AHI
Conference on Capitol Hill on U.S. Relations with Turkey:
The New Realities in the Post-Iraq War Era.
WASHINGTON, DC—More than 100 people attended the AHI Capitol Hill
Conference on July 8, 2003 on “U.S. Relations with Turkey: The New
Realities in the Post- Iraq War Era.” The conference, held at the
Rayburn House Office Building, hosted members of the U.S. Congress and
prominent members of the foreign policy and journalism fields. All
speakers highlighted the critical point that U.S. – Turkey relations
have reached after the Iraq War. They urged the United States to take into
consideration Turkey’s refusal to help the U.S. in the Iraq War and to
change its policy towards Turkey.
The keynote speaker of the conference was Christopher Hitchens, world
renowned columnist, speaker and author of many best seller books. The
other speakers at the morning session were: Dr. John Eibner, Director of
Human Rights, Christian Solidarity International, Aram Hamparian,
Executive Director of the Armenian National Committee of America, and Kani
Xulam, Director of the American Kurdish Information Network. The chairman
and moderator was Gene Rossides, general counsel of the American Hellenic
Institute.
The luncheon speaker was Ted Galen Carpenter, Vice President, Defense and
Foreign Policy Studies of the Cato Institute, and author of several books
on foreign policy.
The afternoon session was highlighted by the presence of the following
members of the US Congress: Rep. Rob Andrews (D-NJ), Rep. Ileana
Ros-Lehtinen, (R-FL) and Rep. Brad Sherman (D-CA). The other afternoon
speakers were: Nikolas Gvosdev, Editor of the on-line journal “In the
National Interest”, Nicholas G. Karambelas, Esq., Partner of Sfikas
& Karambelas, LLP and Gene Rossides, AHI general counsel. The
afternoon session was chaired by Nicholas Chimicles, Esq., Chairman of the
AHI Public Affairs Committee.
In his keynote address, Mr. Christopher Hitchens referred to the Turkish
occupation of the northern part of Cyprus and stressed that the partition
of the island violates a cornerstone of the European values, which is the
freedom of movement. Mr. Hitchens made a clear distinction between the
will of the Turkish Cypriot people and its leader, “Mr Denktash who has
probably more blood of Turkish Cypriots in his hands than he has of
Greeks.”
In referring to the recent civil unrest in the occupied part of the
island, he stressed that the Turkish Cypriots demonstrated that “we want
to be Europeans, we want to share our lives with our Greek Cypriot
brothers and sisters.” Mr. Hitchens, referred to the historical
background of the Turkey-orchestrated Cypriot, Kurdish and Armenian
tragedies and stressed that the Turkish government always seeks a separate
deal to exempt itself from its obligations. Along these lines he referred
to the Turkish behavior during the Iraq War, its unilateral military
action in Northern Iraq and the detention of Turkish soldiers by U.S.
troops in the region. Based on all the above, Mr. Hitchens described
U.S.-Turkish relations to be in a “quite critical turning point” after
the Iraq War.
With regard to the Turkish accession to the European Union he named the
resolution of the Cyprus issue and the recognition of the rights of the
Kurdish people as necessary preconditions for any negotiations to take
place.
Dr. John Eibner approached Turkey from a human rights perspective and
highlighted the legacy of intolerance of the Turkish State. He referred to
the failure of successive administrations to acknowledge and commemorate
appropriately the first major genocide of the 20th century – the
Armenian Genocide. He asked, “Can it be denied that Turkey is the
leading ethnic cleanser of the 20th century?”
He clarified the historical misconceptions regarding the Ottoman Empire
and its successor, the modern Turkish State, by stressing that secularism
and democracy in Turkey are overstated. He particularly stressed that
“the Ottoman Empire was no western style constitutional democracy,
neither is its modern Turkish state.” He urged Turkey to support
democracy not according to “sharia” (the Islamic Law) but to show true
commitment to democracy. He also stated that the U.S. should end its
campaign for Turkey’s accession to the European Union until there is a
full and complete democracy in Turkey.
