Turkey Inside Line: The Evolving Relationship with Russia

EA's Fulya Inci writes:

Last week, Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayip Erdogan made a two-day trip to Moscow, with energy, trade and the Nagorno-Karabakh dispute high on the agenda. Erdogan and senior members of his government, in talks with Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin and President Dmitri Medvedev, launched the process for an agreement on visa-free travel for the citizens of both countries and took important steps on the use of the Turkish lira, and the Russian ruble in bilateral trade. Most significantly, the two sides signed a declaration of cooperation to construct Turkey’s first nuclear power plant.

The energy issue is the rucial factor in the economic and trading relations of Turkey and Russia. Turkey is highly dependent on Russian gas but now also wants to become a major energy corridor, transporting that gas to the Middle East. This South Stream rivals the U.S. and EU-backed Nabucco pipeline plan, even though Ankara also backs Nabucco  and says the two projects should complement each other.



A Turkish government commission is examining the environmental concerns and high-cost route of South Stream, but it has also allowed Moscow to carry out preliminary work off the Black Sea coast. It also has a commitment from Russia to join a prospective Samsun-Ceyhan oil pipeline via Turkey, as Ankara seeks to develop its geostrategic position and create new cooperation opportunities in the region.

Bilateral trade is also important between the two countries. It reached $33 billion in 2008. There has been an unexpected decrease in 2009 due to the global economic crisis, but both countries’ leaders expressed the desire to triple the figure by 2015.

In contrast to the positive steps in energy and trade, the trip did not seem to reward Turkey’s Nagorno-Karabakh policy. Putin told Erdoğan that “Turkey should not link the Nagorno-Karabakh problem between Armenia and Azerbaijan to the normalization of its bilateral relations with Armenia.”

In October, Turkey and Armenia signed agreements to normalize diplomatic relations, after decades of tension over the mass killing of Turkey's Armenian population in the early 20th century. The two sides also discussed reopening borders that Turkey had closed in 1993 because of Armenia's occupation of Nagorno-Karabakh, a largely Armenian- populated part of Azerbaijan.

As a close ally of Azerbaijan, Turkey “first wants to see progress toward the solution of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict before opening its border with Armenia”. Putin’s remarks show that Russia does not want Turkey to slow down the normalization process because of Nagorno-Karabakh’s future.

President Medvedev is expected to come to Turkey on May, and the two sides are hopeful for developing cooperation. It is an important negotiation, given that shifting power in regions such as the Middle East is bringing new opportunities and risks for both countries.

The Ayalon Affair: "Israel Needs Morality; Not a Gangster Diplomacy"

UPDATE 1020 GMT: Despite the criticism of his behaviour, Deputy Foreign Minister Ayalon is not expressing regrets. To the contrary, he is backing away from his formal apology to Turkey: In an interview with Channel 2, he said:

[Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman's] policy is proving to be effective. We will not allow a situation where every country will kick us. If there will be an attack on Israel, we will leave all options open, including the expulsion of ambassadors. We do not want to argue with anyone, but we will not sit idly by.

Ayalon took a specific swipe at Turkey in the guise of "clarifying" the incident with Ankara's ambassador:

The story with the cameras wasn't planned, I didn't think it was being recorded, and if it was --- I didn't think it would be aired with sound. My intention wasn't to humiliate, but to send a visual message. The ambassador didn't feel humiliated either --- only once reporters started calling him. The picture was aimed at the Turks, to send them a message. I think what (Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip) Erdogan did to (Israeli President Shimon) Peres in Davos (over the Gaza War) is humiliation, not this.

Israel-Palestine: US Envoy Mitchell Coming with “No Guarantees”?

Haaretz's Zvi Bar'el questioned today Israel's humiliation Turkey's ambassador Ahmet Oguz Celikkol, which he called "gangster diplomacy', and wrote the prescription for a moral Israel to demand morality from others:

Now we have also shown the Turks who we are, because when it comes to the Jewish, Zionist honor of a nation that endured the Holocaust and the Goldstone report, no one will make a movie about us - certainly not the Turks - portraying us as war criminals. If Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan thinks he can reprimand us without a reaction, we'll show him and all the other countries of the world.


There's no choice because they only understand force. Britain wants to boycott Israeli goods? We'll summon the British ambassador and have him sit on a bed of nails. The United States handles the settlements unfairly? We'll point an unloaded gun at the American ambassador's head and pull the trigger, just to scare him. We're not murderers. We're just trying to frighten, which, as is well known, creates respect. Just ask the Godfather.

But if we're going to put on a performance like this, it's important to do it in style because it gets ridiculous when directors sit on high, uncomfortable chairs with their feet barely touching the ground just to achieve a superior level. Instead of arranging a professional humiliation room and ordering a low chair facing a real master with elevator shoes or barstools, and maintaining a supply of ripped national flags for each country (because who knows if tomorrow we'll have to humiliate the Swedish or Irish ambassador?), they threw everything together at the last minute last week. Proper lighting is an essential element of gangster diplomacy and not a job for amateurs. Our deputy foreign minister merely gave us second-rate humiliation.

