When the civil war in Syria began in 2011, the U.S.-led bloc and its regional allies, including Saudi Arabia, devoted their resources to removing Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. However, as the result of Iranian-Russian cooperation to buttress the Assad’s government, they failed to achieve their goals. The addition to this alliance of Turkey, which initially opposed Assad’s government, has further made it clear that President Assad has won the six-year war and will remain in power. If successful, the trilateral cooperation can play a more substantive role in managing other crises in the region.
Tag: Turkey
Turkish Heritage Organization: “Old Rivalries, New Dynamics” Surrounding the Syria Crisis
Turkish Heritage Organization: “Old Rivalries, New Dynamics” Surrounding the Syria Crisis
During THO’s December 7, 2017 panel at the National Press Club – “Lessons from the Syria Crisis: Old Rivalries, New Dynamics” – former high-level government officials addressed the effect of the Syria conflict on traditional relationships and tensions between actors like Russia, Turkey, Iran, and the U.S.
The panel was moderated by Dr. Sinem Vatanartiran (President, BAU International University), and featured the following speakers:
Amb. Lincoln P. Bloomfield, Jr. – Former U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for Political Military Affairs; Distinguished Fellow and Chairman Emeritus at the Stimson Center;
Amb. Seyed Hossein Mousavian – Former Iranian Ambassador to Germany; Middle East Security and Nuclear Policy Specialist at Princeton University;
Barry Pavel – Senior Vice President, Arnold Kanter Chair, and Director of the Brent Scowcroft Center on International Security at the Atlantic Council.
“THO PANEL EXAMINES ‘OLD RIVALRIES, NEW DYNAMICS’ SURROUNDING THE SYRIA CRISIS,” Turkish Heritage Organization, December 7, 2017.
Atlantic Council Panel Discussion: The Region and the Iran Deal
A conversation with:
Hussein Ibish, Senior Resident Scholar, Arab Gulf States Institute in Washington
Hossein Mousavian, Middle East Security and Nuclear Policy Specialist, Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs
Kadir Ustun, Executive Director, SETA Foundation at Washington, DC
Moderated by: Barbara Slavin, Director, Future of Iran Initiative, Atlantic Council
Video of Ambassador Mousavian’s Remarks
“How Europe and Iran’s Neighbors View the Nuclear Deal Future,” Atlantic Council, September 25, 2017.
Ankara tries to recast war on terror
While the emergence of terrorism in unprecedented forms has sent tremors of anxiety around the globe, Turkey unyieldingly swims against the tide. Despite its Nato membership, it adamantly refuses to participate in multilateral actions with the United States and its allies, Arab countries, Iran, Russia and Syria. While these countries have not acted in unison, they are engaged in a massive endeavour aimed at bringing down Daesh (Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant) and eliminating terrorist groups.
The question, then: “What motivates Turkey to act unilaterally despite further isolating itself from the global community?”
“Ankara tries to recast war on terror,” Hossein Mousavian, Gulf News, November 16, 2014.
Opinion: A Conference on Security and Cooperation in the Middle East
The Middle East is witnessing too many challenges: a return of a regional cold war, the increasing role and weight of non-state actors, the threat of failed or failing states, the reemergence of strong transnationalism through the rise of Islamism and sectarianism, the rise and consolidation of jihadist terrorism on the shores of the Mediterranean, and the revival of sub-national identities fearful of the present or of the future. All of this threatens the fabric of existing states, providing an attractive space for interference, intervention, and confrontation by proxy.
The people of the Arab world, Iran and Turkey are forever condemned to live together in this region. They need to talk to, rather than about, each other. They are facing common threats, and they each have huge potential and influence in the region and beyond. Restoring peace and stability in the Middle East will not be possible so long as individual preferences and influences are not channeled into a coordinated approach to securing the common interest.
Once established, the conference would convene at the ministerial level at regular intervals; it could convene any other time at a lower level as well. It could also entrust small committees of experts and officials with exploring solutions to certain crises or ways to contain issues, or with developing confidence-building measures for such purpose. Such committees could, perhaps, report to the general conference with policy suggestions.
The four major regional powers—Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Iran and Turkey—can and should take the initiative to launch such a process. This quartet, along with other countries in the region, have too many overlapping, intersecting and interdependent issues and areas of mutual interest. Such concerns can be better addressed within the framework of a conference such as we are proposing, which would give the opportunity to avoid new crises, contain existing ones, develop better understandings, and work out common approaches to problems.
Indeed, there are crises in this region that could escalate into war—and this is a region witnessing a proliferation of crises. Most of them are complex in nature, bringing together internal and external factors in a highly volatile Middle East. Even more, all sorts of links exist between these various crises.
The question that remains now is whether these four main powers will rise to this challenge and take the initiative to develop a comprehensive vision of the role of such a forum. Will they join forces with others to turn this idea into a working reality, or will they remain entangled in an increasingly fragmented Middle East?
“Opinion: A Conference on Security and Cooperation in the Middle East,” Hossein Mousavian with Nassif Hitti, Asharq Al-Awsat, June 10, 2014.
Asharq Al Awsat Opinion: Turkey needs to rethink its regional policy
The Middle East is on fire and the constructive role of Turkey is essential. Ankara should try to revive the Zero Problems Policy with its neighbors. To achieve this urgent objective, Ankara should consider the following:
1) Turkey should not throw all its weight behind the Muslim Brotherhood based on the wrong assumption that the future of the region rests with this party.
2) The Arab Awakening should not lead Turkey to abandon its policy of non-interference.
3) Turkey should maintain a position of neutrality, enabling Ankara to play a credible role in regional crisis management.
4) It must determine which direction its foreign policy is heading. Iranian foreign policy following the 1979 revolution was based on ideology and national interest. Turkey, as a secular state, is essentially acting more ideologically than Iran on its foreign policy.
5) Turkey should not harbor ambitions of reviving the Ottoman past, as it would have grave consequences for Turkey and the region. Turkey’s recent policies have made some countries think Ankara is after reviving the former Ottoman hegemony in the region, believing that the “zero problems policy” was just a cover for Ankara’s “neo-Ottoman” ambitions.
6) The country should not forget its internal challenges. Turkey’s credibility in the region and the world took a beating this summer with Erdoğan’s decision to put down the demonstrations with riot police, tear gas and water cannons leading to the arrest and injury of hundreds of demonstrators in about 50 cities.
7) Turkey should attempt to cooperate with regional powers, mainly Iran, Saudi Arabia, Iraq and Egypt, to manage the crisis arising from the Arab Awakening. Such a policy should be based on non-interference, mutual respect and peaceful settlement.
“Opinion: Turkey needs to rethink its regional policy,” Hossein Mousavian, Asharq Al Awsat, September 21, 2013.
