Will the US Distance Turkey from Iran?

In 2003 and following the attacks launched by the US against Saddam’s regime, many analysts assumed that through political and structural developments in Iraq, this country would become the most important political base in the Middle East and that Turkey would lose its significance. But this prediction proved to be wrong and Turkey, which is a member of NATO and an old US ally, has maintained its significance in calculations and equations related to NATO and the Middle East strategy of the US and the West. Turkey was also redefined in the US’ long-term strategy and competition between Turkey and Iran and the balance between Turkey and Saudi Arabia could be considered as a serious and intelligent approach to affect the developments of the region. Although there have, sometimes, been differences between the US and Turkey’s approach towards the developments in Palestine, Iraq and Syria, their relations have always maintained its importance and when Davutoglu and Clinton were the Foreign Minister and Secretary of State, the relations between the two countries became more significant.

Last week Turkey’s Foreign Minister, Mevlut Cavusoglu,  met with John Kerry while many Turkish political analysts believe that there are serious differences between Ankara and Washington. Many of these analysts believe that despite the signing of an agreement based on training Syrian opposition inside Turkey’s territories by the US military advisors, there are still serious differences with regard to the fight against ISIS and the issue of Syria. Perhaps the statement made by John Kerry in the joint press conference was aimed at neutralizing the impacts of such analyses when he said: “Turkey is an important partner for the US and we believe that without this partner we cannot move forward.”

But what was important in this press conference were the statements made by the US Secretary of State against Iran. He made two accusations against Iran. Based on the Turkish translation of these statements published by the Anadolu news agency, Kerry has stated these two points:

1. The US and Turkey both believe that Iran must not acquire nuclear weapons and that is not acceptable for either of them.
2. Both countries have common concerns regarding Iran’s interfering measures and this country’s approach in the fight against terrorism and are worried that these measures would further create instability in the region.

These two strange statements are made by Kerry while during recent years there has never been any remark made by Turkish officials which would show their mistrust with regard to the peacefulness of Iran’s nuclear program. It must be said regarding the regional issues and equations that, although Erdogan made tumultuous remarks with regard to Iran’s approach towards Yemen, after his visit to Tehran and his meeting with Iran’s President, he took logical positions which showed a relative change in his approach towards Iran’s regional policies.

But under the present conditions when such statements are made in the press conference, this behavior could be analyzed from two angles. First, the present government which is affiliated to the Justice and Development Party of Turkey, is pursuing a more pragmatic policy on the verge of the parliamentarian elections and, in order to get close to the US, accepts to make harsh accusations against Iran. Second, Kerry’s statements indicate the US’ attempts to distance Turkey from the Islamic Republic of Iran. Washington knows well that in spite of Turkey’s membership in NATO and its important strategic interests with the US, it has significant relations with Iran. That is why it attempts to, in the new era after the possible nuclear agreement, affect Turkey’s policies in order to prevent the strengthening of relations between these two powerful neighbors.

Therefore, we must expect similar signals in the coming months; signals which show that the US is going to use Turkey’s important capacities in the sensitive area of managing the Middle East’s developments especially in Iraq, Syria and to some extent Egypt. The US intends to show that in the regional balance of power, it considers highlighting the development and power of Turkey in confrontation with Iran to be in its interests and this not very complicated equation, Turkey could both be the leader of the Sunnis and propagator of secularism without being considered as paradoxical.

In the end, the importance of this point must be mentioned that in the 100^th anniversary of the events of 1915, while Russia and many European countries including Germany used the term “genocide” for the killing of the Armenians, Barack Obama used the term ‘ great disaster” instead of genocide. This shows that the relations with Ankara are very important for Washington.