Connect with us

Middle East

Turkey’s confrontational foreign policy in the Eastern Mediterranean

Published

on

Since August 2020, Turkey has been sending several drill ships to the Eastern Mediterranean, which raised diplomatic tensions in the area. The dispute started in July when Turkey put a naval alert informing that it was sending Oruc Reis research ship to carry out drilling operations close to the Greek island of Kastellorizo. Turkish and Greek officials have been holding technical meetings in Brussels since September 2020 to find a common ground on the issue. On the other hand, it has been said that in order to expand its drilling fleet, Turkey plans to acquire a fourth vessel from Norway soon. Therefore, the maritime border dispute does not seem to be resolved anytime soon.

The conflict between Greece, Cyprus and Turkey over the exclusive economic zone (EEZ) began in early 2000s and intensified with the discovery of natural resources in 2010. The Turkish expansionist Blue Homeland (“Mavi Vatan”) doctrine, which defines the country’s territorial waters, the EEZ and the continental shelf, is playing a part on the confrontation. It also emphasizes a naval superiority over the Republic of Cyprus and Greece. Turkey also justifies its actions on the Eastern Mediterranean as a way to reduce its energy dependency from other countries.

There are many Greek islands within the sight of the Turkish coast in Mediterranean and Aegean, which lead to a complex issue of territorial waters. Greek and Turkish interests on the Mediterranean have always confronted with each other, with Athens accusing Ankara to violate its continental shelf, while Ankara responds that islands far from the Greek coastline and closer to the Turkish one cannot have a continental shelf of their own. The exploration of the natural resources might seem like the main point of tensions in the Mediterranean, but the roots of the problem are deeper than it seems.

Turkey’s Cyprus question

After a Greek backed coup in Cyprus in 1974, Turkish military intervened and annexed a part of the island under the name of protection of interests of the Turkish Cypriots. Now there are two States in the island, the Republic of Cyprus and the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (TRNC). Over the years, Southern Cyprus, backed by Greece, got closer with  the EU and finally became a member state in 2004. Meanwhile, TRNC is only recognized by Turkey itself while the United Nations recognize it as territories belonging to the Republic of Cyprus that are occupied by the Turkish military.

Since 1974, there were several attempts at peacebuilding and reunification, the most famous of them known as the Annan Plan, but both sides never found a common ground, which led to the failure of the negotiations. Recently, the Turkish President Erdogan crossed out the possibility of a united federal Cyprus by accusing his Greek counterpart of being confrontational. He opted for a two-state solution as the only way to solve the conflict. Cyprus was also one of the main issues on the table for Turkish accession to the EU. Unless the problem is solved, Turkish membership does not seem likely, considering the Cypriot and Greek opposition inside the EU itself. Meanwhile, it seems like disagreements will continue and that the Cyprus question will isolate Turkey from the EU more and more.

Turkey’s isolation in the region

The prolonged talks, which resulted in the failure of the admission of Turkey to the EU, led Turkey to turn its back to the EU and to focus on being a strong, regional power. Now feeling isolated, Turkey is trying to assert its power throughout the neighboring territories. The recent involvements in the Caucasus and the MENA region support this argument.

Meanwhile, Turkey’s maritime accord with the Libyan Government of National Accord (GNA) also created tensions with other regional powers, such as Egypt and Saudi Arabia, since they are the supporters of the Tobruk Government. The role of Egypt is actually an important point here, as it is also one of the interested parties on the Eastern Mediterranean. Turkish claims on the Mediterranean also threatens Egyptian efforts to become a regional hub for natural resources. The maritime boundary agreement between Greece and Egypt, signed in early August 2020, also agitated Turkey even more and caused the renewal of the exploration efforts.

