Recent Items

Türkiye and Other ‘Mediators’ Play Good Cop Against Iran

Posted on by

Türkiye, even more so than every country on earth, has plenty of reasons to want to see the war against Iran end. It risks causing in Türkiye economic devastation, domestic unrest, a major refugee crisis, and could empower Kurdish groups along its borders.  Yet Türkiye’s role along with the other three nations (Egypt, Pakistan, and Saudi Arabia) holding “peace talks” highlights Türkiye’s good-cop role in the conflict.

Yes, Ankara has been a consistent voice for peace since the US-Israel launched its war in the middle of negotiations with Iran, but what type of peace is it seeking? It is one that largely aligns with US-Israel goals of an Iran that is weak and unable to exert influence over the region.

Türkiye’s role often seems to cause confusion, with some online commentators even suggesting it is one the verge of entering the war on the side of Iran. While Türkiye’s position is often described as a balancing act, there is some truth to that—at least on the surface.

On the one hand Türkiye hosts US troops, is seeing improving economic ties with ‘the West’, aids Israel, has its own ambitions to expand its influence in the Levant, Caucasus, and into Central Asia.

On the other, recipient of threatening statements from the ‘Greater Israel’ Zionists. Turkish leaders, too, make strongly worded statements against Israel yet have continued to literally fuel Israel’s violence for the past two genocidal years. [1]

A closer look at Turkish statements and actions reveal the choice being presented is a gentler version of the US-Israel ultimatum: protracted regional devastation or Iran submission.

The Threat/Reality of Long Regional War

Here is a recent report on Israel’s alleged game plan:

Trying to detect any sort of plan in the US/Israel actions can be a fool’s errand, but what’s obvious is that they’re checking off boxes on this list (although I fail to see how the leveling of Israel helps create a ‘Greater’ one). Tel Aviv and Washington are successfully stirring up a widening conflagration between countries, religious sects, ethnic groups, and other parties. Consider a few recent headlines:

Israel Opens New Incursion Route from Syria into Lebanon via Mount Hermon Asharq Al-Awsat

Syria says ‘large-scale’ drone attack targets army bases near Iraqi border Türkiye Today

Baghdad’s new ‘self-defense’ mandate may formalize regionalization of Iran War Amwaj

I’m unclear on how such a plan benefits Israel if the country is turned into a pile of rubble itself, but one could squint and see a scenario in which the US can declare mission accomplished after its usual state destruction and leave the region a smoldering heap. Of course, for that to be a success for Washington it would also require the opening of Hormuz and Bab el Mandeb Straits.

Türkiye Dragged In?

Türkiye’s defence ministry announced on Monday that another ballistic munition launched from Iran and entering Turkish airspace was neutralised by NATO air and missile defence assets deployed in the Eastern Mediterranean. This was allegedly the fourth interception of Iranian missiles since the start of the US-Israeli war on Iran on February 28.

I say allegedly because Iran has denied it is sending missiles into Türkiye. Meanwhile, the Turks continue to threaten to get involved in the war—against US-Israel-backed Kurdish groups, which so far have refused to be cannon fodder in Iran but are increasingly engaged in fighting in Iraq.

Here are two Turkish involvement scenarios both with the same outcome:

  1. Türkiye really is pissed and goes after the Kurds against the wishes of the US. This potentially—hopefully from the POV of US-Zionists—helps fuel sectarian conflict in Iran between Azeri-Turks and Kurds and possibly others.
  2. Türkiye—or segments of the Turkish Blob—are on board and will use it as an opportunity to replay Syria playbook in Iran, i.e., a buffer zone in Iranian territory, attacking Kurds, and not-so-discreetly supporting takfiris that contribute to sectarian conflict in Iran.

Despite Turkish officials playing the adult-in-the-room role, I’d be shocked if Iran isn’t extremely suspicious of Turkish intent—especially after Syria. Professor Marandi certainly is:

It’s easy to see why.

Turkish Foreign Minister Hkan Fidan delivered a speech in English at the Stratcom Summit in Istanbul over the weekend in which he predictably lambasted Israel but omitted any criticism of the US.

