Connect with us

DIPLOMACY

Chinese Academy responds to Erdogan’s ‘Uyghur’ speech at UN

Published

on

President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s emphasis on ‘Uyghur Turks’ while talking about the Organisation of Turkic States in his speech at the 79th General Assembly of the United Nations (UN) in New York has drawn reactions from the Chinese public.

In his speech to the UN General Assembly, President Erdoğan said that the Organisation of Turkic States is gradually becoming a centre of attraction and that with the contributions of observer members Hungary and the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus, the Organisation has become an exemplary model of cooperation.

Stating that they will further strengthen unity and solidarity as the Turkic world, Erdoğan said, “We are in close dialogue with China to protect the fundamental rights and freedoms of Uighur Turks, with whom we have strong historical, cultural and human ties, within the framework of respecting China’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. We are committed to taking the friendly relations we have established with all countries in Latin America and the Caribbean to a higher level.

The Chinese Academy responded to Erdoğan’s speech on relations with China in the context of the Uyghurs and the Organisation of Turkic States.

‘Violating the basic principles of international relations’

Prof. Dr Guo Changgang, director of the Institute of History at the Shanghai Academy of Social Sciences and director of the Centre for Turkish Studies at Shanghai University, said Erdoğan’s remarks were a violation of China’s sovereignty and the basic principles of international relations.

Prof Guo Changgang said:

‘I believe that when Erdogan talks about ‘working to protect the fundamental rights and freedoms of Uyghur Turks, with whom we have strong historical, cultural and humanitarian ties, through close dialogue with China and respecting China’s sovereignty and territorial integrity’, first of all, he is violating the basic principles of international relations. Secondly, it is an interference in the sovereignty of other Turkic-speaking countries, because he is acting as a representative of these countries as if he were their master. Thirdly, it is not only a lack of respect for China’s national sovereignty and territorial integrity, but also a gross form of interference. The Uyghurs are part of the larger Chinese family; if Erdogan believes that there is a historical cultural link between Turkish Turks and Chinese Uyghur Turks, this link should serve as a bridge for Turkish-Chinese friendship and a facilitator for Turkish-Chinese relations, not as a ‘weapon’ or a tool to increase bilateral tensions. I don’t understand how Erdogan, as a politician, can make such statements that lack international relations and political wisdom.’

‘One of the main reasons for this is probably Erdogan’s aforementioned logical stance,’ said Prof Guo, noting that since the establishment of a ‘strategic cooperation relationship’ between China and Türkiye in 2010, the relationship has not progressed further and has not reached the level of a ‘strategic partnership’.

‘I fully understand Türkiye’s sense of national pride, and as a historian, I also understand the ‘construction’ and ‘interpretation’ of Turkish history in the nation-building process of the Turkish Republic. Türkiye can claim in its history textbooks that the Sumerian civilisation, the Egyptian civilisation and later the Minoan-Mycenaean civilisation were based on the Turkic civilisation, and that the Turkic world once stretched from the Adriatic Sea to the western shores of the Pacific Ocean,’ Prof Guo said, adding that this should not be used as an excuse for Türkiye to interfere in the internal affairs of the countries concerned.

‘Against Türkiye’s national interests’

Commenting on Erdoğan’s speech, Prof. Hasan Ünal also criticised the ‘reduction of relations with China to the Uyghur agenda’.

‘The fact that President Erdoğan mentioned relations with China only in the context of the Uyghur issue in his speech to the UN General Assembly is one of the most important shortcomings of the speech,” said Prof Dr Hasan Ünal, ‘relations with China, the undisputed superpower of the multipolar world, constitute/should constitute the most important pillar of the multilateral foreign policy that Türkiye pursues or, more precisely, should pursue, and this issue can’t be reduced to the Uyghur issue’.

Ünal said, ‘In fact, relations with any state that hosts minorities/societies of Turkish origin cannot/should not be reduced to the situation of relations between the Turkish minorities and/or communities there and the states in question’ and gave the following example: ‘In Bulgaria, our neighbouring country, a large Turkish community lives in very good conditions and is an element of relations between Türkiye and Bulgaria. Their loyalty to the Bulgarian state is unquestionable. Türkiye should not interfere in the internal affairs of Bulgaria through the Turkish community or in the internal issues/discussions of the Turkish community. It contributes to the credibility of the Turkish community in Bulgaria by not interfering, except for some mistakes made in this direction in recent years’.

