkey can have opinions on what is best for them in their back yard.

Guest - MARK 2010-10-23 18:51:48		@babadog. You may have the second largest army in NATO but numbers alone do not make an effective army. As for providing the Americans with the largest military bases in the world? You make to sound like Turkey is providing the base (1) free of charge. America pays a heavy price for the use of THAT base. Who are you trying to fool. Turkey is not even close. Can you say Germany? I am old enough to remember seeing the Turkish soldiers returning to Turkey after the Korean war. They had all kinds of phonograph players, tape recorders, clothers, personal items that bought at the American Base Exchange and wer selling on the streets of Izmir and Istanbul. Please, get out of NATO you are more a problem than a solution. This probably won't make the post but at least I've made my point.

Guest - Rich 2010-10-23 17:15:22		Funny how Turkey used pro-Israel advocates to obtain advantages for decades and funny how the pro-Israel advocates were pretty much pro-Turkey advocates-until PM Erdogan and President Gul put Turkey in conflict with the US when they re-allied the country they control with Iran, Hezbollah, Hamas, Syria, Sudan, Venezuela, and any other radical anti-American group. To make matters worse, they used their power to try to turn the Turkish people into Israel haters- employing all of their tools against, a country that was Turkey's ally. And now, it is clear, that just below the surface of this, lies anti-Semitism. The implications are forboding for all- unless Turkey returns to the West as a proudly secular Moslem nation.

Guest - Steve 2010-10-23 15:07:18		One must remember that anything that is said & done in Washington DC is a direct result of two incredulous, obstructionist & insincere segments of America's political system: 1) the Republicans, The Party of NO; and, 2) AIPAC & the other nefarious Israeli lobbies. Obama has not been able to achieve HIS agenda because of the impact of these deceitful "pieces parts" influence upon the legislative branch, congress. IF the American style of democracy was different, and the president actually wielded power with the stroke of a pen, America, the world & foreign policy would be entirely different. BUT, Obama must try and work with these intransigent people & their not so hidden, selfish & deceitful agendas. IF truth & honesty was indeed the bedrock of American politics, the world would indeed see a different America working for the world's "universal good." Unfortunately, things may well become worse with ALL of America's allies if the Republicans again gain power in congress this fall.

Guest - babadog 2010-10-23 06:49:42		President Obama made a brilliant start to his presidency but as we all know he has fizzled out and his promises have proven to be empty gestures.Now they are threatening Turkiye with less arms and the recognition of the Armenian deaths in 1915 as genocide.Fine get on with it and get out of our hair. Turkiye has been a brilliant friend and ally of the West and the USA in particular.They have the second largest army in NATO, fought alongside the USA in Korea, defended the west with American Nuclear war heads aimed at the old USSR and provided the USA with the largest military bases in the world.In response the USA have not helped Turkiye that much.The trade volume together has never risen above low.The technology transfer from the USA to Turkiye have been second rate.In fact the USA have drugged Turkiye and kept it back colony style. Turkiye has been a very good friend of Israel too until they murdered 1500+ innocent civilians in Gaza and halted the peace process with the Arabs.

Is the US closing Turkey in?

http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/n.php?n=does-the-us-close-in-turkey-2010-10-15

Friday, October 15, 2010

Turkey faces another critical foreign policy decision about joining the proposed U.S.-led anti-missile system that would shield NATO members against mainly possible Iranian threats in the next decade. The new system essentially was put forward by President Obama a year earlier, replacing the Bush vision in which Russia was perceived as a main threat. Just last week, news reports indicated that weapons inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency, or IAEA, warned that Iran had passed a crucial nuclear doorstep, bringing it even closer to being able arm ballistic missiles with nuclear warheads.

While Iran is hastily climbing to the top of the U.S’ enemy list, Turkish leaders find themselves in an awfully awkward position. In its “New Strategic Concept,” led by former U.S. Secretary of State Madeline Albright, NATO is shifting its security challenges, and sees that missile defense is an “essential military mission” for the alliance.

The U.S. has challenged Turkey to shift priorities and is pushing for the regional negotiator to join its ranks. Turkey feels compelled to counter perceptions that it is joining a club that is against one of its largest economic partners and Muslim neighbors. The Justice and Development Party, or AKP, repeatedly stated in recent years that it does not see Iran as a threat, as opposed to how the West views the Islamic Republic.

According to Jim Townsend, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for European and NATO Policy, Turkey tries to strike a balance in which it does not want to seem as “ambivalent” or “reluctant” to the U.S. demands, also not to offend Iran.

