WarSclerotic

Erdogan playing with fire – Israel Opinion, Ynetnews.

Op-ed: Turkey’s recent military moves, rhetoric have shifted from cursing to war games

Alex Fishman

The Turks are playing with fire. It appears that Turkey’s Prime Minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, is crossing the fine line between verbal escalation coupled with a diplomatic fight against Israel and the facilitation of military confrontation. This man, whom everyone believed was engaged in methodical, well-planned anti-Israel conduct with clear aims, is starting to go with his gut. The psychiatric aspects in the Israel-Turkey crisis are starting to overcome logic.

Over the holiday, the Turks published a report about what they characterized as “Israeli military provocation.” They claimed that Israeli fighter jets hovered above the Turkish Navy’s taskforce securing the gas drills planned by Turkey near Cyprus. The IDF denied the report, but it makes no difference. This is the message the Turks convey: Physical friction exists between Israel and us.

Meanwhile, Israeli officials are starting to monitor Turkish naval moves in the Mediterranean with special attention. A few weeks ago, a medium-sized Turkish battleship sailed in the Mediterranean’s eastern basin, from north to south, taking the same route as the Marmara did while moving abnormally close to Israel’s shores. While the ship did not enter Israel’s territorial waters, it sailed in ranges where military vessels usually update friendly states about their presence in order to avoid misunderstandings.

This set off alarm bells in Israel: Could it be that Erdogan, using the Turkish Navy, is checking Israel’s alertness and conduct?

On September 20th, a Turkish Navy taskforces sailed to the drill site near Cyprus. The force comprised frigates, missile boats, a supply ship, a tugboat, and apparently two submarines as well. This did not look like a security presence, but rather, as a force heading towards “hostile” states such as Cyprus, Greece and possibly Israel as well.

US warnings, Erdogan’s hubris

Generally speaking, Turkey has boosted its operations in the Mediterranean theater, both in the air and at sea, for no reason and without any perceptible strategic threat. The flights performed by the Turkish Air Force in the region are different than what we saw in the past.

A senior Turkish Foreign Ministry official recently summoned Arab ambassadors in Ankara and boasted about scrambling jets on several occasions and chasing away Israeli fighter jets flying near Syria’s shores. Regardless of whether these are half-truths or fantasy, one thing is clear: Turkish rhetoric has shifted from cursing to war games.

These games could end up badly. Senior NATO officials pled with their Turkish counterparts, deploring them to stop playing with fire. The Turkish officers responded that as far as it depends on them, there will be no military clash. However, Turkey’s military leaders are scared of Erdogan. Turkey’s public sphere is also different than Israel’s, and Erdogan’s acts and conduct are not transparent and are not under constant scrutiny. He can feel quite confident in the face of domestic public opinion – which in any case perceives Israel as an insane state that goes with its gut.

The Americans are also warning the Turks: Should you continue playing these games, you could end up losing a ship. However, Erdogan’s hubris is leading to military escalation.

Under such circumstances, Erdogan should not be surprised to see a Turkish or Israeli pilot, who suddenly feel threatened, pressing the button and firing the missile. The distance between provocation and a regional flare-up could be several seconds long. So who will be stopping Erodgan?

Lawrence Solomon: New battle over Mediterranean gas | FP Comment | Financial Post.

Lawrence Solomon  Sep 30, 2011 – 10:33 PM ET | Last Updated: Sep 30, 2011 10:52 PM ET

Turkey, Greece, Israel and Cyprus stake claims

The Middle East has moved north, with the Mediterranean emerging as home to some of the world’s richest deposits of energy. And as in the Middle East, rights to resources will be settled less by law than by force, or by the threat of force.

Much of the conflict involves the island nation of Cyprus, situated in the eastern Mediterranean close to Turkey to the north, Israel to the south, and Greece, its cultural cousin, farther to the west. The 200-kilometre stretch of sea between Cyprus and Israel — believed to hold hundreds of billions of dollars worth of hydrocarbons — is now a checkerboard of prospective drilling sites that have begun to be exploited by Israeli, Cypriot and American oil and gas companies.

