Atwan says neighbors threaten stability in Turkey

Stressing that Iraq and Syria are in complete disarray, Atwan singled out Israel and Iran as the two leading countries that destabilize the region with their policies. “Israel tries to strangle Turkey. They [Israeli officials], in particular, have gone to non-Muslim countries and tried to insult Turkey, in Greece, Romania and Bulgaria,” he said, adding that “Iran conducts a sectarian policy in the region”

“I am worried about Turkey [and] how they are going to survive with minimum damage among such a boiling area,” he remarked to Today's Zaman in an exclusive interview last week while pointing out the huge challenges the Turkish government must face. He explained that “because there are some conspiracies by Turkish neighbors against Turkey's stability,” Davutoğlu's “zero problems with neighbors” policy was doomed to failure.

Atwan noted that Turkey should be aiding the Arab Spring countries swept by revolutions to help them to politically and economically rebuild themselves, adding that this is necessary to create “strong allies” and to save its “zero problems agenda” from collapse in the Middle East, which is fraught with crises.

Atwan, who was named among the 50 "most influential Arabs" by The Middle East Magazine in 2011, claimed that Turkey should counter its problems with conflict-stricken Syria and Iraq by developing stronger ties with countries in the Middle East that have successfully toppled their authoritarian regimes, such as Tunisia, Egypt and Yemen.

Stressing that that these countries have taken Turkey as a model for their democratic transition process, he said the Turkish government's pluralistic approach has been welcomed by the new governments. “Turkey should support successful Arab Spring states. They must help them build their institutions, strengthen the democratic changes, improve their economy and create friends for them.”

As for Iran, Atwan was critical of the regional involvement of Iran, whose goal is to strengthen Shiism in the region. “Iran unfortunately has conducted sectarian-oriented policies in the region. I think Iran should behave as a Muslim country and try to extend bridges to all Muslims regardless of sect,” he warned, adding that this policy could endanger Iran's interests in the long run as well.

Atwan ruled out foreign intervention against the Bashar al-Assad regime in Syria, saying it would not solve the Syrian situation but aggravate it. Atwan said even if Assad was toppled, clashes would probably continue because Syria has a highly fragmented opposition, unlike in Egypt or Libya. He also warned that the conflicts between Syrian groups would likely escalate into civil war because of the ethnic and sectarian division among the population.

Atwan also criticized a recent call by the Arab League on the UN to send a peacekeeping force to Syria, saying that the countries in the Arab League should come up with a regional solution.

The conflicts in the Middle East have worsened since last year, considering President Bashar al-Assad's violence in Syria and the Sunni-Shiite sectarian clashes in Iraq after the US pullout from the country. How will Turkey manage to build stable relations with the region again?

Turkey's “zero problems with neighbors” policy has collapsed because there is a certain country in the region conspiring against Turkey and its stability. Israel tries to strangle Turkey. Israeli diplomats in particular have traveled to non-Muslim countries and tried to politically besiege Turkey in Greece, Romania and Bulgaria, which is obvious.

Also, Iraq and Syria are in disarray, completely unstable. I am worried about Turkey. How will it emerge unscathed from the turmoil in the region? There are huge challenges the Turkish government must face.

I believe Turkey should support successful Arab Spring states, like Egypt, Tunisia and Libya. They must help them build up their institutions, solidify the democratic changes and improve their economy as well as to create friends for them.

I would urge Turkey to establish a new group, a “Friends of Egypt” group, and not limit its initiatives only to the “Friends of Syria.” We need groups such as Friends of Egypt, Friends of Tunisia and Friends of Yemen. That must be Turkey's role. Turkey should not only help the countries that face problems -- such as foreign intervention --but also those where the revolution has succeeded.

Iran is conducting a sectarian policy in the region, helping Shiite groups in the region to monopolize political power in their countries. Do you think Iran's role aggravates existing conflicts in the Middle East?

Iran unfortunately has a sectarian vision for the region. This can threaten Iranian interests and its stability in the long run. I think Iran should behave as a Muslim country and try to extend bridges to all Muslims, regardless of sect.

