SERIOUS POLITICIAN AND EXCELLENT DIPLOMAT

Turkey, which is only beginning to find its way out of the domestic political crisis resulting from a recent presidential election, is facing a number of difficult tasks on its international agenda. Naturally, most of the work has to be carried out by the Foreign Ministry where Ali Babacan has replaced Abdulla Gul, who, for his part, is the Turkish president now.

The choice of Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan was quite expected and logical. Ali Babacan (in fact, one of the youngest ministers) used to hold the position of the minister of economics in the previous government and earned himself a reputation for being a serious politician and excellent diplomat. This was largely achieved due to the fact that starting from 2005 he, together with his main responsibilities, was also in charge of the country's negotiations with the EU. Babacan and Abdulla Gul can take the credit for the fact that EU countries, at the well-remembered Luxembourg summit, finally voted for the commencement of a long dialogue with Ankara over its accession to the "united Europe". It is therefore no wonder that the new head of the Turkish foreign ministry is enjoying Erdogan's trust as the latter has deemed it appropriate to continue entrusting Babacan with the role of the key negotiator with Brussels. Turkish political analysts are convinced that by appointing Babacan, the prime minister simply highlighted that EU accession is a priority issue on his agenda.

Ali Babacan was born in Ankara in 1967. In 1989, he graduated with distinction (was one of the best graduates) from the prestigious Technical University majoring in construction engineering. Then, as a student of the Fulbright Scholarship program, he continued education in the USA where, in 1992, he received the MBA degree at the North-West University. In 1992-1994, Babacan worked as a consultant for a well-known private company which represented consulting services for high-ranking officials of the US financial sector. Upon return to Turkey, the future minister took charge of the textile company owned by his family. Then he got gradually involved with politics. As stated in his official biography, after the establishment of the Justice and Development Party (JDP), Babacan became a coordinator of its economic activity. When the JDP ascended to power, he quite deservedly took the post of the economic minister. It is worth emphasizing that it was Bacan who completed the program developed jointly with the IMF in 2001 when Turkey was experiencing a difficult period of economic recession. Earlier, 17 similar programs had ended in a failure. Babacan did a lot to lead Turkey out of the economic crisis and is therefore referred to as the "father" of Turkey's economic development. Now he needs to do even more for Ankara's "breakthrough" on the international arena. 

The foreign political course of Turkey, as of any other democratic state, is based on the care for national security. In fact, it is necessary to take into consideration Turkey's geopolitical location at the crossroads of Europe and Asia and the presence of rather difficult neighbors. By maneuvering at the sea of different interests, which are often represented by the world's superpowers, it is not always easy to defend one's own position. However, Babacan and his subordinated appear to have fully immersed in this eddy and are very determined. This is confirmed at least by the fact that in early October the new Turkish foreign minister paid an extensive visit to the Middle East. The objective of his visit to Syria, Israel, the Palestinian authority, Jordan, Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia and Egypt was announced as the discussion of ways of improving the situation in the region. In an interview with Turkish Daily News, Babacan said that a "new diplomatic campaign" was on the agenda. It is aimed to achieve peaceful settlements in the region. "Our region is going through hard times. We have faced a number of problems, first of all the Israeli-Palestinian relations and the situation in Iraq," the minister explained. Indeed, attention of analysts was particularly focused on Babacan's intention to visit Iraq and Israel. 

The relations between Ankara and Jerusalem have considerably worsened of late. This has been caused by an attack of the Israeli air force on a facility on the territory of Syria on 6 September. During the attack, Israeli F-15i fighters entered Turkey's air space. Further blow to the relations was made by the fact that a number of Israeli politicians expressed solidarity with the statement by the Anti-defamation league concerning recognition of the so-called Armenian genocide. Babacan, however, decided to restore the diplomatic channels between the two countries.

An international conference on Middle Eastern problems is due to be held in Istanbul in early November. According to all Turkish media, the US authorities have not invited Ankara officials to the Annapolis international conference on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict due in late November. In this connection, the Turkish administration decided to hold its own conference to discuss, first of all, the problems of Iraq and Palestine. Besides, Israeli President Shimon Peres, the president of the Palestinian authority, Mahmoud Abbas, and the special envoy of the "Middle Eastern quarter", Tony Blair, have been invited to visit Turkey in mid-October to meet President Abdulla Gul, who, as stated earlier, has "prepared a special suggestion with regard to the Palestinian-Israeli settlement".

Therefore, Ankara is demonstrating clear understanding that a complete solution of the problems which concern Turkey is impossible as long as such hotbeds as the Arab-Israeli conflict and the current situation in Iraq remain in the region. The unclear future of this Middle Eastern country is the biggest source of concern for the Turkish administration. On 26 September, the US Senate adopted a resolution on dividing Iraq in three parts: the Shiite, Sunni and Kurdish. The federal government in Baghdad will in this case manage only the oil revenues and be responsible for the security of state borders. And although this document is not binding and has already been opposed by US President George Bush, this already means a lot, particularly as the talk on the division of Iraq is not new at all. 

At the same time, it is worth mentioning that the division of Iraq is particularly delightful for the Kurds living in the country's north because in the event of a "split" both the Sunni and the Shiite parts of the divided Iraq are likely to come under the influence of neighboring countries. With Kurds, however, it is completely the opposite. Then can breathe new life into the separatist sentiments of their tribesmen living on the territory of Iran, Syria and Turkey. Therefore, Ankara is worried about the activity of PKK militants based in northern Iraq from where they often raid Turkish territory. Clashes between Turkish soldiers with PKK militants are almost a daily occurrence. Besides, acts of terror are also frequently committed in major cities of western Turkey. Since the time when the Kurdistan Workers Party started attempts to form an independent state in the south-east of Turkey (1984), the stand-off has claimed more than 37,000 lives. 