These companies and their three governments have no intractable conflicts with each other — in fact, they’re developing their resources in close co-operation.Neither does Greece, which stands to become a major European hub for these energy finds, and longs to develop resources of its own in Greek waters to the west of Cyprus. According to a study for Economist Conferences, a business unit of The Economist, Greece could eradicate its debt by exploiting its Mediterranean hydrocarbons.

The spoiler in the Greek-Cypriot-Israeli plans to exploit the Mediterranean is Turkey, which in the 1970s invaded and seized the northern part of Cyprus, which since the 1980s has threatened Greece, and which in recent years has become belligerent towards Israel.

Turkey disputes Cyprus’s rights to develop what’s known as its Exclusive Economic Zone — a designation under the United Nations Law of the Sea that grants offshore rights to signatories of up to 200 nautical miles. Turkey claims that the residents of what is now Northern Cyprus — officially the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus, a state no country but Turkey recognizes — are entitled to a share of the spoils of the waters off the south part of the island.

To further muddy the waters, Turkey is the only country in the world that doesn’t recognize the state of Cyprus, an EU member, and Turkey has not signed the Law of the Sea treaty. To demonstrate its seriousness, Turkey often characterizes Cyprus drilling in bellicose terms such as “provocation” and “madness,” deploys war ships and jet fighters to the area, and engages in retaliatory gas exploration off the south coast of Cyprus.

Turkey’s relations with Greece are no less complicated, or confrontational. Although Greece signed the Law of the Sea treaty almost three decades ago, and has been entitled to claim an Exclusive Economic Zone in the Mediterranean ever since, Turkey threatened war if it did so. As a result, an intimidated Greece — Turkey’s million-man army is the Middle East’s largest — has refrained from developing its offshore resources, which are believed to include major oil deposits as well as natural gas.

Turkey, meanwhile, has been exploring in Greek waters, and, to everyone’s surprise, claimed sovereignty over Gavdos, a tiny Greek island near the major Greek island of Crete and far from the Turkish mainland. Turkish possession of Gavdos, population 98, would transfer much of Greece’s Exclusive Economic Zone to Turkey.

Enter Israel, whose massive energy finds in its own Exclusive Economic Zone made it Greece’s answer to Turkish force. Greek leaders instantly recognized that Israel would want to export its gas to European markets through Greece, and that Israel’s military is strong enough to give Turkey pause. Quicker than they could say “Eureka!,” the Greeks and Israelis began defence talks, culminating in the deployment of a mutual defence pact in September.

The Greeks, meanwhile, have been sufficiently emboldened to announce that they will soon be establishing an Exclusive Economic Zone in the Mediterranean. Even without a formal Greek announcement, however, a de facto Exclusive Economic Zone is in place, as seen in Israel’s published map of a proposed Israel to Cyprus to Greece natural gas pipeline. This pipeline, which follows a route within delineated Greek and Cypriot Exclusive Economic Zones, will carry Israeli and Cypriot gas to Greece and then to markets in Italy and Germany.

Although terms of the Israeli-Greek mutual defence pact are not public, it would surely envisage protection for Cyprus, with whom they have an economic alliance. To underline this point, Israel this week reportedly sent low-flying jets and a helicopter over a Turkish ship exploring south Cypriot waters. For good measure, Israeli jets also flew over North Cyprus, despite warnings not to.

None of this sits well with Turkey. It is not only seeing its dominance over Greece and the eastern Mediterranean challenged but also its plans to control much of Europe’s natural gas supply — before the pipeline through Greece materialized, Turkey saw itself as a gas gateway through which Iranian and Central Asian gas would reach Europe, a position that would have given it leverage in its long-held desire to be accepted in the European Union. Turkish pride at being trumped by Greeks and Israelis is also at stake.

Will Turkey resort to force to obtain what it views as its right? Not likely, assuming an incident doesn’t spark an unintended war in the Middle East tinderbox. Last week, the European Parliament issued a press release condemning the Turkish government for its threats against Cyprus, and the previous week U.S. Secretary of State Hilary Clinton and Russian foreign minister Sergey Lavrov warned Turkey to tone down its belligerence. To punctuate the message, Russia also sent two nuclear-powered submarines to the eastern Mediterranean as its way of tamping down Turkish aggression.

The Turks, for now, are at bay.

