Page 1 of
2 Syria: Waiting for someone
named Obama By M K Bhadrakumar
Even
as German Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle, who
was on a visit to China, diverted himself to
Istanbul in a mission on Saturday aimed at tamping
down Turkish-Syrian tensions, Der Spiegel calmly
reported that the information about the
"non-civilian cargo", which led to the
interception of a Syrian aircraft by the Turkish
Air Force the previous Wednesday night, was
actually passed on to Ankara by US intelligence.
Furthermore, Der Spiegel
disclosed authoritatively, "Ankara only forced the
plane to land after close contact with its Western
allies."
The question naturally
arises: Was it an incident that had been
choreographed by Washington
with a view to change the dynamics of the Syrian
situation? Stranger ways have been found to
kick-start wars in history. Or did the United
States have another motive?
The
pattern of the rhetoric may give some clues.
Russia, of course, vehemently and promptly denied
that it had violated international law. Foreign
Minister Sergey Lavrov, in fact, gave a detailed
explanation as if he were pleading with the Turks
not to be taken in by whatever they might have
heard:
In the wake of
all sorts of insinuations spread in connection
with the Syrian jet's landing, I'd like to
stress we don't have secrets in this respect.
We've cleared out the situation and the truth is
that, quite naturally, the jet was not carrying
any weapons and certainly couldn't be carrying
them.
The cargo was supplied by a
legal Russian supplier in a legitimate way to a
legal customer. It's electric engineering
equipment for a radar station, a dual-purpose
equipment that isn't forbidden by any
international conventions. Airway bills for it
were filled out in strict compliance with
international requirements. Transportation of
these cargoes by civil-aviation jets is normal
practice, and this is confirmed by the fact the
Turkish authorities offered the crew either to
change the route or to land in Ankara before it
entered Turkey's airspace.The captain decided to
land because he knew the crew wasn't doing
anything illegal.
Interestingly, the
Turkish side has pointedly refused to take issue
with Moscow's narrative. The Turkish statement was
actually evasive and loquacious - to the effect
that Ankara had acted on the basis of "information
that the plane was carrying cargo of a nature that
could not possibly be in compliance with the rules
of civil aviation".
Meanwhile, Ankara and Moscow
lost no time to transfer the topic to the
diplomatic channel away from the limelight.
Russia's Gazprom has since announced that it will
step up the supply of gas to Turkey to offset the
shortfall in the supplies from Iran through the
winter season.
Ankara has also since
disclosed, almost eight weeks in advance, that
Russian President Vladimir Putin will visit Turkey
on December 3. This is the first point.
Went to town Now, the intriguing part is
that it was left to a third party to resort to
shrill rhetoric - the United States. The State
Department spokeswoman in Washington used harsh
language to allege that Moscow was pursuing a
"morally bankrupt" policy on Syria.
Victoria Nuland said: "No
responsible country ought to be aiding and
abetting the war machine of the Assad regime, and
particularly those with responsibilities for
global peace and security - as UN Security Council
members have."
The spokeswoman added: "We
[US] have no doubt that this was serious military
equipment." Evidently Nuland was under instruction
to go to town on the Syrian plane issue. Why would
the US be so overtly keen to introduce high-class
polemics? This is the second point.
The
geopolitics is not difficult to understand. The US
has probably been hoping all along that Syria
would be the wedge that forces apart the
partnership between Russia and Turkey, which has
witnessed a remarkable upswing through the past
decade, helped largely by the understanding and
personal rapport at the leadership level between
Putin and Turkish Prime Minister Recep Erdogan.
Russia has significantly
expanded its energy cooperation with Turkey,
meeting two-thirds of the latter's gas needs.
Russia is set up to build Turkey's first nuclear
plant; the US$25 billion project could be a game
changer in the overall relationship. The
63-billion-cubic-meter South Stream gas pipeline
is slated to pass through Turkish waters to feed
the European markets.
Evidently, a high level of
interdependency is developing between the two
countries, which would be nothing short of
historic given their troubled relationship through
the centuries, and holding the potential to impact
profoundly the geopolitics of a vast region
comprising the Black Sea, the Caucasus, the
Caspian, "Turkic" Central Asia and the eastern
Mediterranean.
Suffice to say, Moscow and
Ankara have done well so far to decouple the
Russian-Turkish bilateral relationship from the
Syrian question. However, whether this is
achievable in the coming period remains to be
seen, as the "end game" is commencing in Syria.
The US rhetoric underscores
the early warning of booby traps ahead. This is
the third point.
Three
interlocking vectors The first booby trap was laid
by unknown hands when Erdogan was in Moscow in
late July as he was proceeding for his meeting
with Putin in the Kremlin. The report of the
high-profile terrorist strike in Damascus killing
the Syrian defense minister and other top security
officials had just come in, which all but
sabotaged Erdogan's mission aimed at bridging the
Turkish-Russian differences over Syria and
exploring an acceptable formula to work together
to find a solution to the crisis.
Curiously, the incident of
the Syrian plane being interdicted also coincided
with a visit Putin had planned to Ankara to meet
with Erdogan for a follow-up conversation on the
substance of the latter's proposal. Earlier
reports had mentioned that Putin was due to visit
Turkey on October 14 and 15.
Putin held a meeting with the
advisory Security Council regarding the Syrian
situation on Friday. Obviously, Moscow realizes
that a new criticality is arising in the
Turkish-Syrian standoff, which is also amply
evident from the growing belligerence in Ankara's
rhetoric toward Damascus as well as its military
deployments on the border regions in an
operational mode.
There are three or four
interlocking vectors here and their interplay is
going to be crucial in the coming weeks. First,
much depends on how the situation develops on the
ground. The Guardian newspaper reported that
Turkey's eastern Mediterranean city of Antakya has
become a meeting point for arms dealers from
Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Lebanon and it is the
centre for equipping and arming the rebels in
Syria.
As things stand, Syrian
government forces have begun challenging the
rebels all over the country. They have had success
in Damascus, but face resistance in Aleppo and the
northern provinces. Thus the fate of the covert
war depends heavily on Turkey. And there are
growing indications that hardliners in Ankara are
prevailing.
Head
Office: Unit B, 16/F, Li Dong Building, No. 9 Li Yuen Street East,
Central, Hong Kong Thailand Bureau:
11/13 Petchkasem Road, Hua Hin, Prachuab Kirikhan, Thailand 77110