Exclusion from the EU membership was followed by exclusion from the EastMed Gas Forum (EMGF) as well, thus leaving Turkey no choice but to act alone. Established as an international body on 16 January 2020, the EMGF brings together Cyprus, Egypt, Greece, Israel, Italy, Jordan, Palestine, with a possible future membership of France. The main reason for the exclusion of Turkey seems to be the US opposition to Ankara’s purchase of $400 missiles from Russia. Turkish politicians did not welcome this act well and interpreted it as a containment policy towards Turkey. The possibility of an Eastern Mediterranean pipeline through the EMFG member countries towards the European market, without including Turkey, is another concern of the government officials. They insist on the fact that they should be included to the Forum for the promotion of regional cooperation.

EU’s stance on the issue

The European Union should be careful to react since Turkey does not welcome very warmly the EU’s intervention on the issue of Eastern Mediterranean. Several arguments from Turkish officials were put forward: the EU cannot play a part on this issue since it involves one member state against a non-member one; it is not the EU’s competence to solve the maritime issues, but it is the one of the international courts; it is up to national governments to decide on border disputes.

On the spotlight of the recent events, the EU considers the application of further sanctions towards Turkey for unauthorized and illegal drilling efforts in the Mediterranean. An extensive report is expected to be delivered by EU’s top diplomat Josep Borrell at the March summit. During his recent visit to Brussels, the Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Çavuşoğlu highlighted the fact that if the EU would resume the accession talks and avoid sanctions, Turkey would be interested to meet all the criteria. This and above-mentioned reactions by Turkish officials show an interest towards a closer cooperation with the EU, which could lead to the de-escalation of the situation in the Eastern Mediterranean, if the EU members also show interest on the cooperation.

Unsurprisingly, EU member states had different reactions to Turkey’s recent efforts. During the peak of the confrontation, Berlin initiated mediation efforts between Ankara and Athens in August. On a video conference with her Turkish counter-part, German Chancellor Angela Merkel mentioned the importance of making progress in dialogue. She also talked about how she welcomed the recent developments and positive news in the Eastern Mediterranean.

On the other hand, Macron’s call for a Pax Mediterranea was successful, with a clear Egyptian opposition towards Ankara’s foreign policy and Italy’s endangered energy interests in Libya and Cyprus. Macron’s clear opposition towards Erdogan’s foreign policy is making the matters worse than it is. France already dispatched several warships to the Eastern Mediterranean to show its solidarity with Greece Opposite positions in the Libyan Civil War also play their part in the relations of the two countries. It seems like the confrontational national interests of France and Turkey in the region will prolong the Eastern Mediterranean crisis for now.

Conclusion

The resolution of the conflict heavily depends on the vis-a-vis relations of Greece and Turkey. The complexity of the situation in the Eastern Mediterranean demands some compromises. Both parties should be ready for some concessions if they want to find a peaceful solution and coexist in the Mediterranean. Otherwise, they will have to get ready for future confrontations, that will eventually emerge because of the proximity of Greek islands to the Turkish coast.

Turkish exclusion from the regional cooperation is also a problematic issue. The EMGF should include Turkey as a member state, since it is one of the stronger powers of the Mediterranean. Discussing energy related issues together with other countries such as Egypt, Greece and Cyprus on a common platform might also help to find a common ground on maritime borders.

EU’s mild approach towards the parties could be useful, but too much involvement is also risky since Turkey does not see EU’s involvement in the region as appropriate. What the EU can do is keep close cooperation with Turkey on a European scale. Introducing more sanctions would agitate Turkey even more, and rather than looking for a common ground, Turkey might become more violent and expansionist. Instead, by cooperating further, the EU could strengthen the mutual relations with Turkey and achieve some positive results.

Abbas Zeynalli is the MA Student of University of Bologna and the Research Fellow from Topchubashov Center, Azerbaijan. His areas of interest cover Middle East, Chinese foreign policy, South Caucasus and European integration.

Continue Reading
Comments

Middle East

Process to draft Syria constitution begins this week

Published

on

The process of drafting a new constitution for Syria will begin this week, the UN Special Envoy for the country, Geir Pedersen, said on Sunday at a press conference in Geneva.