The other aspect of the affair is a matter of honor and morals. The polished statement from the Foreign Ministry spokesman said that "the statement by Prime Minister Erdogan comes in addition to the anti-Turkish television program .... The State of Israel reserves its full right to defend its citizens from missile and terrorist attacks by Hamas and Hezbollah, and Turkey is the last one that can preach morals to the State of Israel and the Israel Defense Forces." This indictment featured three accusations: that Erdogan is cooperating with Turkish television, that he is undermining Israel's security, and especially that he is jumping to the head of the line in preaching morals instead of taking his place behind Europe and the United States.

No one bothered to say that the Turkish television series, in which actually the United States was attacked in the first episode, was produced back in 2003 and made into a film in 2006. They only decided to produce further episodes because of the project's huge commercial success. This time there was a mix of Mafia, Mossad, kidnapping of children and Turkish heroism. The series was distributed by Star TV, which is owned by Erdogan's bitter rival, Aydin Dogan. So Erdogan is innocent of the first accusation against him.

The two other accusations are much more serious. Turkey actually supports Israel's security. It buys unmanned aircraft from Israel to fight terrorism perpetrated by the PKK, the Kurdistan Workers' Party, both in Turkey and Iraq. By using Israeli technology, Turkey knows where to direct its bombing against the PKK, in which civilians are also killed. Turkey is doing in Iraq what Israel does in Gaza. The major question is who is more moral? The seller of the weapon who knows whom it will be used against or the one who uses it?

If Israel had wanted to behave morally, it would have demanded, as the United States has, that its technology not be used in a war against civilians. Maybe it would have lost a $200 million deal, but it would have won the right to say that Turkey is the last country that has the right to accuse others. Does anyone really think Defense Minister Ehud Barak will make a similar demand on the use of Israeli technology during his visit to Turkey today?

If Israel had wanted to behave morally, it would have recognized the Armenian genocide despite Turkish opposition, but it is afraid that taking a moral stance on that issue would cost it dearly. If Israel had wanted to behave morally, it would have lifted the siege on 1.5 million civilians in Gaza long ago - not for Erdogan, but for Israel itself.

So morals are not the issue, but rather Turkey's place in line among those preaching morals. But because this is a case of two friendly countries, and neither is so righteous, why should Turkey be the one to be pushed to the end of the line in the contest over self-righteousness?

Israel: Foreign Ministry Divided after Ayalon's Apology

Israel's Foreign Ministry was divided into two camps over the apology of Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon for his treatment of Turkey's ambassador Ahmet Oguz Celikkol. Some officials say, "Israel will benefit from the way in which Ayalon managed the crisis. The result is that today Turkey will be much more careful in its statements [about Israel]," but others claim:

(Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip) Erdogan will only change his rhetoric if he sees that it costs him something. But blasting Israel does not cost him anything, and actually gains him points both at home and in the Arab world.

Israel: A Government Divided over Turkey and "The Ayalon Crisis"?

The Israeli Government is still in some confusion after Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon's full apology over his "undiplomatic" attitude towards Turkey's ambassador Ahmet Oguz Celikkol. Israel's President Shimon Peres said that Ayalon's treatment reflected the "mistake of one man, not of the state":

It was not diplomatic... and it's good that he apologized. This should not be connected to the whole state or to all diplomats. We must learn not to do this again.

However, the Israeli Foreign Ministry slammed a group of 17 members of Parliament who sent a letter of apology to Turkey over Ayalon's treatment of the ambassador. A member of Ayalon's staff told Israel Radio:

Israel and Turkey: “Ayalon Has Nothing to Apologize For"
Israel & Turkey: A Reset in Relations?

Ayalon respects the MKs who apologized, but where were they over the past two years of anti-Semitic broadcasts in the Turkish media and unbridled criticism of Israel from Ankara? After two years in which Turkey has failed to get the diplomatic message, we had to start making a noise one official told Israel.

Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman said Israel does not want a confrontation with Turkey but will not tolerate anti-Semitic remarks and incitement against Jews.

In contrast, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu expressed his satisfaction with Ayalon's apology. So, could the ambassador crisis, possibly planned by Lieberman and played out by Ayalon, bring an advantage to the Prime Minister?

Netanyahu could use the incident to diminish, if not neutralise, the influence of Lieberman's Israel Beiteinu party. He couldameliorate Israel's image in the eyes of  the international community, bringing credibility in the approaching round of peace talks. And, in case of another crisis with Ankara, he could walk the line that apologies will be offered if any mistake is made but Turkey's continuous criticisms is an unwarranted expression of anti-Semitism.

In the short term, the Israeli Prime Minister has kept talks with Ankara on track. Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan declared, "Israel must put itself in order and it must be more just and more on the side of peace in the region," but given Ayalon's apology, Erdogan was ready for discussions.

That process is well under way. Before Defense Minister Ehud Barak's visit to Ankara on Sunday, Ministry official Udi Shani returned from an official visit in which the March delivery of 10 Heron drone aircraft to Turkey was confirmed.

