While the story of Ireland and the fate of Portugal monopolize the attention of the European Union (waiting for the eye along the Brussels move garbage from Naples accounts of the Beautiful Country), the EU risks losing sight of a privileged partner in the Islamic world, preaching in the country to become a member for 50 years, Turkey.
Or maybe not. Not all observers interpret the strategic choices of Ankara's foreign policy in the same way.
In an editorial published in the Corriere della Sera, November 23, "NATO, Iran and Turkey, which is leaving us," Giovanni Sartori, says: "Turkey, now seems to look to Islam: turkish Prime Minister Erdogan at the NATO summit in Lisbon (19 and November 20, 2010, ed), managed to get that Iran was ruled by the States that threaten the West, precisely protected by the military of the Atlantic Alliance. So we lost Turkey and at the same time strengthened the hand of our most dangerous enemy, Iran of the ayatollahs. Really a bell'insuccesso.
But really the Turkish move is both surprising and definitive? The comment by Valeria Talbot, senior researcher of euro-Mediterranean partnership and Turkey Institute for the study of international politics: "I would like some clarification, because I believe that this first reading is misleading. The document mentioned by Sartori regard the missile shield of NATO, which will be addressed to protect Europe from specific countries, but by generic threats. In addition, in text are not the names of other nations, "then, he claims, report only the name of Iran would be inappropriate.
ISPI From the perspective of the analyst, in fact, "the choice in the direction of Turkey in the Middle East is not an alternative to the European way, but complementary." Even more so if Brussels and Washington will be able to assess this "projection Middle East" in the right proportions.
What Ankara is disappointed by the difficulties negotiating with the European Union and hostile attitude of France and Germany is not new: critical issues such as Cyprus and the rights of the Kurdish minority constitutes an impediment to progress turkish dossier into the European fold. But that is not
impasse to push the government of Recep Tayyip Erdogan to strengthen relations with Tehran, "This is the result of pragmatism, of energy interests (Iran is the main supplier of gas to Ankara, ed) and commercial relief (about $ 10 billion annual interchange with growth expectations to 30 bn).
And attention to the Iran issue in the Turkish Born reflects an attempt to avoid a rupture between the Atlantic Alliance and the ayatollahs, pushing for development in key civilian nuclear program.
"But since the 80s, and gradually more and more in the decade Next, the Turks have strengthened relations with the Middle East. Just think of the intense flow of exports to Iraq that has endured during the crisis "with the regime of Saddam Hussein.
How to 'argue that, to Western interests would be desirable that the Turkish strategy must be in harmony with the objectives of Americans and Europeans, this is another kind of speech, "said the researcher.
Finally, the religious issue: the government of the AKP (Party for Justice and Development, of which Erdogan is the leader) and all his moves are constantly under the magnifying glass.
Why? The answer is obvious, also at risk because dangerous simplification: "For the religious position that we give ourselves to Turkey, the way we want to paint the country", assuming that by now have turned their backs on secularism for un'islamizzazione no return.
a simplification that could be dangerous to assess and prevent the scenario turkish in its specificity, with a route different from that in other Muslim majority countries in the region. And with different political ambitions, such as a bridge between the West and the Middle East.
http://www.lettera43.it/articolo/3231/se-la-turchia-si-rivolge-verso-est.htm
0 comments:
Post a Comment