Mr. Pedersen was speaking following a meeting with the government and opposition co-chairs of the Syrian Constitutional Committee, who have agreed to start the process for constitutional reform.

The members of its so-called “small body”, tasked with preparing and drafting the Constitution, are in the Swiss city for their sixth round of talks in two years, which begin on Monday. 

Their last meeting, held in January, ended without progress, and the UN envoy has been negotiating between the parties on a way forward.

“The two Co-Chairs now agree that we will not only prepare for constitutional reform, but we will prepare and start drafting for constitutional reform,” Mr. Pedersen told journalists.

“So, the new thing this week is that we will actually be starting a drafting process for constitutional reform in Syria.”

The UN continues to support efforts towards a Syrian-owned and led political solution to end more than a decade of war that has killed upwards of 350,000 people and left 13 million in need of humanitarian aid.

An important contribution

The Syrian Constitutional Committee was formed in 2019, comprising 150 men and women, with the Government, the opposition and civil society each nominating 50 people.

This larger group established the 45-member small body, which consists of 15 representatives from each of the three sectors.

For the first time ever, committee co-chairs Ahmad Kuzbari, the Syrian government representative, and Hadi al-Bahra, from the opposition side, met together with Mr. Pedersen on Sunday morning. 

He described it as “a substantial and frank discussion on how we are to proceed with the constitutional reform and indeed in detail how we are planning for the week ahead of us.”

Mr. Pedersen told journalists that while the Syrian Constitutional Committee is an important contribution to the political process, “the committee in itself will not be able to solve the Syrian crisis, so we need to come together, with serious work, on the Constitutional Committee, but also address the other aspects of the Syrian crisis.”

Continue Reading

Middle East

North Africa: Is Algeria Weaponizing Airspace and Natural Gas?

Published

on

In a series of shocking and unintelligible decisions, the Algerian Government closed its airspace to Moroccan military and civilian aircraft on September 22, 2021, banned French military planes from using its airspace on October 3rd, and decided not to renew the contract relative to the Maghreb-Europe gas pipeline, which goes through Morocco and has been up and running since 1996–a contract that comes to end on October 31.

In the case of Morocco, Algeria advanced ‘provocations and hostile’ actions as a reason to shut airspace and end the pipeline contract, a claim that has yet to be substantiated with evidence. Whereas in the case of France, Algeria got angry regarding visa restrictions and comments by French President Emmanuel Macron on the Algerian military grip on power and whether the North African country was a nation prior to French colonization in 1830.

Tensions for decades

Algeria has had continued tensions with Morocco for decades, over border issues and over the Western Sahara, a territory claimed by Morocco as part of its historical territorial unity, but contested by Algeria which supports an alleged liberation movement that desperately fights for independence since the 1970s.

With France, the relation is even more complex and plagued with memories of colonial exactions and liberation and post-colonial traumas, passions and injuries. France and Algeria have therefore developed, over the post-independence decades, a love-hate attitude that quite often mars otherwise strong economic and social relations.

Algeria has often reacted to the two countries’ alleged ‘misbehavior’ by closing borders –as is the case with Morocco since 1994—or calling its ambassadors for consultations, or even cutting diplomatic relations, as just happened in August when it cut ties with its western neighbor.

But it is the first-time Algeria resorts to the weaponization of energy and airspace. “Weaponization” is a term used in geostrategy to mean the use of goods and commodities, that are mainly destined for civilian use and are beneficial for international trade and the welfare of nations, for geostrategic, political and even military gains. As such “weaponization” is contrary to the spirit of free trade, open borders, and solidarity among nations, values that are at the core of common international action and positive globalization.

What happened?

