Erdoğan isolated, entrapped in a vicious cycle of his own making
Compelled to justify their behaviour on the basis of
universally accepted norms, even revisionist powers profess to uphold
international law, regardless of the realities on the ground.
Based on what it claims as truthful in its official
remarks, whether it be the remarks of the presidential palace or those of the
Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Turkish government has been, in the words of
President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, acting “in accordance with international law” and “with legitimate power
arising from the international law”, in its efforts to protect “rights, ties and
interests emanating from international law”.
In the eyes of the international community however,
Erdoğan’s Turkey has been
violating the U.N. arms embargo on Libya, while transgressing most of past
January’s Berlin Conference on
Libya Conclusions.
There are other countries that have also been
accused of covertly violating the arms embargo on the oil rich North African
country, namely Russia, Egypt, and the UAE. But Erdoğan’s Turkey has been
violating this embargo openly, on the basis of the legally contentious MoUs it
signed with Fayez al-Sarraj’s
Libyan Government of National Accord (GNA) back in 2019. The democratically
elected Libyan House of Representatives (HoR), under the presidency of Aguila
Saleh, as well as neighbouring countries, such as Egypt, have condemned those
Turkey-GNA memoranda of understanding as a violation of the Skhirat Agreement
signed by Libyan parties back in 2015.
In the eyes of the international community, Erdoğan’s Turkey has also been “violating international
law” in Syria. The European
Parliament has condemned “the
unilateral Turkish military intervention in northeast Syria” by calling it a “a grave violation of
international law”
that “is undermining the
stability and security of the region as a whole.
Recent reports, covered by Ahval contributor David
Lepeska, tell stories of rampant kidnappings and abuses committed by
Turkey-backed Syrian rebels recently spiking in “lawless” Turkey-controlled
Afrin as Turkey severely limits access to the area for journalists and
investigators.
The mere fact that Ankara sent thousands of Syrian
fighters to Libya as mercenaries, to fight on the side of the GNA, serves as a
proof of the extent to which these two fronts – Libya and Syria - can operate
as communicating vessels affecting “the region as a whole” under the
neo-ottoman banner of an irredentist Turkey.
Turkey has sent to Libya more than 5,000 mostly
“inexperienced” and “uneducated” Syrian mercenaries, whose “continued presence
will continue to negatively affect the overall security situation” in the
country, with increasing reports of theft, sexual assault and misconduct by
Syrian mercenaries further degrading the situation and generating backlash from
the Libyan public, according to a U.S. Pentagon inspector general’s report
released in September.
The European Council has “strongly condemned
Turkey's continued illegal actions in the Eastern Mediterranean and the Aegean
Sea”, while expressing “serious concerns over Turkey's current illegal drilling
activities in the Eastern Mediterranean” on numerous occasions since March
2018. The U.S. State Department has, for its part, also urged - more than once during these past months for
Turkish authorities “to avoid steps that raise tensions in the Eastern
Mediterranean” while having denounced the Turkish-GNA delimitation memorandum
of November 2019 as “unhelpful and provocative”.
Erdoğan, however,
does not seem to care. On the contrary, he adds fuel to the fire by doing
exactly what Europeans and Americans urge him not to.
Only in this way can he then claim that the “the
West has never seen Turkey as one of its own” and pass on all of Turkey’s
current problems, including the economy and the migrant crisis to “outside
forces” historically demonized in Turkey as being responsible for the
dissolution of the Ottoman Empire.
Entrapped in a vicious cycle of his own making, Erdoğan
prolongs his isolation in the international scene. “I’ll give them reasons to
speak out against an imperialist, irredentist, revisionist new Turkey, so that
I can then accuse them of speaking out”, seems to be the implicit motto behind
many of the Turkish president’s efforts.
“In truth, Erdogan welcomes international
condemnation. He draws strength from his constant sparring with domestic and
foreign foes […] Erdogan’s culture war casts faith, nationalism, and material
progress as part of a zero-sum struggle with his adversaries […] It’s a
worldview that resonates with many voters. But it has done little to improve
Turkey’s flagging economy, while leaving the country ever more embattled in its
relations with its neighbors”, writes Nick Danforth, senior visiting fellow at
the German Marshall Fund,in a recent piecefor Foreign Affairs.