Financial Post
LawrenceSolomon@nextcity.com
Lawrence Solomon is executive director of Energy Probe.

Erdoğan means businessby Daniel Nisman*.

Could Israel and Turkey go to war? – Global Public Square – CNN.com Blogs.

By Soner Cagaptay – Special to CNN

The Arab Spring and recent dramatic deterioration of Turkish-Israeli ties present Israel with a uniquely threatening security environment.  Since 1949, Israel has always had the comfort of having Turkey, one of the two major Levantine powers, as its friend. This is no longer the case. In fact, conflict seems to be looming between Turkey and Israel.

In the aftermath of the 2010 Flotilla Incident, Ankara attempted to intimidate Israel by saying its warships would escort missions to Gaza. Now Turkey and Israel are at dangerously opposing ends of Levantine politics. Not only is Ankara no longer a trusted friend of Israel, but it has also begun to emerge as the key regional actor opposing Israel.

When Turkey became the first Muslim-majority country to recognize Israel in 1949, Israel took comfort in the fact that it had the backing of one of the Middle East’s most influential players. The strength of the Turkish military allowed it to become and remain a friend of Israel despite Islamist opposition to it.

Following the Camp David Treaty in 1978, Israel established a cold peace with Egypt, bringing the second major Levantine power closer to its side.  Whereas in the 1960s Nasser’s Egypt represented the center of opposition to Israel in the region, Cairo ceased to pose a threat to Israel in the wake of Camp David. This security environment is all but gone.

For starters, Turkey has become like the old Egypt under Nasser – positioning itself as the regional center of opposition to Israel. Meanwhile, Egypt is becoming like the old Turkey.  The outcome of the forthcoming Egyptian elections is far from certain.  Yet it is very likely that the Muslim Brotherhood will emerge as a power to be reckoned with in the Egyptian polls this fall. Even if the Egyptian military stands for maintaining ties with Israel, the Muslim Brotherhood will push for limiting those ties.  Accordingly, Egyptian-Israeli ties will continue to become more cold and tenuous with each passing day.

For the first time, the two major states of the Eastern Mediterranean are aligning against Israel. This is the most important shift in Levantine politics since Camp David or even since 1949 when Turkey recognized Israel. This new balance is a serious threat for Israel, which must now consider an increasingly hostile Turkey and an ever colder and unfriendly Egypt when it evaluates its security environment.

Yet, the new balance carries risks for Turkey, too.  Ankara’s September 8th announcement that its warships will escort new flotillas to Gaza bears the potential of armed conflict between Turkey and Israel. What if the Israelis decide to stop the next Turkish navy-escorted flotilla as they stopped the Turkish-backed flotilla in 2010?  Will the Turkish navy ships choose to react? As chilling as this scenario sounds, it is not unlikely.  If the two countries fail to slow the escalating situation, they could well find themselves in conflict.

The specter of conflict also hangs over gas exploration in the Eastern Mediterranean.  Turkey objects to Israel’s desire to drill in its exclusive economic zone in the Mediterranean Sea largely because it hopes to block the Greek Cypriots from having the precedent of an exclusive economic zone in which they could drill for gas to the detriment of the Turkish Cypriots.  The latest escalation between Turkey and Israel might just pour oil on the political flames of gas exploration in the Mediterranean Sea.

Perhaps Ankara is only bluffing to bring Israel to its knees, and perhaps the Israelis would rather let Turkish navy-escorted flotillas sail to Gaza than risk regional war.  But one thing is clear: The Arab Spring and the Turkish-Israeli Winter are churning up the Mediterranean.

Turkey: Why The World Should Start To Worry About Erdogan – Worldcrunch – All News is Global.

Die Welt

Op-Ed: Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan is growing more strident in his rhetoric across the Muslim world, even as he cynically pursues Turkey’s self interest.

by: admin

By Richard Herzinger
DIE WELT/Worldcrunch

Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s verbal antics are nothing new to European leaders. Radical rhetoric is one thing, they say, but at the end of the day, the pragmatic good sense that has characterized Turkish foreign policy for so long will prevail.

The problem is that Erdogan’s tone is growing ever more shrill, and it looks increasingly as if he might translate words into action.