Many parts of the Obama administration’s foreign policy practices so far have been heavily criticized by international affairs authorities and former U.S. policy makers. From its war strategy in Afghanistan to its strategic and tactical missteps pre and during the Middle East peace process; its ambitious and so far failed outreach plan for the Muslim world to its weak stance against China’s unbending monetary policies to name but a few. However, there is one piece of the Obama foreign policy matrix that has received generally positive ratings so far: relations with Russia, which have been described as operating under a “reset button policy.”

In that, the Obama administration, to receive the Russians’ support on the front against Iran and being able to begin working towards the eradication of the nuclear weapons, chose to placate Russia’s demands to dismantle the earlier missile defense system for Europe. Nowadays, following 20 months of reset button policy, NATO chief Anders Fogh Rasmussen finds audacity to invite Russia to join the new project as a member of the shield, instead enemy.

The U.S. officials admitted last week that they have visited Turkey “a couple of times” to hold talks over the faith of the new missile plan and informed the Turkish side. According to the U.S. officials, even before the ministerial meeting on Thursday in Brussels between Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu and Defense Minister Vecdi Gönül with their U.S. counterparts Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, ball was in Ankara’s court, and that Ankara must decide which direction it wants to pursue.

There is clarity on the U.S. side and the decision is taken. And for Turkey’s geographic location, its proximity to the future Iranian threats plays an important role for the phased adaptive approach, “as we look at where the ballistic missile threats can come from, Turkey seems to us to be very much along the front lines,” Townsend said.

The U.S. leadership wants Turkey to own NATO’s new strategic vision of the next decade and asks Turkey to join new agreement to making a territorial missile defense as an alliance capability.

The Obama presidency, while closing ranks with the Russian leadership on many issues, applied track two policy to deter Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons capability. The AKP administration rejected the notion and countered those U.S. arguments by claiming sanctions do not work. 

According to a former U.S. ambassador to Turkey, by coming between the sanctions, Turkey did no do any favor to Iran or served for the peaceful future in the region, instead encouraged Iran on its non-consensual behavior and increased any military operation’s chance.  

Now, as a further or secondary step, the U.S. is rallying the NATO members around a missile defense system, closing to strike a deal to construct a 21st. century’s umbrella for its members for a protection.

According to Steven Pifer, Director of the Arms Control Initiative at the Brookings Institution, a Washington think tank, Turkey should at least see the plan as an “insurance policy” against Iran, even if it does not believe that Iran wants nuclear weapons.

Sally McNamara, senior European affairs policy analyst at the Heritage Foundation, stated that “Obama is seeking NATO’s approval to make missile defense a core competency of the alliance. It is critical that Turkey supports him on this... Ankara is being asked to support the upgrading of missile defense to be a key NATO responsibility, which will be enshrined in the new Strategic Concept set to be agreed at the upcoming Lisbon Summit.

NATO already has theatre-based missile defenses... However, this is no longer an adequate defense posture in today’s environment, where the proliferation of ballistic missiles is growing, to both state and non-state actors. European missile defenses must be expanded to protect populations and territory.”

Semih İdiz, on his Friday column in the Hürriyet Daily News & Economic Review, laid out clearly how the tension between Turkey and Israel was still boiling during Erdoğan’s late Pakistan visit and how this strained relationship is further spilling over into U.S.-Turkey relations, which İdiz recognizes as an “ideological divide between Turkey and the U.S...”

It appears that Turkey wishes to take its time before it decides on the matter, perhaps leaving a decision until as late as November, when the NATO summit convenes.

Nevertheless, the U.S.-led NATO leadership has taken a decisive turn, leaving very little room for Turkey to maneuver, or oppose the alliance's new strategic step. 

What will or can Turkey do beside support the new vision, willingly or unwillingly?

 

20 Comments      PRINTER FRIENDLY

READER COMMENTS

Guest - dr p 2010-10-18 16:57:57		@maninthemiddle: i agree that turkey hasn't gotten its due from the west, but quest ion yiour comment "Turkey will NOT be treated as a doormat in Asia." given past history, please consider what will happen once turkey's perceived usefulness to the orient fades: the arab street will vive you what it gave you after ww1, china will use your bazaars as dumping grounds for its nass-produced sweatshop shlock, and iran will make obedient twelvers out of its akp dupes.

