Connect with us

MIDDLE EAST

The formula of Türkiye-Egypt relation: “The past should remain in the past”

Published

on

The foreign policy priorities of Turkey, after the presidential elections, can be divided into two categories: to find a position in new Asian initiatives while lowering tensions with the West. The primary factors promoting Turkey’s normalization with its neighbors and Middle Eastern nations are the economic challenges that require this foreign policy direction.

In the normalization train of the Arab states, who assessed the damage after the Arab Spring, Turkey believes there is a wagon set out for it. Following the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Saudi Arabia, and Egypt, a final settlement in Syria will take up a sizable portion of Ankara’s post-election foreign policy agenda.

On the other side, relations with Egypt have a greater impact, the contacts between Ankara and Cairo are extensive, encompassing Turkey’s contacts with the West in the context of the Eastern Mediterranean and Libya. In this context, we interviewed Dalia Ziada, Director of the Center for Middle East and Eastern Mediterranean Studies  regarding how Egyptians considered about the Turkish election process.

  • Egyptian President congratulated President Erdogan. What can that say about a new era which has begun between the two countries?

The Egyptian and Turkish presidents’ phone call in the wake of the elections is an important indication of the sincere intentions of the top policymakers in both countries to start a new page in their relationship. Honestly speaking, there are some giant differences between the perception of each of the two presidents on crucial regional and domestic policies. That includes for example the situation in Libya, the complex maritime conflicts in the Eastern Mediterranean, and the Islamists’ right for political participation. However, we are seeing an unprecedented determination by both sides to get over these differences and focus on the common ground of economic and geopolitical cooperation.

Ironically, many observers had expressed their pessimism about the potential of the rapprochement process between Turkey and Egypt to succeed as long as the two heads of state, El-Sisi and Erdogan, remained in power. Yet, in December 2022, the two heads of state met in Doha, warmly saluted each other, and then spent 45 minutes talking about the next steps they should take to overcome the obstacles that kept their countries separated for too long. The friendly encounter between the Turkish and the Egyptian presidents cannot be seen as a standard act of courtesy that happened out of sheer coincidence. It was the climax of a year of backstage arrangements by dedicated diplomatic missions and concerned civil society organizations in both countries.

Since then, the Turkish and Egyptian foreign ministers have been exchanging visits and making public promises about implementing the reconciliation process as soon as the general elections in Turkey are completed. As the election in Turkey has been completed successfully, this week, the two countries need to continue working on completing the reconciliation process for their mutual benefit and the entire region’s benefit.

Mending broken ties between Turkey and Egypt is not only beneficial for the political well-being of the two states. It is equally important for the personal image enhancement of each of the two presidents before their peoples and also before observers from the international community. Egypt is having a presidential election in less than a year. Improving his relationship with President Erdogan will dramatically increase President El-Sisi’s support among the huge Islamist-biased voter base.

  • How the Turkish elections resonated in Egypt. What are the prominent evaluations in the Egyptian press?

In general, the Egyptian people are so impressed and inspired by the democratic process in Turkey and the political maturity of the Turkish people who massively participated in the voting at the parliamentary elections and the two rounds of the presidential elections. We wish – we dream – to see a similar democratic process in the coming presidential election which is expected to happen in mid-2024. In other words, the successful democratic practice in Turkey has set the bar high for election processes in Middle East countries, in general, in countries where people are yearning for democratization, such as Egypt and most North Africa countries, in particular.

On another level, the street reaction to President Erdogan’s victory varies greatly from one citizen group to the other. The majority of the Egyptian grassroots citizens, who are mainly characterized by their religious piety, are so excited. They are celebrating President Erdogan’s victory, as they perceive it as a victory of a Muslim idol over the opposition party leaders who exhibited hatred towards Muslims and Arabs.