Meanwhile, Türkiye is officially warning/threatening of accelerating the regional conflagration:

But along with Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and Egypt, Ankara is offering an alternative path. Let’s call it the easy way.

Degrading Iran Softly

As we noted at the start of the US-Israel war of aggression, Türkiye’s role as peacemaker is a mirage. Here is the view of conflict reolution from Ankara:

“A new leadership structure may reshape Iran’s decision-making and create an opportunity to stop the war,” [Fidan] told a live broadcast on TRT Haber news channel. “The new leadership in Iran may show greater flexibility at this stage…This could be a window of opportunity, if used wisely.”

The side being attacked and having school children blown up must show greater flexibility. That is peace on Washington and Tel Aviv’s terms.

And Türkiye, now joined by Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and Egypt, continues to push this line. Their foreign ministers met in Riyadh on March 19 and while the media coverage made it seem as though this was some sort of peace gathering the joint statement issued after the meeting strongly criticised Tehran for its attacks on Gulf countries, while, for example, making only brief reference to Israel’s brutality in Lebanon.

Now we have the most recent gathering in Islamabad with more of the same.

Frame the Globe News has an interesting piece that traces what’s going on there is the culmination of a policy first hatched between Dick Cheney and Prince Bandar bin Sultan, Saudi Arabia’s national security adviser, back in 2006. Some highlights:

The Iraq invasion, Cheney said, was supposed to weaken Iran. It had done the opposite. The Shia crescent that American strategists had dismissed as a paranoid Saudi talking point was now documented geography: Tehran to Baghdad to Damascus to Beirut, a continuous arc of Iranian-aligned states and militias stretching from the Persian plateau to the Mediterranean coast. …Leave it to me, Bandar said. You don’t have to intervene.

That offer, and what it set in motion across the following eighteen years, is the architecture inside which the Iran war of 2026 is being fought. The foreign ministers of Egypt, Türkiye, Pakistan, and Saudi Arabia convening in Islamabad this weekend are not improvising a ceasefire. They are managing the diplomatic conclusion of a project whose military phase is nearly complete…

What are Türkiye, Egypt, Pakistan, and the Saudis offering?

What the Gulf monarchies have understood, and what the Islamabad meeting makes operational, is that a Sunni regional order wealthy enough, armed enough, and populous enough to manage its own security can dictate terms with Washington rather than receive them. The US-Saudi relationship does not end. It is renegotiated from a position of bloc strength, which is what the 1945 bargain never allowed.

The Islamabad meeting is not a ceasefire negotiation in the conventional sense. It is a surrender framework with a restructured orbit offer inside it.

The path is reintegration: not into the American imperial order as a client, but into a Sunni-led, regionally managed order that itself holds considerable leverage with Washington.

The motivation for the aggressors is clear. Here’s the neocon Foundation for the Defense of Democracies salivating at Iranian riches, of which all the peaceseekers no doubt want a slice:

A free Iran represents the single largest untapped pro-American economic opportunity of the 21st century. Conservative modeling shows over $1 trillion in US export revenues, millions of American jobs, decisive energy-price stabilization, and the permanent collapse of the world’s most dangerous state sponsor of terrorism, without US occupation or nation-building.

Under a committed, democratic Iranian government, anchored by investment protections and US-approved financing, the country would embark on a “catch-up” phase of massive modernization. Half of that $1 trillion in US sales could materialize in the first five alone, concentrated in high-value sectors that create millions of American jobs.

Iran’s prolonged underinvestment means explosive growth post-opening, outpacing even the post-Soviet Eastern Europe boom. Unlike risky ventures elsewhere, this would be backed by vast natural resources and a government that prioritizes U.S. ties and includes safeguards against corruption.

Now someone needs to explain why Iran would ever go for such a bargain. I’m operating under the assumption that a post-USSR looting and life expectancy drop isn’t a strong selling point for the Iranian people, but perhaps it’s enticing for some:

Notes

[1] Türkiye is not the next Iran—yet. Many point to the long-running war of words between Netanyahu and Erdogan, and former Israeli prime minister Naftali Bennett’s recent comments as he looks to outflank Netanyahu on his right.