Guest - ManInTheMiddle 2010-10-17 22:23:25		I certainly don't agree with everything the AKP is doing, but one policy the AKP has pursued correctly is strengthening its relations with the "East", at the same time maintaining its relations with the "West". There are some noises being made in the Western and Turkish media about it turning against the West. Nonsense. Turkey is the ONLY card the West has for keeping its interest in the "new Middle East", as Condi Rice and Rumsfeld called it. Turkey's semi-democratic system is the ONLY show in town for the West to be assured its democratic "values" can exist among Muslims in the New-Middle East. Some are reminiscing about the front line "role" for Turkey. The reality is Turkey was a door-stop. Her role was to provide cannon fodder as Turkish soldiers, to slow down the Soviet's move towards the Mediterranean until real "NATO" gets into action. That's all. There are always crumbs that fall on the doormat. Turkey will NOT be treated as a doormat in Asia. Guess which way she'll go.

Guest - Human 2010-10-17 19:37:44		Babadog: You said : "You (Turkey)have protected the eastern flank of Nato for half a century against real and hostile USSR activity ... ". Here is a link to a map of the area: http://www.aboutromania.com/WorldEuropeCountriesMap.gif With reference to the map, please explain how Turkey was able to protect Nato's eastern flank.

Guest - Murat 2010-10-17 16:38:06		"In the 1970s and 80s, when Turkiye was a frontline deterrent against communism, no EU or US actor took a stance on issues that would offend Turkiye..." Maybe you are not old enough to remember when "Midnight Express" came out, when some US seantors even proposed carpet bombing Turkish opium regions, and when US instituted an arms embargo after the operation in Cyprus in 74. 70s and 80s were the worst period in Turkish history economically and politically. Frontline deterrant means just that, no special honor and not the way to gain respect. One shoud have self respect first.

Guest - wtf 2010-10-17 03:30:17		The Headline should read " Does Ergogan close in Turkey ".

Guest - Kadri Ersoy 2010-10-17 02:18:55		This is a chance for Turkiye to reclaim its former frontline status as a NATO and US ally. We are being offered a tremendous opportunity: if Turkiye regains her former status as a frontline NATO member, there will no longer be any anti-Turkish propaganda regarding Armenian lies or the Cyprus issue in western parliaments. I know these resolutions have no meaning, but they are of a degrading and insulting character against the Turkish people, and an assault against realities and justice, and they should not be tolerated. I think this is the overture that the US is trying to convey. In the 1970s and 80s, when Turkiye was a frontline deterrent against communism, no EU or US actor took a stance on issues that would offend Turkiye, it would be so again today. We can reverse the negative trends that we have suffered from in the post-Cold War era of the 1990s and early 2000s whence Turkiye’s strategic position was seemingly reduced, and which was duly exploited by anti-Turkish criminal lobbies and other criminal/racist elements in the West. The AKP should not miss this opportunity. It is now time to test how much strategic vision Mr. “Strategic Depth” really has.

Guest - Kadri Ersoy 2010-10-17 02:11:47		This is a chance for Turkiye to reclaim its former frontline status as a NATO and US ally. We are being offered a tremendous opportunity: if Turkiye regains her former status as a frontline NATO member, there will no longer be any anti-Turkish propaganda regarding Armenian lies or the Cyprus issue in western parliaments. I know these resolutions have no meaning, but they are of a degrading and insulting character against the Turkish people, and an assault against realities and justice, and they should not be tolerated. I think this is the overture that the US is trying to convey. In the 1970s and 80s, when Turkiye was a frontline deterrent against communism, no EU or US actor took a stance on issues that would offend Turkiye, it would be so again today. We can reverse the negative trends that we have suffered from in the post-Cold War era of the 1990s and early 2000s whence Turkiye’s strategic position was seemingly reduced, and which was duly exploited by anti-Turkish lobbies and other criminal/racist elements in the West. The AKP should not miss this opportunity. It is now time to test how much strategic vision Mr. “Strategic Depth” really has.

Guest - gokturk 2010-10-17 00:30:51		Andy from dc, will it matter when Turkey has its own nukes?

Guest - HAKAN 2010-10-17 00:28:03		Turkiye has a chance to decide to change about future in Middle East . It can be a most valuable country how it behaviours . In fact what does Turkish people think about that , U.S or Iranian ? All decides depend on ,than, AKP will have been critized by...

