Local initiative drives out foreign intervention

On the Syrian question, it is very important that regional initiative grow stronger, come to the fore, and tie the region's future to a solution built on peace and stability. For neither the US, nor Russia, nor the European Union is the region's being in peace and stability a concern. Each is preoccupied with its own concerns, and they do not even care about the blood that will flow, the lives that will be extinguished, today or in the future, in Syria or in Iraq. On the contrary, to the extent that they refuse to be part of its solution, they continue to be the most important part of the problem.

Is having to wait for the US and Russia to reach an agreement for a solution on Syria a fate for the region? Undoubtedly, neither a person's fatalism nor his agency is a fate; to a great extent it is his own decision. The same is true of countries. Why should Turkey and Iran have to play different tunes on Syria?

I wrote recently that too much has been made, in terms of profit and loss, of the alternative to the policy Turkey has followed on Syria so far. According to that calculation, Turkey was coming out of its Syria policy very much the loser. Leaving aside the humanity and morality of bringing up profit and loss calculations in an event in which a complete human tragedy is being lived, I had tried to explain that who has come out of this event with what profit has never been calculated, even comparatively. For example, is Iran supposedly gaining much from the Syria policy it has followed so far?

Frankly, not only does it gain nothing, and in fact lose much more with each passing day, it also causes the region to lose a great deal in stability, peace and independence. Iran ends up serving the creation of an atmosphere of insecurity in which the people of the region cannot live together without outsiders stepping in. In the name of what? In the name of so-called anti-US-Israel stance. Yet as long as the problem in Syria continues in this way, the ability of regional actors, first of all Iran, to solve the problem is sidelined, and the day dawns for actors from outside the region.

In this respect, it is very important to put regional initiative into operation and to consolidate what exists. At the beginning of last week, the first meeting, at the level of foreign ministers, of the quartet initiative mentioned earlier, to be realized with the participation of Turkey, Egypt, Iran and Saudi Arabia, was held in Cairo. Because the first meeting was held in Cairo, some know-it-alls promptly recorded one more major loss of points in our column of losses. Those who regard the meeting's being held in Cairo rather than Istanbul as a loss for Turkey need a basic-level grammar lesson on Turkey's new foreign policy language. For instance, we could begin by explaining what it means in this new language that the proposal, indeed the insistence, that the meeting be held in Cairo instead of Istanbul was made by Turkey itself.

The reason for this preference, as explained by Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu, is precisely that it is the best occasion for expressing that, in this process, regional initiative should be one of mutual assistance and solidarity rather than competition.

In fact, one of the first things that needs to be explained in this process is exactly this. Turkey is not in competition with anyone for the resolution of the crisis in Syria. Turkey's preference has been the best occasion for explaining that it is not in competition not only with Egypt but also with Iran. In fact, if Iran, instead of falling prey to unnecessary worries about the post-Assad situation in Syria, trusted this new regional initiative, and, instead of seeing itself in competition with the actors of the region, saw that investing in peace, trust and stability is more profitable, it would thereby strike the real great blow against the imperialists.

The meeting in Cairo, together with the message conveyed by its having been held in Cairo at Turkey's request, was a very successful meeting in terms of the acceptance of this reality, even though the Saudi Arabian foreign minister did not attend owing to illness. This initiative seems likely to continue. Next week, because of the UN meeting, it is planned for this initiative to convene again in New York.

It is possible to say that Turkey, Egypt and Iran, which Prof. Davutoğlu, while constructing the power and history equation of this region, has always cited as its three legs of a tripod, have never before had as great an opportunity as today to shape the region's destiny. Not worrying that Egypt's magnificent return to the history of the region will push Turkey into the background, but on the contrary being able to see new opportunities for Turkey too in Egypt's strengthening... This is exactly what shows that the new and original language of foreign policy is being spoken. Why should the strengthening of Egypt or Iran be to the detriment of Turkey or of the region's other local actors? All right, this question may sound very naive from the standpoint of the political logic we are used to, but is it not precisely that political logic we are used to that needs to be intervened upon?

Some people are all but ready to dance with jingling bells, saying that Turkey's zero-problems-with-neighbors goal cannot be achieved. What do they want, does anyone understand? Does having problems with everyone make them happier? Evidently it does. They rejoice because the problems that have arisen or are likely to arise vindicate them. Yet, at the cost of leaving their joy stuck in their throats, let us say that the zero-problems goal is a direction, and there is not a millimeter of deviation from this direction. Moreover, much more progress has been made in that direction than is thought.

Nor is it the case that there are problems with everyone. Apart from Syria, there is currently no country with which Turkey's relations are worse than before. With Syria too, it is not only Turkey but the entire world that has a problem, because Syria has a problem with the entire world, beginning with itself. Other than that, Turkey's relations with all its neighbors, first of all Russia, Greece, Georgia, Azerbaijan and even Iran, are at the best level of its history. Along with these, relations with countries such as Egypt, Tunisia and Libya are at the level of holding joint cabinet meetings.