Turkish-Israeli dispute unveils structural problems in vision

Relations between Tel Aviv and Ankara came to a breaking point after the Israeli navy intercepted the Freedom Flotilla on May 31 in international waters and killed eight Turkish citizens on board, but experts argue that relations had given signals of “conflicting interests” long before.

Professor Mustafa Kibaroğlu from Bilkent University told Sunday’s Zaman that the relations started to decline as early as 2003 and that this had nothing to do with the ruling Justice and Development Party (AK Party) coming to power.

He recalled an article he wrote five years ago in which he argues that Turkey and Israel enjoyed an almost perfect relationship throughout the 1990s. However, the US war in Iraq revealed that the two longstanding allies did indeed have contradictory objectives and concerns with respect to the future restructuring of Iraq.

“While Turkey fears the emergence of an independent Kurdish state in northern Iraq, this appears favorable for Israel from a security standpoint, considering the threats posed by countries such as Iran, Pakistan and beyond. It appears that the ‘amazing alliance’ is heading toward a crossroads. Such an eventuality may change the nature of the relationship from a ‘win-win’ to a ‘lose-lose’ outlook unless proper steps are taken soon with a view toward rebuilding confidence on both sides,” he wrote in his article.

Speaking to Sunday’s Zaman, Kibaroğlu underlined that these confidence-building measures were not taken, but with two totally different visions, it was not possible to take them, anyway. And so their relations are now in a coma.

Taha Özhan, from the Foundation for Political, Economic, and Social Research (SETA), underlines that if the relations were good during the 1990s, this was simply because of the de facto situation created in Turkey after the Feb. 28, 1997 postmodern coup.

“If you ignore those years, you will notice that the relations were not very good,” he told Sunday’s Zaman.

Özhan stressed that Turkey, starting from 2003, did not defend the occupation of Iraq but worked very hard to make Iraq stable. It improved its ties with Syria and Iran and tried to improve regional stability. “However, Israel acted as if it were engaged in a short-term project instead of proceeding as a state, which looks at the long-term outlook. When Turkey tried improving stability in the Middle East, Israel started two wars -- one with Lebanon and the other with Gaza,” he said.

Sedat Laçiner from the International Strategic Research Organization (USAK) recalled that at the beginning Turkey also tried to get Israel involved in its new Middle East vision, one based on stability. “Turkey tired to mediate between Israel and Syria. It organized secret meetings between Pakistan and Israel. But Tel Aviv was unable to act as a partner. One of the unfortunate facts that make the situation worse is the existing Israeli government. Under this government Israel is not acting with wisdom but with stupidity. There was no need to lower the chair [of the Turkish ambassador to Israel] or for the Mavi Marmara crisis,” he told Sunday’s Zaman.

In January of this year relations faced yet another crisis when Israeli Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon in a meeting with the Turkish ambassador made him sit on a chair lower than his. Ayalon reportedly told reporters this was done deliberately. Turkey insisted on a written apology and eventually got it.

Özhan stressed that countries such as Lebanon, which Israel tried to destroy, chose to take part in Turkey’s efforts at stability. Laçiner added that even Iran, which is not willing to be a partner in this stability pact, refrained from acting against Turkey’s efforts, unlike Israel.

“Both Israel and Iran belong to the old Middle East, while Turkey is after a new Middle East. Both are rivals, but Iran is able to act diplomatically and refrains from confrontation, unlike Israel, which is unable to deal with the change desired by Turkey,” Laçiner said. According to him, because Israel is acting like a spoiled child and is unable to adjust itself to the new Middle East, relations between Turkey and Israel are turning into a blood feud.

According to Özhan, so long as Israel acts like it was a project rather than a state, it will be too optimistic to hope that bilateral ties between Israel and Turkey can improve. “Israel should give up policies that make it look like a project imported from outside of the region and act as if it were organically connected to the region,” he said.

Kibaroğlu underlined that Turkish-Israeli relations are in a comatose state and asked whether it would be possible to resuscitate them. “The answer is no, not anytime soon. Maybe not even later, unless extraordinary developments take place that reverse the current course of events,” he said in answer to his own question.

According to him, neither side seems to be willing to back down, even an inch, from its current position. Moreover, these positions are getting ever more deeply entrenched due to the incessant crossfire of words from the highest posts in the administrations of both countries. “The worst thing that can happen between the two countries is a state of war. The second worst would be the non-recognition or cutting off of diplomatic relations. Turkey and Israel, it could be said, are currently in the next category down. This means, if good sense does not prevail, a further escalation and moving to the second-worst level are not out of the question. How far can this go? Hopefully not to the point of no return from a hot confrontation,” Kibaroğlu said.