Aram Hamparian presented the new perspective in U.S.-Armenian relations
under the light of the deterioration of U.S.-Turkish relations since the
Iraq War. By quoting statements of members of the U.S. Congress, foreign
policy makers, and Pentagon officials Mr Hamparian noted the significant
downgrading of Turkey from “an indispensable ally” to simply “an
important friend in the region”. Mr. Hamparian, expressed the view that
the Turkish Government will come to understand this new reality and that
“both sides in the U.S. – Turkish relationship will recognize that
fifty years of essentially unconditional support for the Turkish
government actually undermined reformers within Turkey and stunted real
progress toward democracy and human rights.”
Kani Xulam vividly depicted the tragedy of the Kurdish people living in
Turkey and called for the principles of self-dignity and respect of their
freedom.
Luncheon speaker Ted Galen Carpenter stressed the broadening differences
between the U.S. and Turkey and noted the estrangement of U.S.-Turkish
relations. “What has happened in the past is that Turkey has simply
pursued its own national interest and done so very vigorously. Sometimes
these interests overlap with American interest and when they did there was
a level of cooperation. But when Turkish national interest as perceived by
the governing national elite differed from American interest, Turkey was
never shy about pursuing an independent course and that’s very simply
what we saw with regard to Iraq.”
Mr. Carpenter identified four areas where US-Turkish interests clash,
namely the future of the Kurds in Iraq, their approach toward Iran, the
growing anti-U.S. sentiment of Turkish public opinion and the inevitable
U.S.-Turkish clash within the context of the growing gap of the
transatlantic relations. He concluded that “for all of the reasons the
estrangement that has developed between the U.S. and Turkey after the Iraq
War is not likely to go away…. The reality is that U.S. and
Turkish interests overlap only sometimes … the current estrangement has
simply brought that reality forward.”
Rep. Rob Andrews (D-NJ) enumerated three major misconceptions about Turkey
that haunt U.S. foreign policy. He first attacked the misconception that
Turkey can always be counted on to be a strong military ally to the United
States, by commenting on Turkey’s negative role to the Iraq War. He
stressed: “I certainly understand the sentiment within Turkey against
the war in Iraq but I also understand that if the argument is that Turkey
is a solely dependable and exclusively dependable ally of the United
States- that’s just not true.”
The second misconception that Rep. Andrews demystified was that Turkey is
a stabilizing force in the region and that it should be a model for the
reconstruction of Iraq. Rep. Andrews underscored the non-democratic nature
of the Turkish regime and named Turkey “a human rights violator almost
without parallel in that area of the world.”
With regard to the reconstruction of Iraq he stated that “if we were to
hold up a model of a functioning Islamic democracy, Ankara is the wrong
place to look.” With regard to the tragedies of the Cypriot, the Kurdish
and the Armenian peoples caused by the Turkish Government, Mr. Andrews
stated: “I do not believe that U.S. policy should overlook the
intransigence and difficulties caused by that [Turkish] government.”
Finally, he urged the U.S. to support the Turkish accession to the EU only
on the basis of certain conditions: “that Turkey becomes a positive
factor in the resolution of the Cyprus dispute within the framework set
forth by the United Nations; number two, that Turkey ceases any type of
economic or military hostilities toward its neighbors in Armenia; number
three; that Turkey recognizes its role in the war against terrorism, which
means two things: cooperation with the U.S. and our allies in the
extradition and pursuit of terrorists.” It also means the recognition of
human rights within your own country, toward the Kurds, toward the other
citizens of Turkey; and number four it means a continuing warming of
relationship to Greece.”
Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL) highlighted the importance of U.S. –
Greece relationship and the key role that the latter plays for the U.S.
foreign policy and the stability in the Southeastern Mediterranean and the
Middle East. With regard to Cyprus Rep Ros-Lehtinen stressed that “ it
is in our interest to see the emergence of a new, vibrant, unified
Cyprus” and directly accused Denktash who “continues his intransigent
policies…all with Turkish support and with the presence of a Turkish
occupation force of some 35,000 troops.” Mrs. Lehtinen put full
responsibility on Turkey for the failure of the Cyprus talks and called on
Turkey “to end its illegal occupation of the island for once and for
all.” Rep. Ros-Lehtinen reaffirmed her determination to continue to work
closely with the Greek American community and to work towards ending the
occupation and for the reunification of Cyprus.
