The UN's Mavi Marmara report and Turkish foreign policy
by Cenap Çakmak*

Sources also say that shortly before the official deadline, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton asked Turkey to agree to the postponement of the announcement of the report to late September. But the report was leaked, likely because it became evident that the report supports Israel's standpoint on the incident.

The report is significant for two reasons: First, the report now serves as a legal justification for Israel's Gaza policy, including the naval blockade as well as the raid Israeli forces carried out against the Mavi Marmara in May 2010. Secondly, Turkey viewed the report as a potential major asset, fortifying its case in the international arena as it pursues a cooling foreign policy towards Israel in connection with the Mavi Marmara incident. Apparently, however, it is no longer useful for Turkey to prove it has been doing the right thing. After the publication of the report, Turkey will have to expend greater effort to justify its stance and make its position acceptable to the world.

What does the report say? Briefly, the report confirms and supports everything Israel has already said about the Mavi Marmara incident. To summarize its points:

1. The use of force by Israeli defense forces during the raid was unnecessary and disproportionate. This could have been avoided, but Israeli forces chose not to.

2. It would be appropriate for Israel to pay some sort of compensation to the families of those who were killed during the raid.

3. Israel should also issue a statement of regret over the incident.

The report's recommendations fail to meet Turkey's demands. Even before the report was issued the Israeli government acknowledged that the use of force in the raid was excessive and unnecessary, albeit not publicly, so on that point the report paraphrases something already known. Payment to the families of the victims is also something Israel agreed to before the report. In respect to an official apology, central to Turkey's demands, the report adopts an evasive approach and instead of recommending an apology, puts emphasis upon a statement of regret. Turkey has said before that this will not be satisfactory.

Therefore the report as a whole makes recommendations contrary to Turkey's demands and supports Israel's position. The statements in the report that justify Israel's blockade of Gaza especially please Israel. Sadly, Turkey's legal objections to the blockade no longer bear any political significance.

As expected, following the release of the report, Turkey has toughened its stance with Israel. While Turkish foreign policy has not wavered despite the report's findings, the government has also stated that it does not recognize the report's validity. Shortly after the leak, Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu announced a package of sanctions against Israel. Turkey first downgraded its diplomatic ties with Israel, and the minister also declared that Turkey would take appropriate measures for safe navigation on the high seas in the eastern Mediterranean. Military agreements between Turkey and Israel have been suspended. Turkey will not recognize the Gaza blockade and will take action at the UN General Assembly to make sure that the matter is discussed in the International Court of Justice (ICJ). And finally, Turkey will extend full support to the families of the Mavi Marmara victims in their pursuit of justice from Israel.

Some of these sanctions could be considered radical; however, some of these same actions, although with some slight differences, have been taken before in Turkey's relationship with Israel. Diplomatic ties between the two countries were severed in 1980s when Israel declared Jerusalem its capital, so this is not a first. The suspension of military agreements could be viewed as significant, but it should be noted that the two countries' military ties became stronger only in the 1990s, so it's not as though military cooperation between them has existed over a lengthy period. The emphasis upon taking measures to ensure safe navigation in the eastern Mediterranean is important because Israel assumes the right to take action in the area for its own territorial security. It is possible that the two countries could have an altercation if Turkey decides to take extreme measures in this regard. Of course, this does not necessarily mean that there will be a direct conflict, but the eastern Mediterranean could become a source of tension between the two states.

The decision to seek adjudication on the Gaza blockade from the ICJ is also new, given the history of Turkish-Israeli relations, and it should be noted that this will not be easy to do. A decision by the court in such a case will not have a binding effect, as it will be an advisory opinion. Also, requesting an advisory decision from the ICJ requires a voting session at the UN General Assembly and a qualified majority vote on the issue. Turkey will need to make a great diplomatic effort to secure that majority.

From Turkey's perspective, it could be said that the report undermines its foreign policy attitude with regard to this specific incident. The report could have provided legitimate grounds for Turkey to explain and justify its stance towards Israel. Now Turkey will have to try much harder to promote its position to the world in the absence of such support. However, this does not necessarily mean that Turkey's decision to impose sanctions against Israel is wrong. Any other decision would have meant Turkey was bowing to Israel's demands.

The report certainly undermined Turkey's position, but overall, things are not so bad in its aftermath. The policy Turkey has pursued since the Mavi Marmara incident has served its interests so far. The report could have sealed the process. The presidential statement made at the UN Security Council immediately after the incident as well as the UN Human Rights Council's decision finding the Gaza blockade illegal and Israel the culprit should be revisited. Turkey expected that this last UN report would complete the circle and drive Israel into a corner. But contrary to expectations, the report made some room for Israel to maneuver and took an opportunity away from Turkey.

*Dr. Cenap Çakmak is the head of the department of international relations at Eskişehir Osmangazi University.