The PKK activity is viewed by the Turkish, US administration and the EU as terrorist. However, Ankara is almost alone in the struggle with the militants. On 30 May 2007, Turkish military command decided to concentrate a considerable military contingent with military hardware, including tanks and APCs, on the southern border. After that, it was clear that everything was ready for a large-scale military operation in northern Iraq, which certainly caused the discontent of Washington. Ankara, for its part, has criticized the US for doing nothing to prevent this threat and for the possibility that Kurdish extremists may be receiving US weaponry.

The point is Iraq's Kurds are valuable to the US because of their loyalty to the US troops. Furthermore, if the Turkish army crossed the border to conduct a military operation, this would mean that Iraq has not even the basic sovereignty the semblance of which Washington and Baghdad proper are trying to maintain. However, Washington cannot ignore the interests of Turkey, an important US ally in NATO, a country which controls the Bosporus and Dardanelle straits and a large Muslim state. An important role, together with other institutions, has certainly been played by the Turkish foreign ministry which always works in this direction.

As a result, the talks between the leaders of the Turkish and Iraqi interior ministers in late September ended in an agreement whereby Ankara received the right to conduct, with the consent of the Iraqi authorities, trans-border operations against PKK militants in the country's north. Also, agreement was reached on joint anti-terror activity: fight against political and financial activity of Kurdish organizations, the possibility of extradition of militants, etc. The main target, of course, is the Kurdistan Workers Party, which committed a series of acts of terror on Turkish territory shortly afterwards. Namely, a passenger bus carrying representatives of local "rural guard" units, Kurds loyal to the government, was fired on. Local media described this attack as payment for the Turkish-Iraqi agreement, though it is not as complete as it may seem. Ankara was hoping to receive the opportunity of persecuting Kurdish militants on Iraqi territory without informing the country's authorities - "hot on the heels", so to speak. However, this has not happened yet.

In the meantime, some experts are saying that the USA may promise Turkey assistance in eliminating the Kurdish threat in return for Ankara's support in the event of commencement of a military operation against Iran. There may be some truth in this, because Turkey is also wary of Iran's growing authority in the Islamic world which will inevitably increase dozens of times even Tehran lays its hands on weapons of mass destruction.

Another direction, European, is not less problematic for the Turkish diplomacy than the Middle Eastern one. The talks on accession to the EU have almost stalled. The new French President Nicolas Sarkozy has recently reiterated his opposition to Turkey's joining the European house. According to the head of the Elysee Palace, Turkey is not part of Europe in geographic or any other terms. Therefore, it can only count on the status of a privileged partner, something Ankara is categorically opposed to. Nonetheless, the opinion of Paris is directly and indirectly shared by many other EU countries. Turkey, however, is not losing hope. For instance, a meeting of French and Turkish foreign ministers, Bernard Cushner and Ali Babacan, was held recently. In a news conference in Ankara, they stated that their countries had more in common than differences and that there was a great potential for a dialogue between them. France has reiterated that it is interested in seeing Turkey in the Black Sea Union. It appears that EU countries, despite their reservations regarding Ankara's joining the European house, do not want to push away Turkey and to increase the already palpable anti-Western sentiments in the country's population. In the meantime, it is obvious that the issue of Turkey's accession to the EU will fully emerge on the agenda only after the dispute around the island of Cyprus has been completely resolved. And this is where Ali Babacan has to do a lot to communicate Turkey's stance on the issue to the world public. As is known, Ankara is refusing to open air and sea ports for the vessels under the Cypriot flag until the EU decides to lift the economic embargo on Cypriot Turks. This has been repeated by Ali Babacan during a visit to the north of Cyprus. "No-one must expect us any unilateral steps related to the opening of ports for Greek-Cypriot vessels. This is not going to happen," he said firmly.

Another "stumbling block" in Turkey's way to the EU is the so-called "Armenian genocide". In fact, the same issue is on the agenda between Ankara and Washington. A number of US congressmen are in favor of approving a resolution on the "Armenian genocide". It is possible that the document has not been adopted yet due to the firm position of US presidents (whether democrats or republicans) who think that it is up to the historians, not law-makers, to give an assessment to the events. While attending the 62nd session of the UN General Assembly in New York, Ali Babacan held a number of important meetings with the US administration, including representatives of the Jewish lobby. All this raises Ankara's chances of being heard and exposing the false allegations of Armenia which is trying to stir the dark waters of the past for the sake of dubious dividends.

Therefore, Turkey is trying to bear the brunt for foreign political blows at a very difficult time, especially since quite important developments are unfolding in the country proper. As is known, the JDP has put forward a draft new Constitution, i.e. a number of amendments to the old law. In fact, a referendum is due to be held in Turkey over that on 21 October. We recall that earlier the package of suggestions has been ratified twice, but rejected by ex-president Ahmet Necet Sezer who ruled to put it on a nationwide referendum. For instance, it is believed that the Turkish president will be elected by a nationwide poll for five years with the possibility of one re-election. However, particularly disputed are the issues concerning the foundation of Turkish statehood laid by Ataturk - reduction of the role of the army and removal of the prohibition for women to wear hijab. The point is that after the election of Abdulla Gul as president, the issue of confrontation between the ruling party and the army, which will always remain incredibly popular in Turkey, has not been removed from the agenda. In the run-up to the third round of the presidential election, the Turkish military command issued a warning that some "centers of evil" are trying to undermine the cornerstones of the Turkish state. And although General Beyukanit, who issued the statement, did not name the people "trying to undermine the secular nature of the Turkish Republic", analysts have no doubt that his words are addressed to the incumbent president and his ministers.