[NEWS ANALYSIS] Ambiguities in post-US Iraq a new tightrope to walk for Turkey

That motto has been the fact that Turkey is not a guest in Iraq. “Everyone who has entered Iraq will stay for a while and then leave, but we will stay,” Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan said at the time. Today, there is a different Iraq than that of 2003, with the US military having formally ended its combat operations as of Tuesday. This situation is not meant to portray what Turkey has said about “going away” from Iraq as there are still 50,000 US troops in the country.

US troop levels were cut to 50,000 before the partly symbolic deadline of Aug. 31 set by President Barack Obama as he seeks to fulfill his pledge to end the war launched by his predecessor George W. Bush. The six remaining US brigades will turn their focus to training the Iraqi police and troops as Iraq takes charge of its own destiny ahead of a full US withdrawal by the end of next year.

Ankara is confident that time has proven the appropriateness of its move in March 2003 -- which led to the reference “the March 1 syndrome” when talking about the bilateral relationship of NATO allies Turkey and the United States. As a matter of fact, a considerable number of analysts and officials who at the time favored allowing US troops passage through Turkish territory now recognize that Ankara's rejection served to strengthen the legitimacy of its further contacts and policies regarding this war-torn country.

Ankara believes that Washington is still far away from being “sufficiently elaborate,” while dealing with issues regarding Iraq, although it appreciates that the US has come a long way as, for example, it favored the decentralization of Iraq into semi-autonomous regions, while Turkey, right from the beginning, before the US invaded Iraq in 2003, fiercely defended Iraq’s territorial integrity.

Now, with political deadlock and persistent violence lingering and the Iraqi administration warning other countries, particularly neighboring countries, not to interfere as US troops depart, Turkey yet again has to tread a delicate path. While holding contacts with all ethnic and sectarian groups in Iraq in order to pave the way for a broad-based government, Ankara wants to maintain its legitimate stance and credibility in the eyes of the Iraqi people. It seems extremely aware that if Iraq’s post-election deadlock persists, the greater the risk of its security gains unraveling. Political, ethnic and sectarian groups might eventually abandon the bargaining process and return to violence to secure their perceived interests.

“Our contacts are going on hectically to help form a broad-based government. Our ambassador in Baghdad is in intense talks with all groups. And Turkey’s advantage is the fact that it is able to talk to all sectarian and ethnic groups in Iraq. This is something that should not be underestimated,” a senior Turkish diplomat told Today’s Zaman.

Speaking to all groups is one thing and gathering these groups around the same table or under the same roof is something else.

Although months passed after the March 7 parliamentary elections that left Iraq without a clear winner, a situation insurgents exploited to hammer Iraqi security forces in near-daily attacks, there has been no visible progress in forming such a broad-based government.

When reminded that there has been no reunion among these groups yet, the same senior diplomat, speaking on the customary condition of anonymity, first noted that Turkey has been in coordination in its said efforts, and added, “Patience is needed.”

Admitting that the current picture in Iraq is not glorious, if not gloomy, and that there are a lot of ambiguities regarding the near future, the diplomat, however said: “The fact that at least everyone is talking about the ongoing process and that doors are not shut to dialogue should give us a certain level of optimism. This is a democratic process to which Iraqis are not used and which has no precedent.”

Iran and its opportunities

Shiite Iran has gained considerable influence in Iraq since the fall of Sunni dictator Saddam Hussein in the 2003 US-led invasion. Iraqis fear that Shiite Iran will seek to fill any vacuum left by the US military, in competition with Sunni-led neighbors such as Turkey and Saudi Arabia. It is no secret that most Arab countries in the Middle East with large Sunni populations are feeling uneasy over the prospect of Shiite-ruled Iraq and afraid the new Iraq may shift the precarious balance in the region into disarray.

Ankara had in the past privately warned Iranian officials that there was a thin line between helping Iraq to solidify its democratic institution and meddling in the domestic affairs of the country. Nonetheless, Turkey, while pursuing its own interests in Iraq, has avoided antagonizing Iran, a valued trading partner, and has sought ways to resolve Tehran’s nuclear dispute with the West.

“Iran is able to talk to solely Shiite groups, while we are able to talk to all groups. Their opportunities are limited,” the Turkish diplomat briefly told Today’s Zaman, when reminded of concerns over Iran’s growing influence.

According to Associate Professor Mehmet Seyfettin Erol from the Ankara-based Gazi University’s department of international relations, Turkey does not have to worry much about the Iran factor.

“If Iran takes bold steps in interfering in Iraq’s affairs, it will be Iran who will remain in a difficult position, not Turkey. Iran will not dare lose Turkey since it receives significant support from Turkey for its legitimate presence in the international arena. A ‘nuclear’ Iran operative in Iraq is not acceptable for Iran’s close neighborhood, either,” Erol told Today’s Zaman.

Osman Bahadır Dinçer, an expert from the Ankara-based International Strategic Research Organization (USAK), is of a different opinion than Erol when the issue comes to Iran.

“In the coming years, Iran’s presence will pose a serious threat to any reconciliatory move within Iraq. True, Turkey is politically active in Iraq. But Iran’s network within Iraq is too strong from the point of social and cultural ties. Turkey has no such activity in the social and cultural fields. If it really wants to be active in Iraq, it has to launch such activities among Iraq’s people in addition to its activities in the political field and among political leaders,” Dinçer told Today’s Zaman.

A new regional initiative

A recent article published by the London-based, Saudi-owned newspaper al-Sharq al-Awsat reported that Turkey, Syria, Saudi Arabia and other Arab countries were planning a conference modeled on the 1989 Taif Agreement which ended Lebanon’s civil war.

The conference will seek “to resolve issues in Iraq away from Iranian and American influence,” and will take place in Damascus, the newspaper said, while quoting Iraqi sources as saying that a government could not be formed without the involvement of Arab states. The same sources set out four different scenarios, all of which excluded Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki and favored former Prime Minister Iyad Allawi to head the government.

Ankara rejects that it is preparing for such a conference, but does not shut the door to such a possibility, with the senior diplomat saying that the will of regional countries is essential for holding such a conference. “As long as it will have a positive impact on Iraq, we will take all opportunities, if appropriate,” the diplomat added.

Both Erol and Dinçer maintain that Turkey should lead a new regional initiative to help domestic reconciliation within Iraq, with Dinçer giving the Taif Agreement as an example. While Dinçer cautioned that Iran should not be intimidated along this process, Erol said Turkey should be very careful to preserve its independent approach towards Iraq while launching such an initiative.

“Saying that we are supporting Iraq’s territorial integrity is not sufficient and the US is not doing it literally, although it argues that it defends this integrity. The only appropriate thing to do is to have a regional conference similar to the Taif Conference of 1989 without entirely excluding Iran and having regional actors more active in ensuring Iraq’s stability,” Dinçer said.

In January 2003 Turkey launched the neighboring countries process, an initiative that brings together Iraq and its neighbors for ministerial consultations, in a bid to focus efforts on preventing a war in neighboring Iraq, but few realized that the initiative would grow into the international platform it is today.

The initiative, launched during Turkey’s 58th government, led by then-Foreign Minister Abdullah Gül, came prior to the US-led invasion of Iraq. In the meantime, the process has evolved into the Expanded Neighboring Countries of Iraq Foreign Ministers Meeting.

Erol is confident that by simultaneously operating backchannels with civil society groups, Turkey can again create a synergy for such a regional platform with the support of Syria and Saudi Arabia. “Turkey should be very careful not to be considered as a sub-contractor of US policies in post-US Iraq while exerting these efforts. Otherwise it will lose the credibility it has gained since March 2003,” he said.