Some observers advance continued domestic political and social unrest in Algeria, whereby thousands of Algerians have been taking to the streets for years to demand regime-change and profound political and economic reforms. Instead of positively responding to the demands of Algerians, the government is probably looking for desperate ways to divert attention and cerate foreign enemies as sources of domestic woes. Morocco and France qualify perfectly for the role of national scapegoats.

It may be true also that in the case of Morocco, Algeria is getting nervous at its seeing its Western neighbor become a main trade and investment partner in Africa, a role it can levy to develop diplomatic clout regarding the Western Sahara issue. Algeria has been looking for ways to curb Morocco’s growing influence in Africa for years. A pro-Algerian German expert, by the name of Isabelle Werenfels, a senior fellow in the German Institute for International and Security Affairs, even recommended to the EU to put a halt to Morocco’s pace and economic clout so that Algeria could catch up. Weaponization may be a desperate attempt to hurt the Moroccan economy and curb its dynamism, especially in Africa.

The impact of Algeria’s weaponization of energy and airspace on the Moroccan economy is minimal and on French military presence in Mali is close to insignificant; however, it shows how far a country that has failed to administer the right reforms and to transfer power to democratically elected civilians can go.

In a region, that is beleaguered by threats and challenges of terrorism, organized crime, youth bulge, illegal migration and climate change, you would expect countries like Algeria, with its geographic extension and oil wealth, to be a beacon of peace and cooperation. Weaponization in international relations is inacceptable as it reminds us of an age when bullying and blackmail between nations, was the norm. The people of the two countries, which share the same history, language and ethnic fabric, will need natural gas and unrestricted travel to prosper and grow and overcome adversity; using energy and airspace as weapons is at odds with the dreams of millions of young people in Algeria and Morocco that aspire for a brighter future in an otherwise gloomy economic landscape. Please don’t shatter those dreams!

Continue Reading

Middle East

Breaking The Line of the Israel-Palestine Conflict

Published

on

The conflict between Israel-Palestine is a prolonged conflict and has become a major problem, especially in the Middle East region.

A series of ceasefires and peace negotiations between Israel and Palestine that occurred repeatedly did not really “normalize” the relationship between the two parties.

In order to end the conflict, a number of parties consider that the two-state solution is the best approach to create two independent and coexistent states. Although a number of other parties disagreed with the proposal, and instead proposed a one-state solution, combining Israel, the West Bank, and the Gaza Strip into one big state.

Throughout the period of stalemate reaching an ideal solution, the construction and expansion of settlements carried out illegally by Israel in the Palestinian territories, especially the West Bank and East Jerusalem, also continued without stopping and actually made the prospect of resolving the Israeli-Palestinian crisis increasingly eroded, and this could jeopardize any solutions.

The attempted forced eviction in the Sheikh Jarrah district, which became one of the sources of the conflict in May 2021, for example, is an example of how Israel has designed a system to be able to change the demographics of its territory by continuing to annex or “occupy” extensively in the East Jerusalem area. This is also done in other areas, including the West Bank.

In fact, Israel’s “occupation” of the eastern part of Jerusalem which began at the end of the 1967 war, is an act that has never received international recognition.

This is also confirmed in a number of resolutions issued by the UN Security Council Numbers 242, 252, 267, 298, 476, 478, 672, 681, 692, 726, 799, 2334 and also United Nations General Assembly Resolutions Number 2253, 55/130, 60/104, 70/89, 71/96, A/72/L.11 and A/ES-10/L.22 and supported by the Advisory Opinion issued by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in 2004 on Legal Consequences of The Construction of A Wall in The Occupied Palestine Territory which states that East Jerusalem is part of the Palestinian territories under Israeli “occupation”.

1 or 2 country solution

Back to the issue of the two-state solution or the one-state solution that the author mentioned earlier. The author considers that the one-state solution does not seem to be the right choice.

Facts on the ground show how Israel has implemented a policy of “apartheid” that is so harsh against Palestinians. so that the one-state solution will further legitimize the policy and make Israel more dominant. In addition, there is another consideration that cannot be ignored that Israel and Palestine are 2 parties with very different and conflicting political and cultural identities that are difficult to reconcile.