At the afternoon session, Nikolas Gvosdev depicted the changing
environment in the geopolitical chessboard in Eurasia and highlighted the
changing nature of Turkey’s geostrategic significance: “it is no
longer a front-line state versus the Warsaw Pact and is no longer needed
as a staging area for Iraqi containment. It is one option among several
for the projection of U.S. power in the Near East, Southwest Asia and the
Black Sea Basin.”
Mr Gvosdev also traced the limited utility of Turkey as a model for
post-communist and Muslim states as well as its diminishing role as the
“energy hub” for the resources of the Caspian and Central Asia.
He finally stressed that U.S. policy has been contradictory to Turkey but
predicted that after Turkey’s refusal to allow U.S. troops to use its
bases in the Iraq War, there will be a re-evaluation of U.S.-Turkish
relations. “Turkey is running out of the credit it had from the Cold
War, and cannot indefinitely use that to sustain its position with the
United States.”
Nick Karambelas provided the legal perspective of the Annan plan, and
clarified key issues of the Cyprus problem, such as property rights and
decision-making on the federal level. Mr. Karambelas highlighted the
potential dead-ends that the Annan plan might lead to if it does not take
into consideration the historical particularities and the demography
factor in the island.
Mr. Karambelas highlighted the outcomes of the European Union jurisdiction
on the island. “The Turkish Cypriot rights are not going to be protected
by being in a separate state that perpetuates the partition of the island;
they are not going to be protected by being dependent on Turkey; they are
going to be protected by being full EU citizens.”
Mr. Karambelas also highlighted the issue of the property rights of the
Greek and Turkish Cypriots as a sinister point in the Annan formula that
is in opposition to the European Community law.
Gene Rossides discussed “The Need to Change the Flawed U.S. Policy
Towards Turkey” of double standards and appeasement on the rule of law
and human rights. He enumerated three new realities that should define the
U.S.- Turkey relations. Mr. Rossides highlighted the significant decrease
of Turkish importance in the region, because of: (1) its unreliability as
a strategic ally by refusing the use of its bases by U.S. troops to open a
northern front against Iraq; (2) the fact that we were able to open the
northern front and defeat Saddam Hussein without Turkey demonstrated the
minimal strategic value of Turkey for U.S. interests in the region; and
(3) its legacy as an “extortionist” state in which one senior
administration official called Turkey’s efforts to get more aid as
“extortion in the name of the alliance.”
Based on these arguments, Mr. Rossides stressed the harmful effects to
U.S. interests of the “policy of double standards for Turkey on the rule
of law and human rights.”
Mr. Rossides then addressed the question of what should U.S. relations
with Turkey be in the post-Iraq era and set forth a number of points to be
taken into account. He concluded with a list of specific actions the U.S.
should take regarding Turkey including a halt in all military aid and
putting conditions on any economic aid to Turkey.
Rep. Brad Sherman (D-CA), voiced out his strong opposition to giving aid
to Turkey. He criticized Turkey for its non-democratic regime and
addressed its military aggression to its neighbors. With regard to Cyprus
he directly accused Turkey for the illegal occupation of the island and
stressed: “All the people in Cyprus, including the Turkish Cypriots want
to see a Cyprus that is part of the EU, that has a bi-zonal federation and
has the sovereignty of Cyprus restored. Instead you have a Turkish general
staff and a puppet named Denktash holding that up.” Rep. Sherman
concluded his speech by reaffirming his strong commitment to continue
working with the Greek American community in order “to have unity
restored in Cyprus, to have a U.S. foreign policy that matches our values
and to try to save the civilian dollars that do not need to be spent.”
AHI’s Executive Director Nick Larigakis stated: “We believe that the
Conference provided a critical analysis regarding U.S. – Turkish
relations and offered constructive policy recommendations for
consideration.”
