 |
Turkey, US share same goal, but differ on methods on Iran
Although Turkey voted ‘no’ in the UN Security Council against new sanctions on Iran, in contrast to the US administration, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton still said that Turkey and Brazil will continue to play an important role in future diplomatic overtures to Iran and that the US is still open to effective diplomacy.
Ahead of UN voting, Turkey and Brazil convinced Tehran to consent to an agreement by which low-enriched uranium would be swapped for richer uranium in Turkey; both Turkey and Brazil voted ‘no’ on UN sanctions.
Yasin Aktay, from the Institute of Strategic Thinking (SDE), said while Turkey and the US share the same target, they also have differences. “Turkey’s aim is to denuclearize the region, while the US only wants to prevent Iran from having nuclear weapons. Turkey thinks that preventing Iran from doing so by implementing sanctions is not a very good solution; just the opposite, it can be harmful for its neighbors,” he told Today’s Zaman.
Although Turkey voted ‘no’ in the UN Security Council against new sanctions on Iran, in contrast to the US administration, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton still said that Turkey and Brazil will continue to play an important role in future diplomatic overtures to Iran and that the US is still open to effective diplomacy |
Aktay added that because of the sanctions Iran could be reluctant to sit at the negotiating table and could also use the sanctions as a pretext to attempt illegal methods.
According to him, Turkey should follow a careful policy in order to avoid damaging relations either with Tehran or with the US. “Turkish foreign policy is based on zero-problems approach with its neighbors, but while doing this it is possible that it will be difficult to satisfy both sides in the conflict,” he said.
Veysel Ayhan, from the Middle East Strategic Research Center (ORSAM), said Turkey surely does not want Iran to have nuclear weapons. “If Iran gets nuclear weapons, it will negatively affect the military balance in the region. Russia does not want it either, because it does not want a rival in the region. But Turkey at the same time does not want Iran to enter into a process of ‘Iraqization’,” he said.
Ayhan underlined that the US is using sanctions as a tool for its long-term aim, which is the containment of Iran. “There are different ethnic structures in Iran, and it has a decentralized administration. If Iran turns into a loose structure, it will affect everybody in the region, including Central Asia. In such a situation, the US will find entities to cooperate with and the loser will not be the US. So in short, preventing Iran from having nuclear weapons is the base of both the US and the Turkish policy, but in the long run the US has some other goals,” he said.
But Sedat Laçiner, of the International Strategic Research Organization (USAK), has a different opinion, according to him, neither the method nor the aim of the US and Turkey regarding Iran are the same. “The US does not mean what it says regarding Iran. It just wants a reliable government over there and is using the nuclear ambitions of Iran as a pretext for this. Iran is not sincere also. The only sincere party is Turkey, but it has a different psychology. When the US did not accept the outcome of Turkey’s efforts to mediate, Ankara took it as a move against itself,” he told Today’s Zaman.
He added that the different positions of the US and Turkey regarding Iran might not harm relations, but Turkey’s stance regarding Israel might increase the possibility of harm to bilateral ties between Washington and Ankara.
“Between 2003-2007, when US-Turkey relations were not at their best, the [Kurdistan Worker’s Party] PKK grew triple-fold. If there will be any harm to Turkey-US relations it will start there,” he added.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| BÜLENT KENEŞ |  |
||
| What befell Niyazi-i Misri in the past is happening to Fethullah Gülen now | |||
| EKREM DUMANLI |  |
||
| When a call for fairness and reason finds acceptance | |||
| ŞAHİN ALPAY |  |
||
| Uludere, test case for democracy in Turkey | |||
| EMRE USLU |  |
||
| Are the Kurds mentally divorced from Turkey? | |||
| GÖKHAN BACIK |  |
||
| Erdoğan, Gül and Davutoğlu: the inner bargain on Turkish foreign policy | |||
| MARKAR ESAYAN |  |
||
| Taking lessons from previous experiences with the military | |||
| YAVUZ BAYDAR |  |
||
| Qualm | |||
| ÖMER TAŞPINAR |  |
||
| A new phase in Syria? | |||
| İHSAN DAĞI |  |
||
| Turkish foreign policy: Time for a re-evaluation | |||
| SEYFETTİN GÜRSEL |  |
||
| Poor-friendly economic growth and the AK Party | |||
| CHARLOTTE MCPHERSON |  |
||
| Missing women, missing opportunities | |||
| BERK ÇEKTİR |  |
||
| Changes to incentives for investment in Turkey | |||
| MERVE BÜŞRA ÖZTÜRK |  |
||
| The 1960 coup: a final test for democracy | |||
| AMANDA PAUL |  |
||
| Ukraine: a lost country | |||
| MÜMTAZER TÜRKÖNE |  |
||
| The 52nd anniversary of May 27 | |||
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