Noting that similar principles apply to the Uyghur issue, which is often raised in our relations with China, Ünal said: ‘The Uyghur issue is not and should not be a foreign policy issue for Türkiye. Relations between Ankara and Beijing should be decided directly between the two states on the basis of sovereignty and national interests. It cannot be reasonable and logical for Ankara to include an issue like the Uyghurs in this policy-making process. The Uyghurs will become part of the bridge formed by the good relations between Türkiye and China, and this is the right thing to do’.

‘Otherwise, problems and misunderstandings are inevitable,’ warned Ünal, adding that President Erdoğan’s remarks were ‘very open to misunderstanding’ and that ‘it is really difficult to understand why this sentence was inserted in the part of the speech that talks about the close cooperation between the countries of the Organisation of Turkic States. Because here, by presenting itself as the representative of the Uyghur Turks and even the Turkic world, Türkiye appears as a state trying to take away their rights, which they cannot get from China and which no sovereign state can accept’.

On the other hand, Ünal stressed that none of the member states of the Organisation of Turkic States has kept this issue on the agenda in its relations with China, and said that Türkiye’s raising of an issue that these states have not in any way made a foreign policy issue within the framework of cooperation among the members of the Organisation of Turkic States could raise suspicions among other states that ‘Ankara is trying to create a Uyghur agenda by using them’. Prof. Dr Hasan Ünal stated that Türkiye would not benefit from such an outcome in terms of its national interests and said: ‘It goes without saying that the ‘genocide of the Uyghurs’ allegations in Türkiye and around the world are purely American propaganda’.

DIPLOMACY

US proposes controversial ‘colonial’-style agreement to Ukraine

Published

on

The US is pushing to control all future major infrastructure and mining investments in Ukraine, veto the role of Kyiv’s other allies, and undermine its goal of European Union membership.

According to a draft document obtained by Bloomberg, the Donald Trump administration is demanding the “right of first refusal” on investments in all infrastructure and natural resource projects under a revised partnership agreement with Ukraine.

If accepted, the partnership agreement would give the US enormous power to control investments in projects in Ukraine such as highways and railways, ports, mines, oil and natural gas, and the extraction of critical minerals.

The agreement would give the US first claim on profits transferred to a special reconstruction investment fund controlled by Washington.

The most crucial point of the document is that the US considers the “material and financial benefits” it has provided to Ukraine since the beginning of the war as a contribution to this fund.

In effect, this means the Trump administration would force Ukraine to pay the cost of all US military and economic support provided since the start of the war before Kyiv receives any income from the partnership fund.

According to the draft document, the US International Development Finance Corporation (DFC) will control the investment fund by nominating three of the five board members and holding a “golden share” giving it special voting rights to block certain decisions. Ukraine will appoint the other two members and will be prevented from interfering in the fund’s daily management.

The Kyiv government will be required to deposit 50% of the earnings from all new natural resource and infrastructure projects into the fund. The draft states that the US will be entitled to all profits until its investment is recouped, plus a 4% annual return.

Ukraine will be obliged to submit all projects to the fund for review “at the earliest possible time,” and the DFC will gain board membership or oversight rights in all funded programs.

Kyiv will also be prohibited from offering rejected projects to other parties on “materially better” terms for at least one year.

Furthermore, according to the draft, the US government will have the right to purchase Ukraine’s metals, minerals, and oil and gas on commercial terms before other parties, regardless of whether the fund finances the project.

The agreement, which has no time limit, also prohibits Kyiv from selling critical minerals to countries that are “strategic rivals” of the US.

The US presented a revised agreement to officials in Kyiv last weekend after Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s plans to sign an earlier deal fell through following a tense discussion with Trump in the Oval Office last month.

The White House said last week that the administration has moved beyond the previously negotiated agreement covering critical minerals in Ukraine.