But until there are any actions and not mere words it’s hard to take this seriously as Türkiye literally fuels Israel genocide and agression and both work in different ways toward a similar outcome in Iran. Deniz Karakullukcu, a foreign policy and security advisor at the Grand National Assembly of Türkiye, makes the case that Türkiye as the next Iran is nonsense:

Iran is an isolated, sanctions-hit state that has built much of its regional reach through armed networks. Its security system has long relied on proxy warfare, missile pressure, and a nuclear file that sits at the center of global nonproliferation politics. Türkiye is a very different case. It is a NATO member and a G20 country with deep commercial links to Europe and broad ties to Western institutions.

Ankara uses hard power in its neighborhood, but it does so as a state actor, not as the patron of a transnational militia ecosystem aimed at Israel. Its leverage is often economic, diplomatic, and geographic as much as military. Lumping these two countries into one box blurs what matters in each case and invites blunt policy tools.

Part of the Turkey-KSA-Egypt-Pakistan alliance also seems designed to check Israeli aggression.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Subscribe to Post Comments
20 comments

  1. disillusionized

    In regards to the note – i agree, but;
    That presuposes that Israel is rational, when the most apt way of considering Israel is as a paranoid sociopath.
    Thats why i think Turkiye is next – because they are a bunch of paranoid sociopaths.

  2. The Heretic

    When words and actions do not align, one should only listen to the actions; the words are merely noise for distraction or confusion.

  3. lyman alpha blob

    Great post Conor. Not much too add since you cover all the angles from all the actors – just want you to know your posts are much appreciated.

  4. Quintian and Lucius

    “(although I fail to see how the leveling of Israel helps create a ‘Greater’ one).”

    It doesn’t seem to matter if Israel is all rubble so long as the debris is spread out, along with IDF fire teams, across all the lands of erstwhile Judea; in an example of historical lyricism and with apologies to Calgacus, “They make a solitude and call it Zion.”

  5. The Rev Kev

    Even at the start of this war Turkiye was talking about grabbing a chunk of Iran for a so-called “security zone” so Iran knew whose side they were on. Erdogan’s promises are even less trustworthy than Trump’s promises. Looking at a map, I would not be surprised if Erdogan’s idea was to take that chunk of Iran and then push east until the Turks would have a solid presence on the Caspian sea for their own purposes in expanding east.

    1. vao

      Would it be correct to say that Turkey does have some general objectives and associated plans, but that instead of consequently and forcefully implementing them like Israel is doing, it acts opportunistically only when undisputably favourable conditions emerge and risks can be kept to an absolute minimum — which is why its diplomatic and military moves in the past 20 years or so often seem a bit disjointed?

      1. The Rev Kev

        I would guess that it is all about Erdogan who is very opportunist and loves intrigue for its own sake, even when in the end it makes Turkiye’s position worse. He is to be trusted as far as the door.

  6. ChrisRUEcon

    What a bunch of losers, the entire lot of them!

    They should all be put out by popular revolt. All of this sudden diplomatic posturing is little more than a repeat of Merkel’s Minsk head-fake. Get Iran to stop long enough to re-arm the g3n0ciD4L entity. Thankfully, Iran has learned from the previous war and Russia’s naïveté with respect to Ukraine. Iran is playing this correctly: accept our demands, or we’ll keep going. The calculus is clear based on the wealth of information provided by this wonderful family blog – energy, agriculture, food and fuel security – it’s all gonna go to pish sooner than later, and the political ramifications look to be severe for everyone siding with the aggressors.

    1. The Rev Kev

      Look at the bright side and think of the great books and the like that will come out about this war. We had Barbara Tuchmann’s “The Guns of August” about WW1, we had the docudrama “The Missiles of October” about the 1963 Cuban Crisis and pretty soon we will have “The Winchester of April” about this war. Trump talking about ending the war in two or three weeks is about the time that nearly all the interceptor missiles are out.