He has sent a Turkish ship to prospect for natural gas and oil deposits along the coast of Cyprus and threatenedTurkish military supervision of the activity: non-stop patrols by “frigates, gunboats and the air force“ warned Erdogan. This offers more than hint that the Turkish premier intends to back up his high-flying claims to dominance not only in the Middle East but also in Europe.

Erdogan appears increasingly to be leaving a sensible sort of Realpolitik behind in favor of a self-aggrandizing messianic stance. Since his recent trip to Egypt and Libya, where he was celebrated as a kind of healing force, he has mixed a pro-Islamic democracy message with an ever stronger anti-Israel position.

One result is that Erdogan’s sense of international law appears to have morphed into his own definition of what that law is. Turkey claims to have a rightful share in Cyprus’s natural gas and oil deposits based in the supposed right of a state – the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus – that is only recognized by Ankara.

His approach on the Gaza Flotilla conflict with Israel offers a similar militant will to disparage international law if it shouldn’t happen to coincide with his way of reading events.

When trying to get through Israel’s Gaza blockade in the Spring of 2010, nine activists were killed by the Israelis on the Turkish aid ship Mavi Marmara.

Erdogan keeps insisting that Israel must present formal excuses to Turkey and put an immediate end to the Gaza blockade which he says violates international law. The Turkish Prime Minister has even gone so far as to say that Israel’s behavior constitutes grounds for war.

Double standard

But not only does Erdogan sneeringly push aside international laws if they don’t suit him, he posits himself as guardian of a kind of higher morality among states.

However, even as he denounces Israel’s behavior towards the Palestinians in ever more strident tones, he apparently sees nothing objectionable in the fact that for years Turkey has launched attacks against PKK extremists in Kurdish northern Iraq.

And Erdogan recently announced a joint offensive of Turkish and Iranian forces against Kurdish rebels deep inside Iraq. When asked about possible casualties from this operation, he replied coldly: “I’m sorry to say this, but there will be a price to pay.”

Erdogan assumes a moral tone even as he preaches a double standard with regard not only to international law, but to human beings. He went so far as to state that Sudanese dictator Omar al-Bashir could not be responsible for genocide since Muslims, quite simply, did not do that sort of thing. And his government continues to question the Armenian genocide at the end of World War I at the hands of his own people.

Erdogan has been increasingly critical of the bloody repression of Syrian despot Bashar al-Assad, who used to be a close ally. Still, he hasn’t quite been able to bring himself to call for Assad to step down.

Meanwhile, he goes deeper and deeper in demonizing Israel. In a recent interview with CNN, Erdogan even questioned just how accurate figures were with regard to Israelis who had lost their lives as a result of Palestinian terror attacks. According to Erdogan it was, however, beyond question that Israel had murdered “hundreds of thousands” of Palestinians. With regard to the Holocaust, Erdogan appears to share views similar to those of Iranian president Ahmadinedjad – that Israel uses the Holocaust as an “excuse” so as to be able assume the stance of victim.

Furthermore, according to Erdogan, “Germany alone” should pay for the atrocities against the Jews: neither the Turks nor the Muslims in the region had anything to do with “this problem.”

This sort of attitude shows that Erdogan‘s hostility to Israel goes well beyond economic and political disgruntlement. It constitutes the ideological core of his endeavor to present himself to the Arab world as a charismatic spiritual guide and pan-Islamic leader.

And indeed: since Gamal Abdel Nasser, arguably no other political figure has found such broad resonance in the region as Erdogan.

Still his growing irrationality and regional stature should not cover up the fact that he pursues Turkey’s interests with an unwavering eye. Even Erdogan’s anger at Israel is connected to the fact that Cyprus and the Jewish state want to team up to drill for gas and oil in the Mediterranean. Turkey’s confrontation course against Israel will become a European problem — so Europe would be well-advised to listen exactly to what Erdogan has to say, and assume that he means it.

Turkey, Israel, Cyprus: an explosive triangle – Cyprus Mail.