Meanwhile, the Egyptian intellectual elite, who are mostly secular, are expectedly not so happy with President Erdogan’s victory. Some of them warned that he will encourage the political Islamist groups – such as the Muslim Brotherhood – to seek political competition in Egypt once again and renew the state of political instability in the country. But, in my opinion, that is a little too exaggerated, especially in light of improved ties between the Egyptian and Turkish presidents in the past few months.

On the political stage, most members of the government, political parties, and media agree that it is time for Egypt to reconcile with Turkey and with its elected president. “The past should remain in the past;” they say. That is a healthy attitude, I think, because it will pave the way for a lot of mutual benefits for Egypt and Turkey in the future, and will also be beneficial to the regions of the Middle East and the Eastern Mediterranean.

  • How do you consider the normalization process between the two countries to proceed after the election? Which steps could be taken initially?

In their first phone call after the successful completion of the Turkish presidential elections, presidents Erdogan and El-Sisi agreed to immediately proceed with their reconciliation process by elevating their diplomatic ties to the ambassadorial level. That is a very significant first step for two reasons:

First, it fixes the rift that had been broken between the two states in 2013 and had kept the two countries estranged for ten years. The ambassadors were the first scapegoats to be slaughtered during the dramatic breakup between Egypt and Turkey, then. Each of the two countries immediately declared their mutual ambassadors as persona non grata. Therefore, the return of the ambassadors today is like an official declaration of the end of the decade-long conflict and the beginning of the negotiations phase.

Second, upgrading the diplomatic missions to ambassadorial levels is so crucial to accelerate and facilitate the discussions on critical bilateral and regional issues that represent a conflict of interest between the two states. Right now, the mutual diplomatic missions in both countries are limited in size and scope to the level of chargés d’affaires. Therefore, most negotiations between the two countries had to happen through security channels and intelligence bureaus more often than they happened between diplomatic missions. This caused the reconciliation process to go very slowly in 2021.

The rapprochement process only started to leap when the Turkish ambassador, Salih Mutlu Şen, got hired as charges d’affaires in Cairo, in the second half of 2022. He exerted a tremendous effort to wake the embassy from the dead by directly engaging with ordinary citizens in the Egyptian streets and reaching out to media personnel, civil society organizations, and political groups. That paved the way for a successful meeting between the two presidents, El-Sisi and Erdogan, in November 2022 in Doha. After the presidential meeting, the reconciliation process took a whole new turn.

Therefore, I believe that raising the diplomatic representation to the ambassadorial level will allow diplomatic channels to take the lead in the negotiation process, thus accelerating the rapprochement process and improving the quality of the outcomes of future negotiations.

However, that is not enough. There must be direct and personal talks between presidents Erdogan and El-Sisi, at the nearest time possible. It is not a secret that the two leaders adopt divergent – if not contradicting – political ideologies. For example, El-Sisi’s political image is mostly built upon his role in removing the Muslim Brotherhood from power in 2013. In contrast, Erdogan’s legacy is entirely based on his image as a successful Muslim leader, coming from a political Islamist party, in a secular democratic system of governance. How the two presidents are going to compromise their ideological differences is so important for the success of the reconciliation process between Egypt and Turkey and for ensuring its sustainability in the long term. Such a compromise can only happen through direct face-to-face and heart-to-heart conversations between the two presidents over the coming weeks or months.

In parallel to that, the senior policymakers and government officials from Egypt and Turkey should engage in lengthy discussions about enhancing their areas of cooperation and limiting their areas of conflict. For example, Egypt and Turkey already have a successful record of economic cooperation that can be further improved. In the meantime, there are a lot of areas of potential cooperation between our two militaries, building upon the history of cooperation in the defense industry sector between the two countries. They will also need to discuss their conflicting foreign policies in the Levant region, and the Eastern Mediterranean region, keeping into consideration the concerns and the interests of other key players in these regions, such as Libya, Syria, Greece, and Israel.