  7. JMH

    The Sunni vipers seeing an opportunity to fang the Shia viper they conjure are about to lie down with one another. Splendid. Who benefits from the chaos? The US neocons in their fevered dreams. Donnie et al because they can see a “win” and a way out. Israel’s eschatologically bemused, the Greater Israel crowd, and of course the Zionists, especially those comfortably far away. Who loses? Looks to me like just about everyone in the short and medium term. The oil and gas infrastructure is fragile and volatile. Iran has many missiles and even more drones. The world economy cannot bear very much reality. It is asking for an overdose.

  8. AG

    Mouin Rabbani called Israeli comments re: taking on Turkey as delusional and totally out-of-touch and wouldn´t really take them seriously. Especially in light of their Merkavas being lit up in huge numbers just the last couple of weeks by a “rebel force”. He highlighted the Turkish army´s capabilities even compared to Iran, e.g. in terms of airpower. (I think Martyanov would immediately fall off the chair laughing.)

    Interview by Doug Henwood see first half
    https://www.nachdenkseiten.de/?p=148568

  9. ISL

    Not exactly schadenfreude, but with refineries at Haifa off line for months to years – thanks Iran! – there is no need (and probably no storage) for the Turkish / Azeri blood – dripped oil.

  10. Balan Aroxdale

    Türkiye—or segments of the Turkish Blob—are on board and will use it as an opportunity to replay Syria playbook in Iran, i.e., a buffer zone in Iranian territory, attacking Kurds, and not-so-discreetly supporting takfiris that contribute to sectarian conflict in Iran.

    I have long been skeptical that the Turkish political class is really more independent than the Gulf states or European vassals when it comes to US demands and Israel. While Turkiye has the 2nd largest military in Nato, it’s political system is weak to western influence and persuasion as evidenced by Syria. Being drawn into the Iran war in the same way will be the obvious ruin of Turkiye and the whole region, and thus Israel will do its utmost to achieve it. Are the Turkish political class and deep state really going to resist the cheap temptations of anti-Kurdish campaigns or hollow promises of a neo-Ottoman dominion? The term “deep state” originally comes from Turkish politics, and deep states today are typically long groomed creatures of the Epstein class.

    I’m unclear on how such a plan benefits Israel if the country is turned into a pile of rubble itself, but one could squint and see a scenario in which the US can declare mission accomplished after its usual state destruction and leave the region a smoldering heap. Of course, for that to be a success for Washington it would also require the opening of Hormuz and Bab el Mandeb Straits.

    We’re talking about plans to smash the middle east and the states therein. But we’re leaving out the obvious corollary that those who view such matters are good outcomes are quite likely to apply the very same logic to Western states if not the rest of the world. Why assume the US and Israel prefer chaos in the Middle East, but order at home? Of course a rational, reasonable, pragmatic political class would not smash up its own state or those of key allies, but the western political class is a shower of narcissistic liars, blooming fascists, and religious loons. As western economies and political systems tumble into chaos, don’t assume our leadership/Epstein class of geopolitical arsonists is going to care about putting out fires at home as much as starting them for fun and profit.

    1. jsn

      This is why Yves keeps coming back to Mr. Market’s delusions.

      As the banquet of consequences is set, the bubble dwellers continue to bubble around in their bubbleshious embubblement.

      When the bubble pops, the banquet is “The Red Wedding”.

    2. Taner Edis

      You’re right: almost all the “political class” in Turkey, Islamist and non-Islamist alike, is all in with NATO and subservience to the US. Not only that, in the past few years their various factions have ramped up their competition for US favor.

  11. Mikel

    Here’s some added juice. Posted today on House of Saud site:

    https://houseofsaud.com/iran-war-readiness-sinks-saudi-islamabad-framework/
    “Iran’s foreign minister went on Al Jazeera on April 1 and told the world his country is ready to fight for six months, that no negotiations are taking place with anyone, and that the Strait of Hormuz will stay closed to hostile nations for as long as Tehran sees fit. Five days before Trump’s April 6 deadline to “completely obliterate” Iran’s energy infrastructure, Abbas Araghchi dismantled the diplomatic architecture that Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Turkey, and Egypt spent the past week constructing in Islamabad — and he did it in a single television interview.”

    That’s just the opening. The “Counter-Demands That Aren’t Counter-Demands” section is also another point of view from the House of Saud.

Comments are closed.