Having a Republican majority in the United States House of Representatives following the midterm elections on Nov. 2 will not directly influence US foreign policy but indirectly could be to the advantage of Turkey as far as the Armenian issue goes, according to an American expert.
Bruce Jackson, president of the Project on Transitional Democracies based in Washington, D.C., noted that after an intense election, the leaders of both parties will be reluctant to engage in international activism, such as recognizing the World War I-era killings of Armenians in the Ottoman Empire as genocide. The incoming House Republicans generally believe that passing an Armenian resolution is not the foreign policy of the United States.
“Passing an Armenian resolution is not the foreign policy of the United States. It’s the agenda of a domestic pressure group. It does not enjoy support in either Democratic or Republican foreign policy circles. Is the US Congress going to offer a verdict on the Crusades next time?” Jackson asked as he answered questions for Sunday’s Zaman at the Nov. 5-7 Halifax International Security Forum in Canada.
He added that President Barack Obama would veto a resolution if it were to be passed by Congress in any case. “There is a constitutional and presidential aversion to passing whimsical, inflammatory resolutions that are destructive to [the] international system just because it makes you feel good. It is not the role of the Congress or the president,” he said. “When Turkey will come to terms with its history, it should be done by the Turkish people themselves. Coming to terms with history cannot be imposed from the outside.”
In addition, he said the Armenian lobby has a “bad reputation” in the US capital. They have tried to block Matthew Bryza’s appointment as the US ambassador to Azerbaijan after previously delaying Philip Gordon’s appointment as assistant secretary of state for Europe. Both diplomats are widely admired by both political parties.
“We are extremely interested in Turkey-Armenia reconciliation, which would open Europe and its institutions to Armenia. And reconciliation also gives us a shot at finally addressing the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict,” Jackson said in reference to the conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan.
Turkey’s border has been closed since 1993 when Turkey sided with Azerbaijan, following the Armenian armed forces’ occupation of 20 percent of Azerbaijan in 1992.
‘Iran nuclear issue to test Turkish-American relations’
The Armenian resolution may not enjoy much support in the US House next year, but there is one big contentious issue that will test Turkish-American relations and that is policy towards Iran, according to Jackson. “Iran is probably the number one foreign policy concern in the United States. We have a fundamentally different view of Iran,” he said.
Turkey, which has developed close ties with Iran in recent years, has called for a negotiated settlement to the international dispute over Tehran’s nuclear program, dismissing sanctions and any military action as ineffective at best.
Tehran says it seeks nuclear energy only for the generation of electricity. But many countries are concerned Iran is using a civilian nuclear program to conceal development of nuclear weapons. Israel and its main ally, the United States, do not rule out a pre-emptive strike to stop Iran getting the bomb.
“The United States might be wrong. Turkey might be right or vice versa. It seems like we will continue to have different opinions for a while,” Jackson said. “If Turkey wants to appoint itself as the good cop engaging with Iran, Turkey can do it. But this engagement will not enjoy the support of the United States.”
Jackson also said Washington either doesn’t understand or is uncomfortable with the “Davutoğlu view of the world,” in reference to Turkey’s Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu’s vision, which employs a “zero problems with neighbors” policy.
“If the president of Sudan is indicted for war crimes, we don’t understand why he is invited to visit by a NATO ally. We have increasingly divergent views on Israel. Turkey’s search for a post-Kemalist identity has confused Americans and possibly even disappointed or angered us. We liked the Kemalist Turkey; we were comfortable with secularism, which is much like our own. We were used to it, it became a pattern. It’s hard to imagine the Cold War without Turkey firmly in the West,” he explained, and added that there is now a major shift of identity in Turkey.
“It is as if Turkey decided to have an ideological change of identity. Maybe we’ll get used to it, but it could take a while. The danger is if Turkey and the US are not working together, there is likely to be a drift,” said Jackson, a former military intelligence officer and conservative strategist. He also worked in the Office of the Secretary of Defense during the Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush administrations.
‘We want Turkey in the EU because the neighborhood is unstable’
Regarding the process of democratic transformation in Turkey, Jackson sees it as a search for a new identity. “All European states have searched for a modern identity. We have culture wars all the time in the United States. The political debate in Turkey should have been expected. But we have concerns about how far that goes,” he said, but added that there is time.
“Even if there is alienation between the US and Turkey at present, we have time. There is not a major war on the horizon. We have a few years in front of us in which Turkey can mature, have elections and make decisions. I just hope Turkey won’t give up on its European aspirations,” he said.
Jackson also stressed that the United States wants Turkey in the European Union. “We want Turkey in because the neighborhood is unstable. That’s what we want an ally for. We in the US never said that instability in neighbors is a barrier to integration. If difficult neighbors are an issue for the Europeans, then they should not have taken West Germany in. The whole idea of an alliance is that the outside world is unstable. That’s the NATO formulation,” he said.
Americans believe that it is wrong for Europe to create obstacles before Turkey’s integration into the European Union, he affirmed. “These practices are racist and discriminatory. Deliberate opposition to Turkey creates an unfair process. We have made that point to Europeans frequently,” he said. “Turkey, on the other hand, is an excessively proud state and tells Europe that it will come into the EU on its own terms, the diplomacy of the sultan. If you want to join a club, you have to be nice. If the club says wear a tie, then wear a tie.”
He added that when Turkey did not implement regulatory and reform changes, this failure gave negative forces in the EU additional grounds to oppose Turkey’s candidacy.,
Yonca Poyraz Dogan
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|
