Fragile Big Power Relationships Add to Middle Eastern Uncertainty
A web
of relationships between Turkey, Russia, Iran, and China have to a significant
degree shaped Middle Eastern and North African geopolitics. The fragility of
those relationships, however, begs the question whether fluidity in regional
geopolitics rather than paradigm shifts is, at least for now, the name of the
game.
by James
M. Dorsey
An initial
version of this story was first published in Inside
Arabia
A podcast
version of this story is available on Soundcloud, Itunes, Spotify, Stitcher, TuneIn, Spreaker, Pocket Casts, Tumblr, Podbean, Audecibel, Patreon and Castbox.
Fraught with
multiple powder kegs that could blow up at any moment, Turkish-Russian
relations constitute a study in the management of a new world order’s seemingly
fragile alliances.
Much like
relations between Russia and China, Russia and Iran, Turkey and Iran, and
Turkey and China, Turkish-Russian ties are fragile despite the fact that they,
contrary to Western perceptions, are not just opportunistic and driven by
short-term common interests but also grounded in a degree of shared values.
The fact of
the matter is that men like presidents Recep Tayyip Erdogan, Vladimir Putin, Xi
Jinping, and Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, find common ground
in a view of a new world order that rejects democracy and the rule of law;
disregards human and minority rights; flaunts, at least for now, violations of
international law; and operates on the principle of might is right.
That glue,
however, is insufficient, to prevent Turkey and Russia from ending up on
opposite sides of conflicts in Libya and Syria.
It is also
unlikely to halt the gradual erosion of a presumed division of labour in
Central Asia with Russia ensuring security and China focusing on economic
development.
And it is doubtful it would alter the simmering rivalry between
Iran and Russia in the Caspian Sea and long-standing Russian reluctance to sell
Iran a badly needed anti-missile defense system.
Similarly,
the balance of power in Syria where Russia and Iran are hoping to reap the
economic benefits of reconstruction after having played the key role in
securing President Bashar al-Assad’s military victory could shift dramatically
if and when China commits to investing in the war-devastated country. Neither
Russia nor Iran have the financial muscle to compete.
So far,
Turkey, Russia, China, and Iran have been adept at ensuring that differences do
not get out of hand. The question is whether stopgap management of potential
blow-ups is sustainable.
In Libya,
Turkey temporarily halted drone operations to allow Russian mercenaries to
evacuate areas lost to the Turkish-backed, internationally recognized Islamist Government
of National Accord (GNA) after Turkish electronic warfare whacked Russian
anti-defense missile systems operated by Moscow-supported rebels led by
self-appointed Field Marshall Khalifa Haftar.
In Syria,
Russia and Turkey have negotiated an uneasy ceasefire and security arrangement
in Idlib, one of the last rebel strongholds, following clashes in which Turkey
dealt a serious blow to the Russian and Iranian-backed forces of Mr. Al-Assad.
The band
aid-solutions may serve immediate economic interests and geopolitical goals but
do little to mask the four powers’ seemingly incompatible long-term hegemonic
ambitions.
“What is
Turkey doing [in Libya]?” asked Mesut
Hakki Casin, a
member of President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s Security and Foreign Policy Board.
“The reason is that Ottomans conquered Egypt after establishing dominance and
control in the straits of the Mediterranean and the Black Sea. Turkey is in
Libya because of historical and political reasons.”
Diverging
interests do not only play out on the battlefield, as is evident in the
shifting balance of power in Central Asia. They are also evident in the
competition in arms sales.
The credible
performance of Turkish drones in Libya and Syria have boosted demand for
Turkish-made unmanned aerial vehicles and electronic warfare systems and dented
the infatuation with Russian anti-missile defense batteries.
Dubbed
Bayraktar TB-2 and Anka-S, Turkish drones destroyed Russian-backed Syrian
military units in northern Syria earlier this year even though they operated
Russia’s Pantsir and Buk surface-to-air missile systems. A similar scenario
played out in the defeat in western Libya of Mr. Haftar’s forces.
Clashing
interests in Libya and Syria and economic woes at home accelerated by the
fallout of the pandemic, persuaded Mr. Erdogan to seek to improve relations
with the United States and rejuvenate his personal relationship with President
Donald J. Trump while massaging his ties to Russia.
In a recent
gesture, Botas, Turkey’s state-owned gas grid operator, opened a tender for the
construction of a pipeline to Nakhichevan, an Armenian enclave in Azerbaijan.
The pipeline would allow Azerbaijan to reduce imports from Iran.
Lobbyists in the United States for the Turkish
business community are seeking to capitalize on the opening by pushing an offer
by a Louisiana energy company to provide Turkey with “long-term, secure,
competitively priced access to Turkey’s LNG terminals, gas pipeline and storage
facilities” that would make the country less dependent on Russian and Iranian
imports.
Mr. Erdogan
and his energy minister, Fatih Donmez, have pushed the notion of
diversification of Turkey’s energy imports.
“From Syria
to Libya, from the Black Sea to the Mediterranean, Erdogan now figures that
Turkey needs America politically and strategically more than it did some months
ago. He learned by experience that getting the United States on board by making
Trump his personal friend is easier than any other way,” said veteran Turkish journalist Cengiz Candar.
Mr. Erdogan
is banking on his past experience of talking to Mr. Trump directly and getting
what he wants despite opposition from the Pentagon as was the case with
Turkey’s most recent intervention in Syria.
“To be
honest, after our conversation tonight, a new era can begin between the United
States and Turkey,” Mr. Erdogan said
during a television interview afterward speaking to Mr. Trump by phone on June
9.
Mr.
Erdogan’s approach may not be available to Iran with its deeply engrained
distrust of the United States, but it certainly is what guides the thinking
regarding Russia of numerous European leaders and politicians. No doubt, it is
also an option that Mr. Putin has not lost sight of.
The web of
relationships between China, Russia, Turkey, and Iran may seem formidable but
the complexity of Turkish-Russian relations suggests that they may be built on
more quicksand than any of the players are willing to admit.
On the
principle of “It ain’t over until the fat lady has sung,” that is something
that Gulf and other Middle Eastern leaders no doubt have taken note of.
Dr. James
M. Dorsey is an award-winning journalist and a senior fellow at Nanyang
Technological University’s S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies in
Singapore. He is also an adjunct senior research fellow at the National
University of Singapore’s Middle East Institute and co-director of the
University of Wuerzburg’s Institute of Fan Culture in Germany
Comments
Post a Comment