General Outlook

The Middle East could be the centre piece of the evolving new international system. In the previous changes in the system, the Middle East was also deeply affected. Cold War circumstances hampered any serious effort to solve the Palestinian problem. At the end of the Cold War it was presumed there could be favourable circumstances to make peace between the Palestinians and Israel. That is how the Oslo Process started. However, the Declaration of Principles on Interim Self-government Arrangements of 1993 made in Washington was signed by two unequal parties.  After the Gulf War Israel was strong. Palestinians included in the Jordanian delegation represented the weak party. Therefore the Oslo Process   could not achieve peace. Today, a new international system is taking shape following the September 11 attacks.

The global role of the European Union is also slowly emerging. The Balkan Wars prompted the formation of the Common European Foreign and Security Policy and the European Security and Defence Policy. Turkey played an important part in the actions in the Balkans. Let us see what role the European Union can play in the Middle East and what contribution Turkey can bring to these efforts.

We must first recognize that the task devolving on both the EU and Turkey is a very difficult one, because the Middle East has changed beyond recognition. On the Western fringe of the Middle East, the parameters of the Israeli-Palestinian problem have been altered tremendously. There is doubt whether the principles of Security Council resolutions 242 and 338 are still valid or not. Even the Road Map seems to be in difficulty. The situation on the ground is also completely different from the one existing five years ago. Gaza has been evacuated, the Wall has been built in the West Bank. The actors have changed: we have a Palestinian Government under Hamas. On the eastern part of the Middle East, in Iraq, we have a completely different picture. What can the European Union do under the circumstances?  Despite the transatlantic frictions during the start of the Iraq war, US and EU are working harmoniously in the global arena, as it was emphasized in the last EU-US Summit Declaration in Vienna, 21 June 2006. Hopefully, EU’s job in the Middle East may become easier.

Palestinian-Israeli Situation

Turkish policy in the Middle East is designed to make everybody’s job easier. In the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, Turkey consistently supported a solution based on Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338. Turkey has good relations both with Israel and the Arab countries, including the Palestinians. Turkey, for some time, has acted as “facilitator” in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. Later on, when the Quartet has assumed responsibility, Turkey supported the Road Map envisaging a “Two State Solution”. But as has been indicated in the previous paragraph, things have changed in the Palestinian-Israeli equation.  The fight is now between “unilateral” and “negotiated” solutions. The Israeli Prime Minister says there is no Palestinian partner for peace and wants to impose unilaterally final borders of Israel inside the occupied territories. However, there is no doubt the interest of the region lies in a Two State solution. To achieve that Hamas should change its position with regard to Israel. The gesture of Turkey to invite the Hamas leader following their election victory may prove to be useful in the long run. Turkey counseled the Hamas leader to act in the best interest of the Palestinian people. That was in line with the position of the EU urging Hamas to renounce violence, to recognize Israel’s right to exist and to disarm.

EU expects Hamas to commit itself to a peaceful and negotiated solution based on existing agreements and the Road Map. This can be achieved if there is work on the two fronts. On the one hand to convince the Israelis that a negotiated settlement is in their best interest. When the Israeli Foreign Minister visited Ankara in May 2006, the Turkish Foreign Mister made it clear that a Two State solution should be based on negotiations between the two Parties. The basic texts would be the Road Map and the United Nations documents. On the other hand, Hamas also should not be totally isolated. They have to be convinced that there is a real opportunity for a peaceful evacuation of Palestinian lands. Israel’s so-called “realignment plan” which aimed to incorporate large parts of the occupied West Bank, East Jerusalem and Jordan Valley into Israel within permanent borders, would not help the peace envisioned by the Quartet. Also, it was essential   to make sure that the Palestinian people were not isolated. Turkey would continue assistance to the Palestinian people, particularly humanitarian assistance.

Iraq

Turkey always had the best of relations with the Iraqi people, but detested the Saddam regime. When the operations started in 2003, Turkey’s major concern was the territorial integrity of the State. In the new set-up there should not be any loopholes that might jeopardize the unity of Iraq. In March 2004 when the Provisional Constitution was prepared in Baghdad by the Coalition Authority, the Turkish Foreign Policy Institute has organized a Workshop with Iraqi and Western experts. The attention was drawn to many of the loopholes Another Turkish concern was that Northern Iraq should be prevented from becoming a safe-haven for terrorists. Also the legitimate rights of the Turcomans should be preserved, Kirkuk included. The natural resources of Iraq must belong to the Iraqi people as a whole.

Turkey has taken many initiatives to safeguard the stability of Iraq. In January 2003, Turkey hosted the first meeting of the Countries neighbours of Iraq. This proved an useful mechanism. Turkey will attend the 9th foreign ministers meeting of Iraq’s neighbouring states scheduled for July 8 in Tehran. These meetings try to enhance the contribution of neighbouring countries to Iraq’s security and stability. Turkey appointed a Special Representative who would meet all the factions in Iraq. Turkey made efforts and arranged meetings so that the Sunnite would participate in the elections.

Now that there is a new Iraqi government, Turkey and EU should intensify their efforts to assist this government. Turkey and EU have the same objective: an independent, secure, stable, unified, democratic and prosperous Iraq.

