Obama's latest visit to Turkey could be seen as an opportunity to mend the cracks that surfaced between Washington and Ankara during Bush's term in office. Yet the visit stirred up much controversy over the potentials of the Turkish role in the region as well as the challenges it might face.
The US President was willing to use the visit to lay the ground for a strategic partnership between Washington and Ankara and bridge the gap between Islam and the west. He confirmed his support to Turkey's bid for EU candidacy and heaped praise on the country's secular and democratic legacy as well as its role in the Middle East and the Caspian Sea. As he was keen to emphasise his administration's commitment to resolve the Arab-Israeli conflict via the two-state solution, the US President expressed his full support to the Turkish role in this regard-a position that could be seen by many as an explicit recognition of the Turkish mediation between Israel and Arab parties.
The Turks were heartened by Obama's statements vis-à-vis the Armenian and Kurdish issues. He said that he would not use the term 'ethnic cleansing' to describe the crimes the Ottoman Empire had allegedly committed in Armenia during the WWI-thought he called the Turkish parliament to open the Armenian file. He displayed an understanding to Turks' efforts to fight the (Kurdistan Workers Party) PKK, and said that such efforts work in tandem with the country's constructive role in support of the US war on terror.
It seems that US President chose Turkey to be the first Muslim country to visit throughout his first 100 days in office for the administration considers relations with Ankara a high priority. The Americans plan to employ Turkey's regional role to promote the new US strategy dubbed 'smart power'. The strategy, outlined by a group of experts including Richard Armitage, seeks to use rising powers in the region in a way that serves the US interests world-wide. The core of the 'smart power' is to preserve the US hegemony via consent rather than coercion. In this context, antagonising major powers in the Muslim world -such as Egypt and Turkey-is no more conceivable for it would do more harm than good and tarnish America's image.
Obstacles on the way
Despite the factors in favour of a growing Turkish role, too much optimism would be misleading as it overlooks the typical US manipulative approach vis-à-vis debatable issues. Despite Obama's keenness to find ways to push forward the dialogue between Turkey and Armenia -kick-started last October- his attitude a propos of the question remains ambivalent. For instance, he used the term 'genocide' in his electoral campaign to describe Turks' alleged crimes in Armenia.
In his speech before the Turkish parliament, Obama called upon the Turks to work through their past for this would help them seize a better future and voiced his support to full normalisation between the two countries. He asserted that ethnic problems should be dealt with through tolerance and stressed that diversity enriches nations and cultures.
In fact, a group of congressmen pressurised Obama to issue a statement before 24 April -the anniversary of the Ottoman Empire's alleged crimes- recognising the "genocide". It is worthy of mentioning that Washington is keen to please the Armenians without outraging Turkey. In fact, obstacles on the way of resolving the dispute between the two counties go beyond the disagreement over the classification of the events of 1915. It has to do with border demarcation and the dispute between Azerbaijan -Turkey's ally-and Armenia over Nagorno-Karabakh region. When the Armenian President announced lately that Turkey's recognition of the 'genocide' is no more a precondition to normalise relations between Ankara and Yerevan, Azerbaijan expressed its grave concern and the Turkish premier had to visit Baku to quell Azerbaijanis' worries and show support to their stance regarding the disputed region.
As for the Kurdish question, although Obama repeatedly accused the PKK of committing terrorist acts, he urged the Turkish government to take further steps to open up to the Kurds. Thus Obama met with Ahmed Turk, the head of the Kurdish Democratic Society Party (DTP) which has close relations with the PKK. Indeed, the DTP made a resounding victory in last municipal elections and raised its share to 98 seats instead of 56-at the expense of the ruling Justice and Development Party. Although the meeting was supposed to last no more than 3 minutes, it eventually took about 10 minutes, within which Turk explained his outlook to settle the Kurdish problem and offered a written outline in this regard. At the end, he praised what he called Obama's support to Kurds and their peaceful struggle to gain their legitimate rights.
EU Candidacy
When it comes to Turkey's bid to join the EU, the US was satisfied with appealing to the Europeans to listen to Ankara's demands and stressing the benefits that could result from cooperation with Turkey. Yet the Europeans rebuffed on the grounds that there remain 12 outstanding issues that prevent any tangible progress in this direction. Unlike previous reports, the latest EU report had a passage on Abdullah Ocalan, the PKK leader imprisoned in the island of Imrali for more than 10 years. It talked about his deteriorating health and psychological state and condemned the isolation the Turkish authorities impose on him.
Moreover, there were other disturbances including Turks' persistence not to send combat troops to Afghanistan and their reluctance to reopen a school to prepare the students for ordination as monks in Heybeliada Island-an action that recalled Ankara's past tensions with the Christian minority which complain of discrimination. Moreover, Turkey displayed its reservation over the appointment of the former Danish prime minister premier Andres Fogh Rasmussen- who infuriated many Muslims by defending freedom of speech during an uproar over a Danish newspaper's publication of the cartoons of prophet Mohammed in 2006- as NATO chief.
In light of the above, one could say that the future of Turkey's role depends to a great extent on its ability to use the opportunities at hand and overcome the obstacles on the way as well as the seriousness on the part of the Americans to support the Turks in their quest for sustaining their role.
.