MIDDLE EAST

Netanyahu vetoes Gallant’s visit to Washington, refuses to share retaliation plans with US

Published

on

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has vetoed Defence Minister Yoav Gallant’s planned visit to the United States, which was announced earlier today. Netanyahu reportedly did not want to share details of Israel’s planned retaliatory attack on Iran with the US, fearing that advance disclosure might prompt objections from Washington. Israel has increasingly adopted this approach, having found that last-minute briefings minimize potential diplomatic complications. Israeli officials are confident that the US will defend Israel regardless of its actions.

Gallant was scheduled to meet with US Defence Secretary Lloyd Austin today during a one-day visit to discuss the response to a recent Iranian missile attack. However, Gallant announced late last night that he was postponing the trip after meeting with Netanyahu.

Israeli media reports suggest that during their meeting, Netanyahu expressed his desire to first speak with US President Joe Biden and opposed Gallant’s visit to Washington before such a conversation. Netanyahu also asked Gallant to delay his trip until after Israel’s security cabinet had approved Tel Aviv’s response to Iran.

WSJ: Israel withholds retaliation details from the US

According to a report by the Wall Street Journal (WSJ), US officials have stated that Israel has so far refused to share specifics of its planned retaliation against Tehran with the Biden administration.

The report notes growing frustration in Washington, as US officials have repeatedly been caught off guard by Israeli military actions in Gaza and Lebanon. It was hoped that Gallant’s planned meeting with Austin would provide more insight into Israel’s strategy concerning Iran.

US officials have indicated that they still do not know the timing of the planned strike or the specific targets Israel may pursue.

The Nasrallah assassination: Israel acts without US notice

The WSJ report also cited the recent assassination of Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah as an example of Israel acting without notifying the US. According to US officials, when Gallant informed Austin of the strike during a phone call, Austin reportedly responded, “Excuse me, what did you say?” In a second call later that same day, Austin asked Gallant whether Israel was prepared to “go it alone” in its defense. Defense officials said Austin was frustrated because the US had not had enough time to reposition its forces to either assist Israel or protect US troops in the region.

The report suggests that some in Washington hope Israel will provide advance notice of any significant actions against Iran, although it is unclear whether Israel has given any assurances to that effect. Officials pointed only to ongoing meetings between senior Israeli and US officials.

Netanyahu and Biden to hold phone call

Following Gallant’s postponed visit, reports indicate that Netanyahu and Biden are scheduled to speak by phone today.

According to three US officials who spoke to Axios, Israeli plans for retaliatory strikes on Iran will be discussed during the call. This will be the first conversation between Biden and Netanyahu in two months, following a period of heightened tension between the two leaders.

Citing two Israeli officials, Axios reported that Netanyahu held a meeting last night with senior ministers and leaders of Israel’s military and intelligence services to finalize decisions on the scope and timing of retaliatory actions against Iran. The response is expected to include a combination of airstrikes targeting military sites in Iran, and possibly assassination operations similar to the recent killing of Hamas leader Ismail Heniyye in Tehran. Israel is also considering strikes on Iranian oil infrastructure, though Biden has reportedly signaled his opposition to such actions.

A Netanyahu aide told Axios that the prime minister would inform Biden once a final decision had been made.

US wants to shape Israel’s response

“We want to use this [Biden-Netanyahu] meeting to shape the limits of Israel’s retaliation,” a US official told Axios. The official added that Washington aims to ensure Israel’s response is not disproportionate.

Israel’s decision to withhold advance information from the US is a calculated one. Netanyahu appears to believe that last-minute briefings will help avoid American objections. Confident that the US will defend Israel regardless of its actions, Israel feels less compelled to share detailed plans ahead of time.

Continue Reading

MIDDLE EAST

No position is vacant; Hezbollah men of battlefield, ready: Deputy SG

Published

on

Hezbollah deputy secretary-general Naim Qassem said: “We see the US as an important partner in all the crimes committed in Gaza. Without the support of the US, the Zionist regime’s attacks would have ended within a month”.

