Evrensel (Turkey): Russian-Ukrainian negotiations and Erdogan's role
The Erdogan administration has seized on a "mediating" role in the Ukrainian crisis. The propaganda carried out on the basis of these negotiations that "Erdogan is a world leader" shows that the Turkish government needs a mediation role more in order to restore its prestige in domestic politics, writes Evrensel.
The statements made after the talks between Russia and Ukraine in Istanbul explain, among other things, why the Erdogan administration seized on the "mediation" role. The propaganda carried out on the basis of these negotiations that "Erdogan is a world leader" and now "even if 60, not six, parties unite, it is impossible to overthrow him" shows that the Erdogan administration needs a mediation role more in order to stop the loss of power and prestige in domestic politics. Therefore, as we have seen before in Syria, Libya and Nagorno-Karabakh, in the Ukrainian conflict, they also want to turn foreign policy into a tool for changing the balances in domestic policy in their favor.
As you know, in the first week of the Russian operation, negotiations between Russia and Ukraine began in Belarus. In fact, the Zelensky administration in Ukraine did not want these negotiations to take place in Belarus, since Minsk directly sided with Russia in this conflict. However, in the first days of the fighting, there was fear /apprehension that Russia's operation could yield results in a short time, and therefore Zelensky had to agree to hold negotiations in Belarus.
The financial and weapons support provided to Ukraine by the Western imperialists led by the United States destroyed the calculations for the imminent completion of the Russian operation and gave Zelensky the opportunity to conduct a new auction. Zelensky asked for negotiations to continue in Turkey, and it was not difficult for Erdogan, who had already agreed to take on this role for a long time, to convince Putin. Because the Putin administration also found it expedient from the point of view of its interests that the Erdogan administration, which opposed anti-Russian sanctions and did not terminate its relations with Russia, despite membership in NATO and support for Ukraine with drone strikes, continued to take this position. Of course, the relations that Putin built with the Erdogan administration after 2016 played an important role in the fact that Putin accepted Turkey's mediation. However, one should also not exclude the influence of Turkey's geopolitical significance, whether Erdogan is at its head or not, on the one hand, from the point of view of the Montreux Straits Convention, on the other — in terms of the struggle for redistribution in such a region as the Black Sea, the Caucasus and the Eastern Mediterranean.
In connection with the mediation role, the following should also be noted here: the countries mentioned as candidates for this role, primarily China, did not show such zeal in this matter as the Erdogan administration, because they did not want to take on the risks that this role would create. For example, the other day Erdogan's statement about reaching consensus on four of the six points at the Istanbul talks was refuted by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine. Later, the statement of the official representative of the President of Turkey Ibrahim Kalın about the annexation of Crimea was answered this time by the official representative of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Russia Zakharova. "In our opinion, this statement stands out from the declared mediation. This is not an issue that Turkish representatives should comment on," the Foreign Ministry spokeswoman said. In other words, the role taken carries the risk of making Turkey part of the tension, and in addition, the role of "guarantor", in which Ukraine wants to see Turkey, will make this risk sustainable.
So what goals does Erdogan want to achieve through this role?
Firstly, the continuation of the conflict and the escalation of tension limits Erdogan's scope for action. It becomes more difficult for him to continue, as before, to maintain relations, on the one hand, with the United States — NATO, on the other — with Russia. Therefore, Erdogan wants an end to the armed confrontation in order to get out of this predicament in foreign policy.
Secondly, the role that the Erdogan administration is trying to play paves the way for the restoration, at least partially, of its relations with the EU imperialists who want to end this conflict because of their interests. The fact that after Erdogan's talks with Macron and Draghi at the NATO summit in Brussels last week, the question arose about the production of French-Italian SAMP/T air defense systems in Turkey indicates progress in this direction. However, the fact that US President Biden did not meet at the NATO summit with Erdogan, who assumed an important role in ending the Ukrainian conflict, shows that the US expectation is not in this mediation, but in Turkey taking an open position on the side of the US—NATO, primarily on the S-400 issue. and until this expectation is fulfilled, the United States will not want to normalize relations.
Along with all this, the main reason why Erdogan assumes the role of mediator, taking serious risks, is the expectation that the steps taken in foreign policy will make up for the loss of power and prestige in domestic politics. This fact is indicated, among other things, by reports that after these negotiations, the number of votes in favor of Erdogan and the Justice and Development Party of Turkey, according to polls, increased by 3%, as well as odes about "Erdogan's world leadership", which the mouthpieces of the authorities sing in the media.
It should be noted that Erdogan's hopes for foreign policy actually stem from hopelessness in domestic politics. Because with the incessant increases in prices and tariffs, the wages of the population are melting, and financial ruin is deepening, while the ruling administration has nothing to offer the people in the face of increasing hunger, poverty and unemployment. On the other hand, the bill recently submitted to the Turkish parliament on "punishment in the form of imprisonment for discrediting companies through the media," as well as arrests and detentions after the Navruz demonstrations, which were attended by hundreds of thousands of people, indicate that against the background of growing discontent of people and their democratic demands, the authorities have found a solution in conducting an even tougher policy of suppression.
With such a picture, with the help of a success story in foreign policy (for example, one of the buglers of power in the media, Abdulkadir Selvi, notes that during Russia's military operation in Ukraine, Erdogan appears in the news on world TV channels four times more than US President Biden, and presents this as proof of Erdogan's world leadership) an attempt is being made to re-create positive expectations among the working masses of the people who are breaking away from power. However, in the conditions of the political situation, when the imperialists continue to concentrate military and weapons in conflict zones (in Eastern Europe after the NATO summit) and increase their military spending, the lifeline (mediation role) that Erdogan is trying to grasp may give a gap, and this is by no means a low probability. Moreover, people suffering from hunger no longer have the strength to pin their hopes on such success stories.