Iran is facing a huge problem, which is that Israel and the US want to put an end to its nuclear ambition. If a war breaks out with Iran, this would be devastating for the region. Iran is a strong country and it can retaliate against the Gulf States because they are the major US allies in the region. The Iranian leadership has threatened that it can take revenge on any country that aligns itself with the US if it bombs Iran.

If Iran seeks retaliation for attacks on the country, there will be a large number of refugees as people will be running for their lives. In short, you will see the same problems witnessed in Kuwait when it was invaded by Saddam Hussein in August 1990 as most Kuwaitis fled their country. Hezbollah will definitely side with Iran in the event of an attack on Iran. The region is facing a very difficult time. The coming 12 months are crucial in the Middle East's history. Should a war with Iran erupt and if the Syrian crisis deepens it could change the whole face of the Middle East, its demography, its geography and its geo-political map.

Everything is possible in the region; no one knows what will happen. Yes, the US achieved its desired regime change in Iraq, but where is the US now [in the face of sectarian clashes and instability in Iraq]? It left the country after 10 years of war, losing $1 trillion. It pulled out of Iraq and by doing so handed Iraq to Iran on a golden platter.

There have also been great political changes in the Middle East. As you mentioned, decades-long dictatorships have been successfully toppled in Tunisia, Egypt and Yemen, one after another, and a wave of hope for more democratic governance is washing over the region. A year after the Arab Spring, do you see any hope for the future of the Middle East?

In the beginning, the Arab Spring was very positive and people were optimistic. They managed to get rid of brutal rulers like Gaddafi, Egypt's Hosni Mubarak, Zine El Abidine Ben Ali of Tunisia and Ali Abdullah Saleh of Yemen, while Bashar al-Assad is on the verge of falling. But people are worried, because there are external powers operating in the region who would like to derail the Arab Spring. They actually want to use it [the Arab Spring] to further the interests of Israel, the US and Western governments. I started worrying about the Arab Spring when Tony Blair, former British prime minister, said we should have a controlled change in the Middle East. A controlled change could actually serve Western interests in that part of the world.

The next thing was the NATO intervention in Libya, as without NATO intervention the Libyan revolution would not have succeeded. While this intervention was organized under the pretext of human rights and democracy, the true item on the agenda was oil; they intervened to protect their oil interests. Libya is very rich in oil and gas and it is close to Europe. Libyan oil is the best in the world -- sweet and light. The intervention became solely about oil after the Friends of Libya guaranteed its continued flow; they did not care about the country anymore.

The Arab Spring is threatened now by many elements from outside the Arab world. As such, the revolution in Egypt is about to be hijacked. There are deliberate attempts to fail the Egyptian people and to undermine the revolution.

There are problems. I now believe the Arab Spring is turning into a battleground for the superpowers. The involvement of Russia and China in Syria, while wielding a dual veto against the Arab resolution, was an indication that there is now a Cold War between the superpowers, centered on the Arab world. I believe what is happening is a conflict between Russia and China on one side and the US and European governments on the other. This conflict is in fact a rehearsal of what could happen in Iran. It is a Cold War based on how the oil and money from oil revenues is going to be divided between the superpowers.

No, this does not mean that I am against the Arab Spring. I support the Arab Spring. I am with the intifada. They are entitled to have human rights, democracy and dignity. Why not? But at the same time we should not be under Western influence; we should not let this Arab Spring be derailed and steered to serve US and Israeli interests.

The humanitarian tragedy is escalating the violence in Syria. Without any foreign intervention in which the West is also involved in accordance with international bodies with military power, such as the UN or NATO, how can a solution be found for the Syrian situation?

We have a deadlock in Syria now. The regime continues its brutal security solutions to the problem. The regime believes that they can crush the intifada and control the situation. But they cannot. A year has passed since the demonstrations started in Syria. Although the regime has killed 6,000 people, it cannot contain or suppress the people; the Syrian people still demonstrate, still protest, still call for the fall of the regime. At the same time, the opposition is not capable or strong enough to depose the regime.

We need a political settlement for the situation in Syria before it gets much worse. The Syrian regime should definitely make huge concessions to its people. They cannot continue the brutal killing. This will not solve the problem but create more problems. We see that after a year al-Qaeda is there. The leader of al-Qaeda asked his people to go and fight the regime in Syria. What will happen after that? Who will run the country?