When we consider the situation in Iraq, a country not very distant physically and mentally from the Israeli-Palestinian problem, the notion of “linkage” inescapably comes to mind. Before the first Gulf War that was the basic premise of the American policy. During the first Gulf War against Iraq, this policy was changed to prevent Iraq from exploiting any linkage. The same thinking was prevalent before the start of the Iraq operation in 2003. Heritage Foundation backgrounder on August 14, 2002 strongly advised the US Administration to “make clear a war against Iraq is not contingent on a peaceful resolution of the Arab-Israeli conflict”. However, it was no accident that the Road Map prepared by the Quartet was delivered to the Israelis and the Palestinians just days after the start of the Iraq operation. Still, today it is difficult to discern which way the “linkage”- if it existed at all- works. Will the solution of the Palestinian problem help the situation in Iraq? Or, will the solution in Iraq help the resolution of the Palestinian problem?

Iran’s nuclear activities

If there is a linkage between anything that happens in the Middle East, it can be traced down to the nuclear activities of Iran.  Iran’s nuclear program has been a matter of international concern ever since the discovery in 2003 that it had concealed is nuclear activities for 18 years in breach of its NPT obligations. The IAEA has announced that Iran is building two plants at Natanz to enrich uranium, plans to construct a heavy-water research reactor in Arak, and a plant to produce heavy-water for the Arak reactor. The Iranian government has acknowledged the existence of these facilities. Many argue that because Iran has big reserves of oil and gas, it does not need nuclear energy and that its nuclear program is designed to produce nuclear weapons. Of course there are many factors motivating states to manufacture nuclear weapons. The situation in the Middle East may have prompted Iran to fulfill its longstanding ambition.

Britain, France and Germany took upon themselves to negotiate on behalf of the European Union. In talks beginning in October 2003, Iran agreed to freeze all enrichment activities while a deal was thrashed out. Following Mr. Ahmadinnejad’s election as Iranian President last year, Iran announced it was turning uranium ore into a precursor gas at its Isfahan plant. In January 2006 it declared it was to remove IAEA seals from its enrichment facilities at Natanz and resume work there. France, Britain, Germany and the US then lobbied IAEA Board to refer Iran to the UN Security Council. The IAEA report said the Agency had not seen any diversion of nuclear material to nuclear weapons, but it was not at that point in time in a position to conclude that there are no undeclared nuclear materials or activities in Iran.  The Security Council   adopted by consensus a statement calling upon the Tehran Government to suspend all uranium enrichment-related activities to guarantee that its nuclear program is for exclusively peaceful purposes.

The last initiative came after the meeting of the Permanent Member of the Security Council with Germany in Vienna where it was decided to approach Iran with an incentives package. That is supposed to encourage Iran “to suspend all enrichment-related and reprocessing activities” and to continue the suspension throughout negotiations on the incentives package. Although the document presented to the Iranians by EU High Representative Mr. Solana is confidential, it is reported that the idea was to formally offer carrots and inormally offer sticks. The carrots would include international commitments to support joint projects with Tehran for building new light-water reactors to make electricity. Tehran could fuel such reactors without resorting to its own enrichment of uranium.

For Turkey it will be a serious threat in case Iran develops nuclear weapons. Therefore, Turkey’s position has been clearly communicated to Iran on every occasion. Ali Larijani, Secretary General of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council visited Turkey in May 8, 2006. Turkish officials urged him to seek more moderate and constructive policies to reach a diplomatic solution to the crisis. He was also told that Ankara favours a peaceful solution, but will abide by any Security Council Resolution on the issue. Turkish officials called on Iran to fully cooperate with IAEA and to be transparent with their nuclear program. Turkey again got in touch with Iran following the initiative of the 6 countries. The Turkish Foreign Minister took a trip to Tehran on 24-25 June 2006 solely for this purpose. He met the Iranian officials and impressed upon them to take the initiative of the 6 positively and respond to it in a reasonable time.

Energy

Turkey’s role in the Middle East cannot be fully understood without mentioning the developments in the energy sector. Europe’s energy interests have been analyzed in a paper prepared by the EU Commission and EU High Representative Mr. Solana in March 2006. For energy security two building blocks are proposed: functioning markets and diversification. To achieve this, the need for an EU external relations policy on energy is underlined. Among the possible initiatives to be taken at the bilateral level, after Russia and Norway, Turkey is mentioned in the following terms:” Help Turkey makes full use of its potential to become a major energy transit hub and in particular promote its rapid integration into the Energy Community Treaty.”

Turkey is indeed fast becoming an energy transit hub. The completion of Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan oil pipeline is adding a new dimension to Turkey’s importance for the European energy security.. The decision to add the Kazakh oil into this pipeline shows the support of this Central Asian state to Turkey’s position. A new project is under discussion with Russia to have an oil pipeline inside Turkey from the Black Sea port of Samsun to Ceyhan. This will relieve the Bosphorus from the burden of the heavy tanker traffic. Of course there is always the old Kirkuk-Yumurtalık oil pipeline coming from Iraq.

As to natural gas routes, there is a project to have a parallel gas pipeline from Shah Deniz in Azerbaijan to Ceyhan. Another project to have a gas pipeline parallel to the Kirkuk-Yumurtalık oil pipeline is envisaged. We should also remember that Turkey is receiving gas from Iran through Tebriz-Erzurum pipeline. Egypt and Algeria are also selling natural gas to Turkey.

The main project to transport gas from Turkey to Europe is the Nabucco gas pipeline project. It will run from the Caspian basin through Turkey to Bulgaria, Romania, Hungary and Austria. The Energy Ministers of these countries met with EU Energy Commissioner on 26 June 2006 to accelerate work to build the pipeline in the shortest possible time.

We should acknowledge that the role of Turkey as an energy hub will also contribute to the stability of the Middle East region as a whole