Confrontation of Turkish, Saudi Red Lines

Considering the measures taken by the US and Saudi Arabia in order to create an anti-terrorism coalition against ISIS, the foundation of which, according to John Kerry, is Arab-Turkish-American, the Turkish officials have stated that this coalition must be formed without Saudi Arabia. What is the reason behind Turkey’s position in this regard?

There is still ambiguity about the foundations of this coalition. But besides the issue of the anti-terrorism coalition, the answer to this question must be found in the competition which exists between Turkey and Saudi Arabia with regard to the security consequences of the region. It must be said that at the present time, there is a serious difference of opinion between Riyadh and Ankara regarding some of the regional issues which is related to the developments after the formation of the Arab Spring and revolutions of the Arab countries during recent years. For example, Saudi Arabia supported the downfall of the regime in Egypt and the coming to power of the military instead of the Morsi government. But there was a completely different approach in Turkey and they completely supported the coming to power of Morsi. Both countries are against the developments in Syria but each one intends to gain more power in that country. Turkey’s approach with regard to Iraq is mostly economic and it attempts to achieve more benefits. It is not important for Turkey whether Kurdistan gains more power or even achieves independence. But these are considered red lines for Saudi Arabia. Therefore, it is natural that, despite their common points, these two countries pursue different approaches in different cases.

There are different positions taken among the members of the coalition; the US and Saudi Arabia do not want Iran’s presence in this coalition, on one hand, and Turkey does not agree with Saudi Arabia’s presence, on the other. Are there different factions among the member countries of the coalition?

Perhaps the US was interested in having certain interactions with Iran with regard to the fight against terrorism in spite of its differences with Iran. But there is more competition between Iran and Saudi Arabia and, according to most experts, it was the pressure of the Arab countries which caused the US to take a harsh position against Iran which led to Iran’s absence in the Paris Conference.

While all countries are interested in fighting against ISIS, they cannot place themselves under the umbrella of one coalition. Is this due to the Shiite-Sunni atmosphere which rules over the region? Or is it because of the Turkey-Qatar strategy, on one hand, US-Saudi Arabia, on the other, and Iran as the third side?

All of them can be influential. But the main problem lies in the fact that first the root of radicalism in the region is mostly cultural and social rather than political which may not be eliminated with this coalition. Thus, these countries know that these measures would at most contain this dangerous phenomenon and cannot eradicate it. The second point is that each country has been successful in its fight against terrorism considering its past policies. They pursued their own interests in pursuing their policies and cannot, at the present time, consider a different trend than their past policies.

What impact would Turkey’s non-interest in Saudi Arabia’s presence have on this coalition?

This coalition is not very efficient by itself and such approaches would affect the inefficiency of these coalitions in the middle run.

At the same time Turkey has stated that it is not satisfied with the US plan in the two neighboring countries of Iraq and Syria. Considering the fact that Turkey is a member of NATO and the biggest US air base is stationed in this country, what impacts would Turkey’s non-interest in signing the treaty of air strikes against ISIS have on the US measures in its fight against terrorism?

Of course, Turkey, as a member of NATO, is obliged to execute the agreements of this defense treaty but NATO has not made a serious decision in its last meeting. Nonetheless, these issues show the differences between Ankara and Washington with regard to different cases particularly regarding Iraq and Syria. There are serious differences of opinion in this regard and Turkey feels that although it has had more costs, it has not gained sufficiently.

Is there the possibility that Turkey would leave the coalition and pursue the policy of anti-terrorism with regard to ISIS independently or with the cooperation of some countries?

This possibility does not exist, at least not in the short run. The reason is that the nature of presence and participation in such coalitions increases the reputation and spiritual interests of such countries and could promote their strategic situation. Furthermore, it is not costly for them either; thus, there is no reason for them to leave this coalition.