Negotiations between the two sides are ongoing, and the final draft may include revisions to the terms. A person familiar with the matter told Bloomberg that Ukraine would respond to the US document with its own changes this week.

Speaking to reporters in Paris on Thursday, where he traveled to attend a summit with European leaders, Zelenskyy said the full agreement proposed by the US requires “detailed study” and that the terms are constantly changing during negotiations.

While it is too early to say an agreement has been reached, he said, “We support cooperation with the US, we do not want to send a single signal that could cause the US to stop helping Ukraine.”

In response to a request for comment, a US Treasury Department spokesperson stated that the US remains committed to the swift finalization of the agreement and securing a lasting peace for Ukraine.

National Security Council spokesperson James Hewitt said, “The minerals agreement offers Ukraine the opportunity to establish a lasting economic relationship with the US, which is the foundation for long-term security and peace. This agreement will strengthen relations between the two countries and benefit both sides.”

Ukraine gained EU candidate status in 2022 and is set to begin accession talks for full membership, which could take years to complete. This situation is likely to become more complicated if the US gains effective control over investment decisions covering large areas of the Ukrainian economy.

Ukraine had previously stated that an agreement with the US should not conflict with its association agreement with the EU. It had also previously rejected the US demand that Washington’s past support for Ukraine be included as a contribution to the joint fund.

Continue Reading

DIPLOMACY

EU to continue funding Türkiye despite İmamoğlu concerns, Politico reports

Published

on

Protests following the detention and arrest of Istanbul Metropolitan Mayor Ekrem İmamoğlu seem to have put Europe in a difficult position.

In an assessment published in Politico titled “EU faces a billion-euro dilemma in Türkiye crisis,” politicians and officials cited say that regardless of what happens on the streets of Istanbul, Ankara is too important an ally to alienate.

The report states, “The European Union will continue to transfer billions of euros to Türkiye despite President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s extensive crackdowns on political opponents.”

Recalling that European officials warned their southern neighbor to “uphold democratic values” following Ekrem İmamoğlu’s arrest, Politico writes, “But Türkiye’s strategic importance means the bloc will likely look the other way. Erdoğan knows this too.”

Dimitar Bechev, a lecturer at Oxford University, says, “Whatever the Turkish leader does, the EU will have to follow suit.”

Two European officials, speaking to Politico on condition of anonymity, said that Türkiye’s EU candidate status requires it to protect democratic values and that Brussels would respond to violations. Although one of them stated, “We are following the developing situation in Türkiye with great concern” and “Recent developments contradict the logic of EU membership,” they also acknowledge that given Türkiye’s importance in migration, trade, energy, and defense matters, any reaction from the EU is unlikely to disrupt relations between Brussels and Ankara.

Pointing out that although Türkiye’s EU membership negotiations have stalled over the past decade, the country still receives billions of euros in accession funds, Politico notes, “Ankara has also received about 9 billion euros in aid to host refugees from the Middle East and is in line to receive large sums to support European defense industries.”

Highlighting that Türkiye, which has become a major hub for oil and gas exports, has a trade flow with the EU exceeding 200 billion euros annually, the publication writes, “Türkiye has also played a key role in controlling access to the Black Sea and enforcing sanctions against Moscow since Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022. Recently, its potential significant contribution to a possible peacekeeping mission in Ukraine has been discussed.”

Bechev says, “The status quo before İmamoğlu’s arrest was comfortable for the EU because there was enough democracy,” and suggests that recent developments are not dire enough to change this.

According to the “Readiness 2030” plan presented by EU leaders last week, Türkiye, as an EU candidate country, has the potential to access 800 billion euros worth of joint procurements from funds designed to increase the bloc’s defense spending.

However, Greece and Cyprus, both long in conflict with Türkiye, are pushing for restrictions. Diplomats speaking to Politico said they intend to enact a clause requiring the defense move to occur “without prejudice to the specific character of the security and defense policy of certain Member States.”

Arguing that Athens and Nicosia, which were in the process of normalizing relations with Ankara before the recent crisis, now have to perform a “delicate balancing act,” Politico quotes a senior Greek official admitting that “even Athens cannot go too far.”

