In their offer, Iran would be given a package of economic and technical rewards if it agreed to suspend the uranium enrichment plan. Everyone knows enrichment can make fuel for reactors -- which Iran says is its only intention -- but it can also make fissile material for warheads, which many Western governments suspect is its aim.Contained within that package was a micro-deal -- the so-called "freeze for freeze" pact -- in which Iran would keep its enrichment at present levels and the UN Security Council, as well as the six countries acting on their own, would not increase sanctions. The first response from Iran was a letter in which it reasserted its right to make nuclear fuel. A phone call then followed in which Iranian officials indicated that this was not a rejection, just a holding pattern.
The most influential country that is against any kind of military option against Iran is Russia. It is influential because it is a member of the group of 5+1 and a permanent member of the Security Council. While Russia does not really want Iran to acquire nuclear weapons, it really does not want the US or Israel to mount a military attack and believes that keeping talks going is the way to do that. The Russians' stance on Iran's nuclear issue resembles Turkey's approach to the Iran dispute. Turkey do not want the US or Israel to attack Iran to demolish its nuclear facilities either, seeing that it will cause new chaos in the region and damage regional stability and security greatly in addition to leading to great regional economic losses. So, like Russia, Turkey also suggests trying a "third way" to find a solution: no intensification of sanctions, no military attacks, but yes to giving a chance to diplomatic negotiations.
Despite Turkey being completely against the proliferation of nuclear weapons in the region, as is the 5+1 group, the legitimate right of countries to acquire nuclear energy in the framework of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and under the monitor of International Agency of Atomic Energy must be respected. Turkey agrees with blocking any attempt to proliferate nuclear weapons, but it does not want this blocking to be an international norm to bar all countries from pursuing producing nuclear fuel for generating peaceful nuclear energy because Turkey also needs nuclear energy to ease its energy dependency on foreign sources and ease the energy bill. So, it is against the suggestion coming from the 5+1 to control the enrichment of nuclear fuel by a determined third party. Turkish officials do not want a new kind of energy monopoly that has control over nuclear fuel production.
The Turkish option has once more circulated through the diplomacy field in recent weeks because Turkish diplomats strongly worry that some radical groups or lobbies within the Israeli and American administrations might abuse the power vacuum in these countries during the transition period to form new administrations in both countries in order to force a military attack against Iran. They think that even if Israel alone launches a military operation against Iran, the US will be obliged to intervene and to continue to finish it. Since stakes are very high in the region, as a country in the regional and as a neighbor of Iran, Turkey will be one of the most affected in the event of any kind of armed conflict with Iran.
Hence, Turkey has been suggesting a "third way" to handle this problem. Turkish diplomats also call the "third way" the "Turkish option." This option does not suggest using military means and forces to solve international disputes but peaceful negotiations and diplomatic means. Turkish diplomacy has earned fame for its ability to intervene in international disputes through diplomatic means in recent years. Opting for a "facilitator" role, Turkey has gained the trust of clashing parties in the region. Turkish diplomacy has been successful in bringing Pakistani and Afghan leaders, Syria and Israel, Hamas and Fatah and Syria and Lebanon to the negotiation table. Why would Turkish diplomacy not be successful in persuading Iran and Western powers to find a solution through negotiations in the Iran nuclear dispute?
Despite criticism by some Western circles of Turkey's role, the intervention of Turkish diplomacy in the issue is quite natural because its national interests will also be at risk if any attack against Iran takes place. Turkey is Iran's neighbor and has had a peaceful border for almost four centuries. It does not want to lose this comfort. The Western powers should give a chance to Turkey's facilitator role to contribute to the process of seeking a solution to the nuclear dispute in the most positive way. Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's planned visit to İstanbul on Aug. 14 may bring a new opportunity to boost hopes of resolving this dispute. Who knows, the Turkish "third way" may become a new highway for a solution.