It all started when Turkey decided to implement the “neo-Ottoman” policy of her Foreign Minister Ahmet Davoutoglou, which obliged her to choose between Israel and the Arab world. Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s ambition to play a leading role in the region gave priority to the Arabs. The consequence of this choice was the gradual estrangement between Turkey and Israel, which started in 2009 at the Economic Forum of Davos and ended last year after nine people were killed by Israelis on the Turkish ship Mavi Marmara which had tried to break the Gaza blockade.

Israel reacted by further strengthening its relations with Greece and Cyprus, offering better strategic perspectives and access to Europe. The common purpose of Greece and Israel, as agreed at the highest level, is stability and security in the Eastern Mediterranean, excluding antagonism with the Arab world and Turkey. Within this framework, a memorandum of military co-operation was signed between the two countries, during the recent visit of the Greek Defence Minister to Israel.

In the case of Cyprus, bilateral relations developed spectacularly and were crowned by President Demetris Christofias’ visit to Israel and the forthcoming visit of the Israeli President to Cyprus. Most important, however, is the signing between the two countries of the agreement for the delimitation of their Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZ) and the co-operation in oil and gas exploration in Cyprus’ EEZ, which has been undertaken by the American company Noble Energy. This sparked the strong reaction of Turkey, which in connection with her other demands concerning the “Mavi Marmara” case (pardon, compensation to families and lifting of the blockade of Gaza) decided to expel the Israeli Ambassador to Turkey, freeze defence trade with Israel and step up patrols in the Eastern Mediterranean. Moreover, she threatened to take steps to hinder the “unilateral” exploitation of natural resources in this region by Israel and Cyprus.

As far as Cyprus is concerned, the threats were accompanied by the decision to sign a delimitation of the EEZ and exploration agreement with the breakaway “state” in the north, if Cyprus proceeded with the extraction of hydrocarbon deposits in Block 12 of its EEZ. This time, the confirmation of Cyprus’ sovereign rights to exploit its natural resources was almost universal. The EU repeatedly asked Turkey to refrain from any kind of threats and stressed the sovereign right of EU member states to enter into bilateral agreements in accordance with the EU acquis and international law, including the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. A similar position was taken by the European Popular Party and the Socialists of the European Parliament. Most importantly, the United States, Russia, the UK and other countries defended the sovereign right of Cyprus to exploit its natural resources, while Greece stated that any attack against Cyprus will be considered an attack against Greece.

This widespread support for Cyprus is partly based on Europe’s desire to be independent of Russian gas. Noble Energy, meanwhile, is an American company proceeding in coordination with the US Department of State and the American Embassy in Nicosia. It would have been naive to believe the United States would have wished to gain the Arabs via Turkey, when Ankara relinquished her former dictator friends, adjusting her policy in order to gain the Arab public opinion which certainly registered negatively this abrupt and interest-oriented change.

In fact, the “Arab Spring” overturned Ankara’s calculations. Believing that there was a political vacuum in the affected countries, Erdogan rushed to fill it, before the prevalence of democratic institutions. For this purpose, he undertook his trip to Egypt, Tunisia and Libya. Turning up the heat against Israel a notch and supporting the interests of the Palestinians, Erdogan aimed at expanding the influence of Turkey in the region. He overlooked, however, the fact that the natural leaders of the Arab world are Egypt and Saudi Arabia. He was reminded of this reality by the Freedom and Justice Party of the Muslim Brotherhood of Egypt, which stated its opposition to Turkey having a leading role in the region. In this respect, the cancellation of Erdogan’s trip to the Gaza Strip is not irrelevant. In general, the Arabs do not forget the economic, linguistic and cultural oppression which they suffered during the Ottoman Empire. At present, they would have preferred Turkey to counter balance Shiite Iran.

Several interpretations have been put forward to explain the reasons which led the Turkish premier to adopt this policy. There is his drive to strengthen his position to bring about the necessary constitutional changes, and his pursuit of curtailing the influence of the army generals in formulating Turkey’s foreign policy. It is obvious, however, that Tayyip Erdogan mainly aims at promoting Turkey as a political power in the Arab world and spreading her influence on a new generation of Arab youth. Supportive of this aim is the feud with Israel which is used as a pretext to build up naval patrols in the seas between Israel and Cyprus, with a view to hindering the collaboration of the two countries in the energy field.

