The politics behind expecting the impossible from Turkey

Lately, in the Egyptian and Gulf media, reports questioning the relations between Turkey and Egypt that began some time ago, and relating with great relish that the relations are not going well at all, have multiplied considerably. For the Gulf media has from the start been doing everything it can to undermine even the slightest possibility of this relationship materializing. Frankly, it appears that the UAE-fed Egyptian media too, at one stage of the talks, even if only for a short time, held itself back considerably so as not to talk too much.

Those who say that Turkey-Egypt relations are not going well cite as the reason Turkey's not complying with the conditions this rapprochement requires. Of course there is already a problem in what this first sentence expresses. Unfortunately, from the start, the goodwill messages that have gone from Turkey regarding Turkey-Egypt, and even Turkey-Saudi Arabia, relations have been reflected as Turkey having given up all its claims and ultimately having surrendered to the autocratic Arab regimes.

I do not think that this perception reflected in the Arab press has been sufficiently followed from Turkey's side, nor the policy it requires. There is, of course, also a serious problem in the way Turkey has expressed its goodwill in this rapprochement. In order to propose a new and well-intentioned level of relations with some countries, especially Egypt and SA, it is not necessary to give the appearance of having abandoned the hundred percent moral, humanitarian and principled stance maintained for years. Unfortunately the Arab media is now pouncing on some careless statements, twisting and turning these statements as it pleases, and enjoying distorting or destroying the magnificent image of Turkey built over twenty years.

In particular, they present the continuation of Turkey's presence in Libya, and even the fact that its effectiveness is growing with each passing day, as a sign of Turkey's disregard for the requirements of this rapprochement.

In a program on Aljazeera TV that he joined in Qatar, where he was on a visit, Egyptian Foreign Minister Sameh Shoukry said openly that one of the most important points of dispute to be resolved in the talks between Turkey and Egypt is Turkey's military presence in Libya. Shoukry went on to say that the withdrawal of foreign fighters from Libya entirely is something the UN itself demands, that Turkey is not exempt from this, and that this presence is disrupting the process of rapprochement or of opening a new page between them.

In the same interview, Shoukry, saying they are waiting for the conditions they have conveyed to the Turkish side to be met for there to be a rapprochement in relations with Turkey, did not himself say exactly what they expect of these conditions, but from the increasingly critical discourse reflected in the Egyptian press it is understood that the impossible is being expected of Turkey.

What is impossible, first of all, is of course the handing over of the political figures who have taken refuge in Turkey. To want political asylum seekers to be handed over to a country where, on top of politicians who are only recently victims of a coup, mass death sentences have been issued in the most arbitrary trials, is in fact, from the start, to sabotage the possibility of a sincere rapprochement with Turkey, if there was any.

Another impossibility expected of Turkey is of course Turkey's withdrawing its military presence from Libya. Was such a thing really asked of Turkey in the talks, and if it was, what answer did Turkey give? Turkey is the only country in Libya whose presence rests on international legitimacy. Turkey is not an occupier there; it is there at the request and invitation of the legitimate government and only as much as it has been invited.

Shoukry, at the insistent question of the Aljazeera TV presenter, of course has to include Egypt among all those who must withdraw from Libya. But what everyone already actually sees and understands is that to ask for Turkey's withdrawal is to want the putschist Haftar, whom Egypt supports, to dominate there. They already give the putschist Haftar, stationed in the East, as much logistical and military support as they wish. The only obstacle to his dominating Libya by way of a coup is Turkey's presence. As far as I know, tying the rapprochement of Turkey and Egypt to such a condition is not in fact a subject of this process.

Moreover, Turkey's rapprochement with Egypt does not stem from some compulsion of Turkey. Turkey, with all its goodwill, has extended a hand to Egypt. The meaning of extending this hand is first of all a well-intentioned answer to some requests that came from the Egyptian side. Otherwise, as we have said from the start, this rapprochement is rather something that Egypt needs and demands.

But the perception given, as if Turkey were obliged to Egypt, in order to lull their own publics, is first of all a cunning policy. This cunning also has the dimension of using the possibility of this relationship as a bargaining chip with their allies in the Gulf. Moreover, there is also the possibility that the Sisi style of politics may produce far greater gains from this perception game.

It is useful on this occasion to clarify the limits of this policy somewhat.

First, agreeing on one issue does not require agreeing on every issue. Turkey has very deep disputes with the US, Russia, Iran and even Israel on many issues, but with them it also maintains the communication required by common interests on some other issues. There is no reason for a relationship of the same level not to exist with Egypt.

Second, the goodwill Turkey shows in re-establishing these relations is not a declaration of defeat or surrender, and does not require it to give up the moral-humanitarian policies it has displayed so far.

Third, Turkey is a fully legitimate presence in Libya, and it is not for Egypt to question this. Egypt has no right sufficient to question Turkey's presence over Libya. With the support it gives there to Haftar, who is a putschist and proven to have committed crimes against humanity, it has in any case entirely lost the right to speak.

Turkey's presence in Libya is not an occupation, not a cause of instability or partition, but on the contrary a presence of solidarity with brothers that will leave Libya to the Libyans.