Naim Qassem said in a statement on Lebanese television that the ground attacks in southern Lebanon began 7 days ago, but the Israeli army has not made any progress yet.

Describing the Aqsa Flood operation launched by Hamas on 7 October last year as the beginning of change in the Middle East, Qassem said that Israel’s aim is to destroy the axis of resistance and the Palestinian people.

Declaring that Hezbollah’s capabilities were strong despite Israel’s painful actions in recent weeks, Qassem said his fighters had repelled Israel’s ground attacks.

This is the battle of who will cry first. We will not cry. Hezbollah’s command and control is organised with precision. All the positions we lost in the attacks have been filled. There is constant coordination between the various units and forces on the ground.

Netanyahu will not achieve his goals in this war. We will attack with missiles and drones at the appropriate time and place according to our own military plans.

Qassem stated that they will elect a new secretary general to replace Hassan Nasrullah, saying that they will announce this when the process is complete. Qassem explained that the conditions for electing a new secretary general are difficult because of the war, adding: ‘The only solution for us is to resist and insist.

Qassem also said that Iran was determined to stand by the resistance ‘in the way it sees fit’.

Noting that Hezbollah and the Amal movement were compatible, Qassem said they supported the political process led by Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri to reach a ceasefire.

For the first time, Qassem’s statement did not mention a ceasefire in Gaza as a precondition for a truce, but it was not clear whether this signalled a change of position.

Hezbollah continues attacks in northern Israel

On the other hand, Hezbollah said in a statement via Telegram that a rocket attack had been organised in the area where Israeli soldiers were gathering near the Al-Merc area near the Lebanese border. The statement noted that rockets were also fired at the Israeli army’s artillery position in the town of Dishun in northern Israel, and that the Israeli artillery position in the town of Delton was also targeted.

The statement said the strikes were carried out ‘in support of the determined Palestinian people of Gaza, their brave and honourable resistance, in defence of Lebanon and its people, and in response to Israel’s barbaric occupation’.

The Israel Defence Forces (IDF) also announced that a total of 100 rockets were fired from Lebanon into the Haifa area today. According to the IDF, some of the rockets were intercepted by air defence systems.

Continue Reading

MIDDLE EAST

Israel cannot advance on the field

Published

on

Hezbollah, which said 17 Israeli soldiers had been killed in clashes in southern Lebanon, announced this morning that it had targeted the Krayot region near Haifa in northern Israel with a large number of rockets.

Following Israel’s announcement that it would invade southern Lebanon, clashes have erupted from time to time along the border. The Israeli army has so far failed to make any significant progress on the Lebanese border.

Hezbollah announced that 17 Israeli soldiers had been killed in the clashes in southern Lebanon. The Israeli army, on the other hand, said that 9 soldiers had been killed in clashes in Lebanon since 30 September, when the ground offensive began.

On the other hand, the Hezbollah statement said that the Krayot region north of the city of Haifa had been hit by a large number of rockets. The Israeli press also reported that sirens were sounding in border towns in northern Israel.

In a statement, the Israeli army said it had observed 20 rockets fired from Lebanon, most of which were intercepted and the rest fell in open country.

The coastal city of Haifa, about 40 kilometres from the Lebanese border, is one of Israel’s most important industrial and commercial centres.

Israel is trying to invade Lebanon by land, while at the same time carrying out intensive air strikes on targets it claims are Hezbollah family members near the capital, Beirut. It is also hitting targets in Syria to cut Hezbollah’s supply line. In this context, it was reported that Israel carried out an air strike on the al-Masna crossing on the Lebanese-Syrian border. It was reported that the road between the Lebanese capital Beirut and the Syrian capital Damascus was also disrupted by the attack, although there was no information on whether anyone was killed or injured.

Continue Reading

MOST READ

Turkey