In theory of course, Erdoğan
officially appears to favour “dialogue
and negotiations[…] in line with the international law”. If he really does
favour “dialogue and negotiations” though, then the current moment could be the
right time.
Greece’s recent moves can be seen as “provocative”
in the eyes of the Islamist/nationalist/neo-ottoman Turkish political
establishment. They could be viewed, however, also as a window of opportunity
that lays the ground for future negotiations on maritime issues.
Meanwhile, Greece has announced a plan to extend the
limit of its territorial waters from 6 to 12 nautical miles. The plan refers
only to the Ionian Sea for the time being, leaving the Aegean unaffected at 6
nm.
Greece’s Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZ) delimitation
agreement with Egypt on the other hand is “partial,” leaving the area to the
south of the Greek Eastern Mediterranean island of Kastellorizo “open” for
future negotiations not only with Egypt and Cyprus but also with Turkey. As for
the historic agreements signed this summer on the demarcation of EEZ with Italy
and Egypt, they both give limited effect to some of the smaller Greek islands,
something that would have been probably welcomed by Turkey before the fall of
2019.
In other words, Turkey now has the opportunity to
enter into dialogue with Greece on the continental shelf/EEZ issue. But for
this to happen, Ankara needs to leave aside claims that infringe upon Greece’s
sovereign rights, such as "grey zones" and the demilitarization of
Greek islands, and/or further unacceptable Turkish maximalisms, such as the
Turkey-GNA maritime delimitation MoU and the claim that large and inhabited
Greek islands have no maritime zones beyond their territorial waters of 6 nm.
Moreover, Turkey would have to suspend all its
provocations in Cyprus, whether it be within the Cypriot EEZ or in the ghost
town of Varosha. Provisions of international law would, of course, favour such
a dialogue.
Erdoğan’s Turkey views
international law though in an arbitrary way, as something that can be invoked
only when it serves the country’s
interests and to the extent to which it does.
Turkey is not a signatory to the United Nations
Convention on the Law of the Sea(UNCLOS). In fact Turkey is the only EU
candidate country that has not signed the UNCLOS.
Why hasn’t it done so? Turkey is “a persistent
objector to the rules of UNCLOS regarding the delimitation of maritime zones
and the islands having maritime zones etc.”, writes Ulaş
Gündüzler in the Ankara
Review of European Studies.
In addition, Ankara has not recognised the
International Court of Justice’s (ICJ) general, mandatory jurisdiction. When,
in 1976, Greece instituted proceedings against Turkey in the dispute over the
Aegean Sea continental shelf before the International Court of Justice in the
Hague, Turkey denied that the Court was competent.
Ankara has not even ratified the Paris Climate
Agreement of 2015. On the contrary, it has rushed to increase its use of
domestic lignite coal as a way to decrease its dependency on energy/gas
imports. Turkey is actually the only G20 country that has not ratified the
Paris Agreement.
As of the July 2016 coup attempt, Erdoğan
had also suspended the European Convention on Human Rights, while as of this
summer of 2020, Turkey is debating whether it should withdraw or not from the
Council of Europe Convention on preventing and combating violence against women
and domestic violence.
The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), whose
president, Robert Spano, visited Turkey earlier this week to receive an
honorary doctorate from Istanbul University and exchange handshakes with
president Erdoğan, has delivered more than 3,645
judgments on Turkey alone since it was established in 1959.
“Turkey refuses to become an United Nations
Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) signatory, closing off its avenue of
legal recourse”, writes Michaël Tanchum, senior follow at the Austrian
Institute for European and Security Policy, in a recent piece for Foreign
Policy.
But Turkey is not the only country refusing to do
so. Israel has not signed the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea,
while other countries such as the United States and the United Arab Emirates
have not ratified it.
While speaking at an open event in Athens back in
February of 2020, Burak Özügergin, the Turkish ambassador to Athens, appeared
as a matter of fact to take pride in his country’s not signing UNCLOS…
It is in similar fashion that president Erdoğan
has also taken pride in contemplating the “borders of his heart” that extend far beyond
the actual borders of modern-day Turkey, while stressing the need for the
Treaty of Lausanne to be reviewed and updated.
The Turkish civilization is, after all, “a
civilization of conquest”. At least this is what president Erdoğan
claimedwhile speaking at the graduation ceremony of the National Defence
University in Istanbul on Aug. 30.