In any event, Cyprus should face the situation cold bloodedly, and, being conscious of its geostrategic importance, proceed steadily towards a substantive co-operation with Israel in all fields. Moreover, Cyprus as an EU member, and given the support extended by the EU to the decision to exploit its natural resources, should also seek European involvement in the exploitation of its natural gas deposits. The economic, political and other benefits will be immense and will certainly serve as a shield against Turkey’s threats. Concerning those threats, Cyprus should launch an international information campaign detailing its position, which is based on International Law, and in particular the Convention on the Law of the Sea. It augurs well that many have already adopted Cyprus’ stand.

n Andrestinos Papadopoulos is a former ambassador for Cyprus

NATO concern over ‘10,000 lost missiles’ in Libya: report.

Al Arabiya

Sunday, 02 October 2011

NATO fears that missiles in Libya belonging to the allied forces could fall into the hands of al-Qaeda. (Photo by Reuters)

inShare0

DEBKAfile, Political Analysis, Espionage, Terrorism, Security.

DEBKAfile  Exclusive Report  October 2, 2011, 11:10 AM (GMT+02:00)

Israel F-15 warplanes react to Turkish harassment

Increasingly assertive Turkey is setting the scene for clashes in the eastern Mediterranean. Since Thursday, Sept. 29, Turkish warships have been harassing Israeli merchant vessels in waters off Cyprus, debkafile‘s military sources report. They come close enough to establish wireless communication and caution the Israeli vessels they are in contravention of international law and ordering them to change course. The Israeli crews mostly ignore these “orders”, treating them as Ankara’s latest bid to assert Turkish naval mastery of the Eastern Mediterranean. But the situation is getting explosive enough to spark a major incident.
Over the weekend, Israeli Air Force planes circled near the sites of the incidents but not directly over the Turkish vessels. At the same time Israeli missile ships sailed close to Cyprus’s Exclusive Economic Zone waters, where the Houston-based Noble Energy began drilling for natural gas on Sept. 19 in the face of Turkish threats. The rig is situated 160 kilometers south of Cyprus adjacent to Israel’s Leviathan gas field.

Western naval sources tracking the new Turkish and Israeli deployments reported Saturday, Oct. 1: “Turkey and Israel are in a constant muscle-flexing contest in the eastern Mediterranean. They are metaphorically shaking fists in each other’s faces and raising the risk of a confrontation that could quickly veer out of control.”

Last week, Ankara retaliated for Cypriot and Israeli deep sea gas explorations by sending an exploration ship of its own escorted by a frigate and a submarine to Cyprus. Ankara sources also disclosed that Turkish F-16 fighters had been deployed in the northern part of the island.
Voicing concern over Turkey’s assertiveness, NATO secretary-general, Anders Fogh Rasmussen, Friday, Sept. 30, said: “Obviously, the tensions between Turkey and Israel are a matter of concern. It’s a bilateral issue – NATO is not going to interfere with that. But it is the interest of the alliance to see these tensions eased, because Turkey is a key ally and Israel is a valuable partner for the alliance.”

The NATO Secretary contradicted Ankara’s claim that Israel would not be allowed to open an office at alliance headquarters in Brussels. “NATO defense ministers agreed during the meeting in April that NATO partners can have offices… This includes all partners,” he said.

Referring to concern about the tensions over natural gas exploration “between Turkey and Cyprus as well as Israel,” Rasmussen said: “I urge all parties to find peaceful solutions to disputes through constructive dialogue.” He said he did not expect armed clashes in the region. However, he suggested that Turkey has to be managed carefully as it asserts a growing role on the global stage.

Also Saturday, Cyprus President Dimitris Christofias had this message for Ankara: “I wish to underline to all those who attempt to question this right of the Republic of Cyprus: our sovereign rights are non-negotiable.”
Five days ago, the prime ministers of Greece and Turkey, George Papandreou and Tayyip Erdogan talked by phone. And four days ago, Adm. James Stavridis, Commander of NATO forces in Europe, flew to Ankara directly from Israel for talks with Turkish leaders.

Turkish harassment of Israeli cargo vessels began after those interchanges, indicating that the Erdogan government has no intention of meeting exasperated US and NATO efforts to cool rising tensions in the eastern Mediterranean.