An attempt is being made at Kiev’s hands to strike at Erdogan’s reputation as a great master of tactical political and diplomatic manoeuvring. Let’s see what comes of it
After NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg said in an interview with CNN Turk that he had conveyed to Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu an offer from the North Atlantic Alliance to join sanctions against Russia over the Ukraine crisis, Ankara responded. But on the level of Energy and Natural Resources Minister Fatih Donmez. He said, citing Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, that Ankara “does not approve of NATO’s proposal to join sanctions against Russia”. According to him, “we see that we don’t have gas problems, we don’t want to be on the side of sanctions, we are on the side of diplomacy”.
Turkey’s position in the current situation is very curious. It motivates its refusal to join the sanctions by the fact that it acts as an intermediary between Moscow and Kiev in resolving the Ukrainian crisis, and if it joins the sanctions, this mission could be derailed. “No one but us has such a trusted relationship with Russia and Ukraine,” says Turkish diplomatic chief Mevlut Cavusoglu.
Indeed, Erdogan has been persistent in offering his mediation, although at first this initiative was perceived differently in Kiev and Moscow. Kiev was in favour, Moscow was cautious and the West simply observed. After the negotiations in Antalya between Russian and Ukrainian foreign ministers Sergey Lavrov and Dmitriy Kuleba, which were brokered by Turkey, and reports from the Turkish side that a meeting between Russian and Ukrainian presidents Vladimir Putin and Volodymyr Zelensky was possible in Turkey “in the near future”, we should admit that Erdoğan got his way and found himself at the very centre of events.
After a long pause, he was contacted by telephone by US President Joe Biden. The intrigue was immediate. Ned Price, spokesman for the US State Department, commenting on Ankara’s mediation policy, said that “Turkey, France and Israel, the US’ close partners in diplomatic relations with the Kremlin,” with Ankara “acting in full coordination and consultation with Washington on Ukrainian matters”. Therefore, according to Price’s logic, Washington supports Turkey in this direction. CNN also reported, citing White House sources, that “the US administration views the peacemaking initiatives of Israel and Turkey positively, considering them more effective than the attempts of France and Germany”. The intrigue here is that Erdogan had previously billed his initiative on Ukraine as self-contained.
The next move was already made by Zelensky. While earlier he had talked about his readiness to come to Turkey for talks with Putin, he now said in a meeting with journalists that he had invited Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett to hold talks with the Russian leader in Jerusalem. So he ruled out Ankara as one of the “points where we can find an understanding to stop the war”.
And the point here is that, as Ukrainian experts suggest, “for Erdogan the policy of peacemaking is a cover for the refusal of sanctions against Russia”. They, as the Turkish Daily Sabah notes, point to Ankara’s rejection of Kiev’s demands to close the Straits and airspace to Russian warships and to give up Russian gas. So Zelensky was advised to break Erdogan’s “peacekeeping cover” and force him “to start stepping in step with his NATO partners, rather than wait for favourable conditions to emerge to achieve his own interests, even in the short term”. And it’s not just that. According to the Polish publication Wirtualna Polska, “Kiev may be trying to block Ankara and opportunities to secure its place in the security architecture of East-Central Europe”.
And now an attempt is being made with the hands of Zelenski to strike at Erdogan’s reputation as a great master of tactical political and diplomatic manoeuvring. It is not by chance that Baku has been mentioned as the venue of the Putin-Zelenski meeting. It cannot be ruled out that within the framework of active communication between Kiev, Moscow and Ankara, Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev will act as a trusted mediator in the resolution of the Ukrainian crisis instead of Erdogan. In fact, assuming that the sides have a desire for non-public dialogue, it is Baku that becomes the optimal link to secure it. But in the end, Aliyev and Erdogan can in this case join forces and play in tandem.
Stanislav Tarasov, REGNUM news agency