The earthquake could not have come at a worse time for Turkey’s President Recep Tayyip Erdogan. Elections are due in May and the economy is in deep trouble with inflation estimated at around 58% and a wide budget deficit. Yet, he has no choice but to spend more, especially in the 10 provinces hit by the quake where over 13% of people live. That will only exacerbate the deficit and affect his re-election prospects. In written responses to questions from Ashwin Ahmad, former foreign secretary and ambassador to Turkey Kanwal Sibal, writes about Erdogan’s response to the quake. He also gives his views on Erdogan’s mediation between Russia and Ukraine, the fallout of Turkey’s spat over Sweden and Finland wanting to join Nato, and the future shape of bilateral relations with India.
What could be the political fallout of the earthquake for President Erdogan? Also, how do you feel his imposition of a ‘state of emergency’ will be viewed in the country?
- The fall-out cannot be positive as people in the earthquake affected region, which is fairly large, feel that the government has been slow in providing relief. One strong criticism is that he did not immediately order the army to undertake relief operations. He has acknowledged the criticism about delay in providing relief as soon as the earthquake struck but explained the suddenness and the intensity of the crisis, the large area involved, the difficulty to gain access to the stricken areas because of the damage to roads and airports etc. as reasons. All this may have some merit but the suffering people look for immediate help by the authorities, not explanations from the government. This is inhuman when people are out in the open in freezing temperatures and time is of the essence to save lives. He did not however explain why he did not visit the affected areas immediately. Opposition leaders preceded him in this. The earthquake has created an emergency situation in the country no doubt as ten provinces are affected and exceptional efforts have to be made to provide relief and prevent looting and unrest. If the declaration of emergency is politically misused as the country moves towards elections that would be a problem.
President Erdogan had some notable successes in mediating between Russia and Ukraine and recently announced he was ready to broker a permanent peace between the two sides. How successful a role has Turkey played given the strong US opposition to negotiations and does it still have a role?
- Turkey certainly was able to broker a grain deal. Before that, in March 2022, Erdogan brought the two sides to the negotiating table when it appears that the contours of an agreement had emerged. The Russians say that former UK Prime Minister Johnson sabotaged the emerging deal by promising full Nato support to Ukraine. Former Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett has reportedly confirmed that the West broke up the negotiations. In view of this, one cannot see any successful mediating role by Turkey. The US strategy, backed by the EU, seems to be clear: continue supporting Ukraine militarily and financially to put it in a position to eventually negotiate from a position of strength, meaning that inflict a lot of pain on Russia, help Ukraine re-capture some lost territories in the eastern part and force Russia to negotiate. It is quite unclear if this western strategy will succeed.
Presidents Putin and Erdogan had talked about setting up a regional gas hub in Turkey. How feasible is this idea and what would it mean for Erdogan and Europe if it was implemented?
- This proposal is attractive to both sides. Russia is looking at alternative routes and markets after losing the European market. Turkey is already a big importer of Russian gas and oil. With this project it will obtain energy at attractive prices and cement Turkey’s position as a key energy player in the region. Besides meeting its own needs, Turkey will be able to re-export gas to European countries. President Erdogan has approved this proposal made by President Putin in October 2022 to create a new hub in Thrace where the conditions to create it are favourable. The current infrastructure – the TurkStream and Blue Stream – is not enough for creating a hub. The details of the project are not known. The US is opposed to the project and is offering to help Turkey diversify its energy sources by supplying it LNG. Western companies are also unlikely to help Turkey in laying the needed gas pipelines on the Black Sea bed. In the best of circumstances it will take some years to bring this project to fruition.
On Nato, Turkey continues to remain the outlier blocking Finland and Sweden’s bid for membership. What is the likely fallout for President Erdogan going forward?
- President Erdogan is driving a hard bargain by demanding that Finland and Sweden cede to its demands on extraditing nearly 130 Kurdish “terrorists” as a prior condition for approving their joint Nato membership bid. A Swedish court has blocked the extradition of one of these “terrorists.” President Erdogan’s effigy has been burnt in Stockholm leading to a Turkish government protest and the tearing of the Quran by a Swede has provoked demonstrations in Turkey and parts of the Islamic world, complicating further Sweden’s accession bid, and by extension that of Finland as both countries seek to join together. In any case, Turkey will continue to block accession until the May elections as President Erdogan cannot politically afford to yield before, more so as he has banned the Kurdish party (third biggest group in parliament) from fighting the elections. If there is a change of government in Turkey in May the scenario may change.
President Erdogan and Prime Minister Modi met on the sidelines of the SCO summit last year and India’s aid to Turkey suggests a thaw in ties is in the making. How much can we build upon this and what outcomes can we reasonably expect in the near future?
- I don’t think we should expect any change in Turkey’s position on India-Pakistan issues – which is our real concern – as a result of our humanitarian aid to Turkey. President Erdogan has successfully managed contradictory approaches in its foreign policy. Turkey is a member of Nato but despite US protests it has bought the S 400 system from Russia. The Turks downed a Russian fighter jet over Syria, supplied drones to Ukraine, works at cross purposes both with Russia (and the US) in northern Syria but enjoys close ties with Russia, even having the credibility as a Nato member to mediate between Russia and Ukraine. It will, as before, seek to deal with India and Pakistan on separate tracks, preserving its option to back Pakistan on Kashmir, injecting religion into the issue, work against us in the OIC and raise the Kashmir issue in the UNGA, while claiming willingness to improve ties with India, especially economic. Turkey did include us in its initiatives on Afghanistan – the Heart of Asia platform. Some softening of Turkish open provocations on Kashmir may happen, but Turkey has a great sense of entitlement and is very self-centred in its foreign policy approaches, and so, with President Erdogan in power nothing much may change fundamentally.