Guest - babadog 2010-10-16 21:57:11		So Iraq had weapons of mass destruction and could strike the west at any moment.Whoever beleiived that fairy tale will also beleive that Iran will nuke the west sometime in the future so an alliance of the worlds greatest nuclear force ever assembled needs even more protection from little old Iran in the form of a colossal nuclear shield.What a load of tosh.Ask yourself do you beleive this Zionist/USA propoganda in other words are you a childish fool who has his eyes closed ears shut and cannot discern between fact and fiction? This Islamaphobic Iran hating is all to do with the survival of Israel and everything is expendable including countries and civilisations. I say to Turkiye stay on course and look to the East and forget extravagant ventures like the missile shield.You have protected the eastern flank of Nato for half a century against real and hostile USSR activity so wheres the recognition and thanks you cant even join a rubbish EU organisation because of prejudice.

Guest - George 2010-10-16 18:39:09		Turkey joining the proposed U.S.-led anti-missile system? One will see this as much as one saw Turkey voting for sanctions on Iran. Nope that is.

Guest - Murat 2010-10-16 17:52:16		Maybe the time to re-evaluate all these military alliences has come. Turkey's geography and cultural heritage and economic ties and geeral interests require it to be the Switzerland of ME, except well armed. It is a myth that NATO or anyone else will ever rush to Turkey's aid in case of a real need anyway. Military alliences need to be seperated from cultural and economic ties and relationships. Unfortunately, the perception is, and this is very intentional, a Turkey that is NOT an enemy of Iran (I have little respect for their regime), is an enemy of the West. Turks can not afford to fall into this trap. Even though a pure defensive system, built by heavy Aselsan participation and TSK sharing the command and control should not be a problem for anyone.

Guest - Gary 2010-10-16 16:55:38		Turkey will soon find that its policy of Iran appeasement has its limits (just learn from the Arabs). But the NATO Missile train will leave the station by that time. Ultimately, Turkey needs to do what it is comfortable with, but misaligning the Turkey political priorities with those of its allies is dangerous. You can always blame Israel at the end, but who will buy this?

Guest - harman 2010-10-16 14:25:20		Maybe Prime Minister Erdogans close relations to Iranian President Ahmadinejad say more about Erdogans true agenda than the whole AKP program.

Guest - osman 2010-10-16 13:54:31		I would like to know who can believe that Iran will attack the entire Western military alliance?It is as ridiculous a thought as Switzerland attacking France. Once again the arrogant bully and its mercenaries are lying like ever before.

Guest - The Prisoner 2010-10-16 11:51:54		Make no mistake, the USA will start a war with Iran and what will Turkiye do then? 90% of the free world is against Iran and recognises it for what it is: anti democracy and pro confrontation. Its attack on the legitimate goverment of Lebanon proves its committment to conflict in the Middle East and now the AKP wants it be an ally! Bad times coming I think.

Guest - Hulya 2010-10-16 09:42:23		The author writes about Iran "largest economic partners and Muslim neighbors". That is not really correct. Around 4% of our import comes from Iran (2007 figures, could not find later) and the export is very very low (not even mentioned at the list). The main partner is EU with exports 56% and imports 40%. Personally I think we should stick to the same type of relationship with Iran as the rest of the world has with Iran, i.e. trade, but keep it to trade and nothing else.

Guest - andy fr DC 2010-10-16 02:44:31		Wow,the author may be slightly misinformed: 1) Ms Albright has not been Sec of State for 10 years. 2) Iran has been America's enemy since 1979. Every year it vies for North Korea as the most hated dictatorship in polls of Americans. That has been true for over 30 years. A little thing called the Iranian Hostage Crisis occurred , perhaps you missed it? Perhaps we object to Iran getting a nuke because their entire revolution is based on hatred of the USA. Or do you not bother to read Iran's papers or watch their rallies ? As for Turkey participating in a missile shield, no one in the USA could care less. Turkey is simply not a topic of discussion in public or the newspapers. If Turkey chooses to leave NATO it may matter to Turkey, it will matter little to anyone else.Your choice, your future.

Guest - Cautious 2010-10-16 02:29:19		No offense - but while Turkey has the strategic location and the potential to be a great mediator/arbitrator between cultures - it has the diplomatic skills of Israel (which is almost non existent). Diplomacy requires skill levels that are apparently not present in the current administration. Turkey is going to be left with a choice - stay with the people who have honored/protected it for decades - or make a change. Either choice is better than trying to straddle the middle.

Guest - Curious 2010-10-16 00:42:50		Can someone please explain to me how the AKP brought Turkiye into a position in which she defends Iran and Palestinians more than she does Azerbaijan, and TRNC? How did it come about that Turkiye is pursuing the interests of Iran and Russia while neglecting her own interests on Cyprus, Karabakh, the Aegean, northern Iraq, etc. applying such submissive and detrimental policies on these issues that affect Turkiye?