The Greek official involved says, “Of course, we will support a firm stance condemning the current developments in Türkiye, but without being provocative. The defense industry remains a major gap for Europe, which paves the way for this policy of trade-offs that we see happening.”

Even Cypriot MEP Michalis Hadjipantela, calling for “targeted sanctions” by stating “Effective pressure from the EU is essential,” also said that “sanctions should be targeted and linked to progress on the above issues to prevent further alienation of the country.”

Continue Reading

DIPLOMACY

Fidan and Rubio discuss Syria, Gaza, and defense in US meeting

Published

on

Minister of Foreign Affairs Hakan Fidan and his accompanying delegation began a two-day visit to the US.

During the visit, Fidan met with US Senator Marco Rubio. According to a statement attributed to US State Department Spokesperson Tammy Bruce, the two discussed cooperation on key issues in security and trade.

Rubio requested Turkey’s support for peace in Ukraine and the South Caucasus, while appreciating Ankara’s leadership in the “Global Coalition to Defeat ISIS.”

According to the spokesperson, the American senator reiterated the need for close cooperation to support a “stable, unified, and peaceful Syria,” stating they do not want Syria to be “either a base for international terrorism or a pathway for Iran’s destabilizing activities.”

Rubio also highlighted recent progress in bilateral trade and encouraged an even greater economic partnership moving forward.

Finally, the Senator expressed concerns regarding the recent arrest of Ekrem Imamoglu in Turkey and the subsequent protests.

Turkey has not made an official statement: AA reported based on ‘foreign ministry sources’

According to Turkish Foreign Ministry sources cited by AA, Fidan and Rubio emphasized the “importance of engaging with the Syrian government” during their meeting on Tuesday.

The sources stated, “Both sides emphasized the importance of engaging with the Syrian government and expressed their determination regarding the stabilization of Syria and the fight against terrorism.”

According to the sources speaking to AA, Fidan and Rubio discussed a range of regional and bilateral issues, including the need for a permanent ceasefire in Gaza, deemed essential for “regional peace.”

The sources also mentioned that the issues discussed in the phone call between President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and US President Donald Trump on March 16 were followed up on during the meeting.

The two sides also discussed preparations for upcoming presidential-level visits and expressed their determination to remove obstacles to defense cooperation.

The report added, “Both sides clearly expressed their political will to remove obstacles to cooperation in the defense industry. Technical meetings will be held to resolve existing issues.”

The two sides also discussed efforts to achieve a ceasefire between Russia and Ukraine, with Turkey expressing support for recent US efforts in this direction.

The talks also covered the ongoing peace process between Azerbaijan and Armenia and the importance of Bosnia and Herzegovina’s stability for the entire Balkan region.

Is Hamas on the table?

Meanwhile, Trump, during a White House meeting with a group of US Ambassadors confirmed by the Senate, referred to Turkey and Erdogan as a “good country, a good leader.”

The new US Ambassador to Ankara, Thomas Barack, was also present at the meeting. Barack, known as a close friend of Trump and a real estate magnate, thanked the President for appointing him to Turkey, “one of the ancient civilizations.”

In an article penned by Murat Yetkin in Yetkin Report, it is alleged that Trump might engage in bargaining over Hamas and Gaza in exchange for steps such as lifting CAATSA sanctions against Turkey.

Yetkin relays that CHP leader Ozgur Ozel, in a statement on March 18, referred to the Trump-Erdogan phone call, criticizing the lack of mention of Gaza and Israel, and accused Erdogan of “selling out the Palestinian cause for Trump.”

Recalling that Trump’s special representative Steve Witkoff told Tucker Carlson in an interview that they expect “good news” from Turkey, Yetkin underscores that Witkoff also stated elsewhere in the interview, “A terrorist organization cannot run Gaza; this is unacceptable for Israel. But their disarmament is possible. Then they can stay for a while longer and even get involved in politics.”

Yetkin asks, “Is Trump supporting Erdogan because of a plan to disarm the PKK and Hamas together?” while also noting that the Secretary of the PLO Executive Committee, Hussein al-Sheikh, met with Foreign Minister Fidan in Ankara on March 19, before Fidan flew to the US.

Continue Reading

MOST READ

Turkey