Israel and Turkey: "Ayalon Has Nothing to Apologize For"

The Jerusalem Post's Michael Freund has criticized public demands for Israeli Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon's apology and bombarded Turkey's Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan in an opinion piece, "Going Cold Turkey":

Since the start of the week, Israel's media have been in a tizzy. With all the frenzied fury at its disposal, the press has been relentlessly targeting Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon, slamming one of the country's most talented diplomats for his handling of a meeting at the Knesset on Monday with the Turkish ambassador.

Israel & Turkey: A Reset in Relations?

Ayalon had called in Ankara's envoy to protest a new Turkish television show called The Valley of the Wolves which seems primarily designed to foment anti-Semitism. Among other things, it depicts Israeli agents abducting Muslim children in order to convert them to Judaism against their will.

The program comes just three months after a Turkish government-run station broadcast a series, Ayrilik, which portrayed IDF soldiers as callous murderers, shooting Palestinian children at point-blank range and massacring innocents by firing squad.

Aiming to underline Israel's justifiable displeasure with this crude incitement, Ayalon sought to choreograph the meeting so that the Turkish ambassador would understand that such shenanigans cannot and will not be tolerated.

SO HE kept the envoy waiting, seated him on a lower chair and did not smile obsequiously in their meeting, as diplomats are often expected to do.

And it is precisely that choreography which has now earned Ayalon the ire of various talking-heads and pundits, many of whom cannot seem to tolerate the idea of a proud Jew standing up for this country's honor.

"Humiliation is not a policy," screamed yesterday's Haaretz, as it blasted Ayalon for what it described as his "display of scorn" and "disgraceful theatrical language" toward Turkey.

Writing on Ynet, Alon Liel asserted that, "What we have seen here is causing damage to our Foreign Ministry and turning international diplomatic rules into a laughing stock." He accused Ayalon of carrying out "a new kind of diplomacy," and wondered rhetorically, "If next week we will see another anti-Israel TV show produced in Turkey, what will we do to the ambassador then? Ask him to crawl into the room? Beat him up?"

There is something truly pitiful about such responses, which say a lot about the limited Jewish self-esteem of those who proffered them. Rather than focusing on the outrageous anti-Semitic and anti-Israel rhetoric that Turkey's Islamist-oriented regime is whipping up with increasing frequency, they prefer to turn their fire on Ayalon for deviating from what is considered standard diplomatic practice.

Frankly, I don't think Ayalon has anything to apologize for. The days when Jews must cower in fear and fawn over those who spit in our faces are over. As a sovereign state, we have the right and the obligation to berate those who sully our honor, and Ayalon should be commended for standing up and demonstrating some good, old fashioned Jewish pride.

INDEED, HIS critics are missing the mark. Like it or not, Turkey has been steadily embracing a more radical stance ever since Recep Tayyip Erdogan's rise to power earlier this decade. Under his stewardship, the once proudly secular and pro-Western country has shifted gears, cozying up to the likes of radical states such as Iran and Syria. In the past year, Turkey has openly defended Teheran's nuclear program, signed various cooperation agreements with Damascus and moved to expand trade and cultural ties with the two rogue regimes.

And in the process, it has increasingly demonstrated outright hostility and antagonism toward the Jewish state. Take, for example, Erdogan's remarks this past Monday at a joint news conference in Ankara with Lebanese Prime Minister Saad Hariri.

With barely-concealed contempt, Erdogan said that Israel "threatens global peace" and enjoys "disproportionate power," and asserted that the IDF had attacked Palestinian civilians in Gaza with white phosphorus shells, which he labeled "weapons of mass destruction."

During his tirade, Erdogan also condemned Israel for defending itself by carrying out an air strike in Gaza Sunday in which three Islamic Jihad terrorists planning attacks against Israelis were killed. "What is your excuse this time?" he said, as if we owe him an explanation.

SOMEONE NEEDS to remind Erdogan that before he goes about lecturing Israel, he would do well to set his own country in order. Just ask the Kurds of southeastern Turkey, who have been targeted for decades by a policy of displacement and forced acculturation. Last month, Erdogan sent the Turkish police to arrest dozens of Kurdish political leaders and activists as part of an ongoing crackdown on the community.

He also detained Muharrem Erbey, the president of Turkey's national Human Rights Association, who has been an outspoken advocate on behalf of the Kurds. I wonder what Erdogan's "excuse" is for this.

And while the Turkish premier feels free to criticize Israel for its "occupation" of the Palestinians, he does not seem overly troubled by the fact that his own forces have been occupying part of Cyprus since July 1974. An estimated 30,000-40,000 Turkish troops are currently on the island, where they prop up the government of northern Cyprus in defiance of international law and have effectively severed the region in two.

Sure, Turkey is a powerful player in the eastern Mediterranean, and it once held out great promise as an example of a secular Muslim democracy. But those days appear to be over, as Erdogan and his Islamist colleagues are clearly leading the country in a very different, and far less friendly, direction.

For its own reasons, Turkey has gone cold on Israel, and there doesn't seem to be much we can do about it. However frustrating this might be, we must recognize the reality for what it is, rather than cling to what we might wish it to be.