Meanwhile, the idea of ​​a two-state solution is an idea that is also difficult to implement. Because the idea still seems too abstract, especially on one thing that is very fundamental and becomes the core of the Israel-Palestine conflict, namely the “division” of territory between Israel and Palestine.

This is also what makes it difficult for Israel-Palestine to be able to break the line of conflict between them and repeatedly put them back into the status quo which is not a solution to the Israel-Palestine conflict.

The status quo, is in fact a way for Israel to continue to “annex” more Palestinian territories by establishing widespread and systematic illegal settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem. Today, more than 600,000 Israeli settlers now live in the West Bank and East Jerusalem.

In fact, a number of resolutions issued by the UN Security Council have explicitly and explicitly called for Israel to end the expansion of Israeli settlement construction in the occupied territory and require recognition of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of the region.

Thus, all efforts and actions of Israel both legislatively and administratively that can cause changes in the status and demographic composition in East Jerusalem and the West Bank must continue to be condemned. Because this is a violation of the provisions of international law.

Fundamental thing

To find a solution to the conflict, it is necessary to look back at the core of the conflict that the author has mentioned earlier, and the best way to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is to encourage Israel to immediately end the “occupation” that it began in 1967, and return the settlements to the pre-Islamic borders 1967 In accordance with UN Security Council resolution No. 242.

But the question is, who can stop the illegal Israeli settlements in the East Jerusalem and West Bank areas that violate the Palestinian territories?

In this condition, international political will is needed from countries in the world, to continue to urge Israel to comply with the provisions of international law, international humanitarian law, international human rights law and also the UN Security Council Resolutions.

At the same time, the international community must be able to encourage the United Nations, especially the United Nations Security Council, as the organ that has the main responsibility for maintaining and creating world peace and security based on Article 24 of the United Nations Charter to take constructive and effective steps in order to enforce all United Nations Resolutions, and dare to sanction violations committed by Israel, and also ensure that Palestinian rights are important to protect.

So, do not let this weak enforcement of international law become an external factor that also “perpetuates” the cycle of the Israel-Palestine conflict. It will demonstrate that John Austin was correct when he stated that international law is only positive morality and not real law.

And in the end, the most fundamental thing is that the blockade, illegal development, violence, and violations of international law must end. Because the ceasefire in the Israel-Palestine conflict is only a temporary solution to the conflict.

Continue Reading

Publications

Latest

Environment7 mins ago

Landmark decision gives legal teeth to protect environmental defenders

A 46-strong group of countries across the wider European region has agreed to establish a new legally binding mechanism that...

Environment2 hours ago

Plastic pollution on course to double by 2030

Plastic pollution in oceans and other bodies of water continues to grow sharply and could more than double by 2030, according to an assessment released on Thursday by the UN Environment...

Americas4 hours ago

Global Warming And COP26: Issues And Politics

The president’s massive social services and infrastructure package is under consideration by Congress.  The problem is Senator Joe Manchin, a...

International Law6 hours ago

The End of the West in Self-annihilation (Intentionality, Directionality and Outcome)

A state of complete physical, mental and social well-being and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity.-Definition of Health,...

New Social Compact8 hours ago

Women in leadership ‘must be the norm’

We can no longer exclude half of humanity from international peace and security matters, the UN chief told the Security...

Energy10 hours ago

Maximizing Nickel as Renewable Energy Resource and Strengthening Diplomacy Role

Authors: Nani Septianie and Ramadhan Dwi Saputra* The development of the times and technology, the use of energy in the...

Defense12 hours ago

To Prevent a Nuclear War: America’s Overriding Policy Imperative

Abstract: Though current US defense policy centers on matters of conventional war and terrorism, other problems remain more existentially worrisome....

Trending