There has been no foreign intervention so far because there is no oil in Syria. That is the problem. The West intervened twice in regimes in the Arab world -- once in Iraq and the second time in Libya; this is because the two countries have huge oil reserves. The West is not going to intervene in Syria because there is no oil and because it is getting increasingly dangerous now.

Libya already has a sectarian civil war, and the introduction of al-Qaeda will make the situation worse. Leon Panetta confirmed al Qaeda's fingerprints behind the recent suicide bombings in Damascus and in Aleppo. And if al-Qaeda seeks to deploy in Syria, the situation will become very dangerous. We know what al-Qaeda did in Iraq in 2006 and 2007. So if the same scenario is repeated in Syria, there could be more bloodshed, and I do not believe either the opposition or the regime want al-Qaeda involved. But al-Qaeda does not need an invitation; Syria's borders are open now, and many arms are being smuggled in. It will end with Syria as a failed state. Neither the regime nor the opposition will survive. It will take a long time. And if a civil war starts in Syria, it could last for years. The civil war in Lebanon lasted 17 years. How many years will it last in Syria once it starts? And it has already started. The irony is who put an end to the civil war in Lebanon? It was the Syrian army. It is unbelievable.

So the situation has deteriorated, and it is getting out of hand for the regime and out of hand for the opposition. And it is disastrous. If the sectarian civil war spreads throughout the country [Syria], it will reach Turkey, Iraq, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states.

You said foreign intervention in Syria is dangerous because of potential repercussions in the whole region. However the Arab League in their last meeting on Feb. 12 called on UN forces to intervene in the situation in Syria. What do you think about their position?

The Arab League is bankrupt; they made huge mistakes, mistake after mistake. An Arab problem should be solved by the Arabs. They have spent hundreds of millions of dollars on weapons. Why don't they solve the problem by themselves? They made a mistake when they went to the UNSC to internationalize the problem.

They also deceived the Syrian people when they implied that the UN would solve the problem. They went to the UNSC and faced a dual veto by Russia and China.

They actually should have gone to Russia and China first to explain the situation to them to try to win them over before they went to the UN. They should not have gone to the SC before making sure that these two countries would abstain. They are trying it now [by organizing an international conference in Tunisia on Feb. 24] but it is too late. They want [peacekeeping] troops in Syria. When you send UN and Arabic troops to maintain peace, you must first have a peace to maintain. You have to have the consent of all parties, of the Syrian regime. You have to make Syria accept these troops in its territories. Syria does not want them.

But the problem is that the Syrian regime itself is losing control of the situation. There are now many factions in Syria fighting the regime. They may fight each other later. You have a lot of divisions among the Syrian opposition outside Syria. There are many divisions among the opposition inside Syria. You have the FSA, the Revolutionary Army and other armed groups. They do not coordinate with each other. They need a strong body, representing the Syrian opposition if there is a dialogue -- a body that can open a dialogue with the regime and a body accepted by everybody in the Syrian opposition. We don't have this yet, and I am worried.

Looking at the Palestinian issue

Do you think the Middle East peace process lost importance after the Arab Spring gained so much importance in the region?

In the short term, yes; the Palestinian issue has lost importance because now the focus is on the Arab Spring. But in the long term the Palestinian issue will definitely benefit because most of the regimes who are taking over are much better than the old regimes in Arab countries. The old regimes failed to solve the Palestinian issue; they made it worse.

There is a corrupt Palestinian elite -- Hamas and Fatah, actually. They failed the Palestinian people, both of them. We should have an Arab Spring in Palestine; people should have another intifada, and we should have a strong intifada in the West Bank. It is a shame for the Palestinians that they are not revolting against a paralyzed, failed leadership. The Palestinian leadership has gambled on peace with Israel for the last 19 years in which they have negotiated with Israel. What was the outcome? More Israeli settlements. I am surprised the Palestinian people don't revolt against Israel; why has Israel enjoyed a relative peace in the West Bank while they are building settlements? Why don't the Palestinian people revolt against leadership that is useless?