Following the recent safe return of 46 Turkish hostages held by the Islamic State, formerly known as the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, hopes were raised in the US that Turkey would finally commit to joining the US-led coalition now fighting the group. However, Turkey’s willingness to contribute to the coalition remains constrained by the legacy of its ill-fated Syria policy, as well as by a fundamental strategic disconnect between Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s government and US President Barack Obama’s administration.
Since Syria’s civil war began three years ago, Turkey has provided logistical and financial support to virtually all elements of the Syrian opposition, while allowing them to use Turkish territory to regroup after launching military operations across the border. Committed to regime change in Syria, Turkey turned a blind eye to some of these groups’ brutal tactics, radical ideologies and big ambitions. The fear now is that this benign neglect has allowed the Islamic State to embed itself in Turkey and build the capacity to conduct terrorist activities on Turkish soil — and thus to retaliate for Turkish participation in the US-led coalition.
However, there is more behind Turkey’s reticent response to the coalition. Turkey fundamentally disagrees with the US in its interpretation of the threat that the Islamic State poses — and how to address it. Simply put, whereas the US is approaching the Islamic State as the Middle East’s most pressing problem, Turkey views the group as a symptom of deeper pathologies.
According to this view, any campaign that focuses exclusively on destroying the Islamic State would do nothing to prevent the emergence of similar threats in the near future. Moreover, unlike the US, Middle Eastern countries and their neighbors cannot decide to “pivot” away from the region when the consequences of their poorly designed interventions become too unruly.
In this context, Turkey’s leaders believe that the international community’s response to the Islamic State should be far more ambitious, seeking to redress the underlying causes of the current disorder. Such a strategy would have to include efforts to compel Iraq’s new government to break with the sectarianism of former Turkish prime minister Nouri al-Maliki, while supporting the new leadership’s efforts to provide basic health, educational and municipal services to all of Iraq’s citizens.
As for Syria, the only plausible route to normalcy begins with forcing Syrian President Bashar al-Assad to cede power. To this end, the US and its allies should consider striking al-Assad’s strongholds in Syria, while establishing safe havens for the moderate opposition under the protective cloak of a no-fly zone.
In this endeavor Turkey, for which the establishment of safe havens is vital to accommodate Syrians who have been displaced by the conflict, could play a central role. Turkey is already bearing a heavy burden of Syrian refugees, having absorbed more than 1 million people since the crisis began in 2011.
Following Islamic State attacks against Kurdish enclaves, more than 120,000 refugees crossed into Turkey in a single weekend. That is roughly the same number of Syrians allowed to seek refuge in the entire EU since the crisis began.
An orchestrated military campaign against the Islamic State would undoubtedly displace even more Syrians. However, in Turkey’s view, they should not have to cross the border to be safe. Instead, Turkey wants to take the lead in building infrastructure that could serve the needs of displaced Syrians within the country’s borders. Such projects would make sense only within internationally guaranteed safe havens protected by a no-fly zone.
Given that the Islamic State poses a graver threat to Turkey than to any other Western country, Turkey has no choice but to participate in the campaign against it. This means, first and foremost, adopting a zero-tolerance policy toward the Islamic State at home, aimed at preventing the group from fundraising and recruiting on Turkish soil. Continued improvement of border security and deeper cooperation with Western intelligence agencies on the issue of foreign fighters are also essential.
However, Turkey’s imperative to fight the Islamic State does not trump — much less invalidate — Turkish leaders’ concerns about Obama’s long-term goals. If the US and Turkey are to work together to eradicate the Islamic State, they would have to first agree on a longer-term strategy for restoring some semblance of order to a crisis-ravaged region.
Sinan Ulgen is chairman of the Istanbul-based Center for Economics and Foreign Policy Studies and a visiting academic at Carnegie Europe in Brussels.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
Could Asia be on the verge of a new wave of nuclear proliferation? A look back at the early history of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which recently celebrated its 75th anniversary, illuminates some reasons for concern in the Indo-Pacific today. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin recently described NATO as “the most powerful and successful alliance in history,” but the organization’s early years were not without challenges. At its inception, the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty marked a sea change in American strategic thinking. The United States had been intent on withdrawing from Europe in the years following
My wife and I spent the week in the interior of Taiwan where Shuyuan spent her childhood. In that town there is a street that functions as an open farmer’s market. Walk along that street, as Shuyuan did yesterday, and it is next to impossible to come home empty-handed. Some mangoes that looked vaguely like others we had seen around here ended up on our table. Shuyuan told how she had bought them from a little old farmer woman from the countryside who said the mangoes were from a very old tree she had on her property. The big surprise
The issue of China’s overcapacity has drawn greater global attention recently, with US Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen urging Beijing to address its excess production in key industries during her visit to China last week. Meanwhile in Brussels, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last week said that Europe must have a tough talk with China on its perceived overcapacity and unfair trade practices. The remarks by Yellen and Von der Leyen come as China’s economy is undergoing a painful transition. Beijing is trying to steer the world’s second-largest economy out of a COVID-19 slump, the property crisis and
Former president Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) trip to China provides a pertinent reminder of why Taiwanese protested so vociferously against attempts to force through the cross-strait service trade agreement in 2014 and why, since Ma’s presidential election win in 2012, they have not voted in another Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) candidate. While the nation narrowly avoided tragedy — the treaty would have put Taiwan on the path toward the demobilization of its democracy, which Courtney Donovan Smith wrote about in the Taipei Times in “With the Sunflower movement Taiwan dodged a bullet” — Ma’s political swansong in China, which included fawning dithyrambs