Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, April 2000, pages 33-34, 82

Special Report

The Turkish-Israeli Alliance Is a New Destabilizing Factor in the Middle East and Southern Europe

By M.C. Geokas and A.T. Papathanasis

In February 1996, a military union was formed between Israel and Turkey. It marked the most important political development in the region since the 1991 Gulf war. This axis has strengthened the militaries of the two nations and has undercut Syria, Iraq, the Kurds, the Palestinians, and Islamic fundamentalism. Turkish threats on Syria’s borders have secured Syria, Lebanon, Egypt and Jordan for Israel and have enabled the Jewish state to concentrate on Libya, Iran and Iraq.¹ Israel has finally found a Muslim, non-Arab ally in the Middle East, and Turkey has found an advocate of Turkish positions in the U.S. Powerful Jewish organizations, like the American Jewish Congress, B’nai B’rith’s Anti-Defamation League, and the influential American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), among others, have become the champions of Turkey.

Both countries are enemies of Syria and share borders with her. Turkey and Syria have clashed repeatedly in the past over water rights and Syrian support of Kurds seeking independence from Turkey. Turkey also has had problems with Iraq, a long-term enemy of Israel, relating to water resources and the Kurds in the north of Iraq. For its part, Syria is claiming the Alexandretta-Hatay district given to Turkey after World War I, and it is controlling the Bekaa valley in Lebanon, a Hezbollah hotbed.² The Turkish-Israeli alliance has, in effect, partially encircled Syria, and this explains Syria’s acquiescence to Turkish demands to stop supporting Turkish Kurds.³ Turkey would not have confronted Syria so aggressively had it not been for its alliance with Israel.⁴

Iran’s support of fundamentalist Muslims is viewed with alarm in Turkey, and Iran’s support of Hezbollah in Lebanon presents intractable security problems for Israel.⁵

Both Turkey and Israel face intractable minority problems of their own. Turkey, a multiethnic country, faces disintegration, and Israel, surrounded by enemies, is such a multi-cultural amalgam that some Israelis refer to Israeli society as one of minorities.⁶ Turkey has about 15 million Kurds, maybe as many Alevis, and hosts of other minorities.⁷ Similarly, Israel contains about 4.75 million Jews, 887,000 Muslim Arabs, 128,000 Christians, 123,000 Druze, and another 128,000 people without religious affiliation.⁸ Last but not least, both nations are international outcasts, Israel for illegally occupying southern Lebanon, the Golan Heights and the West Bank, Turkey for occupying northern Cyprus, and both have been accused by international organizations of serious human rights violations.

Reaction to the formation of the pact was swift.

As expected, the reaction to the formation of the pact was swift, with Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Greece, and Armenia entering into various alliances and agreements. Syria is mobilizing the Arab world while it is pursuing the return of the Golan Heights by Israel, and Egypt’s Foreign Minister Amr Moussa has said that Egypt cannot tolerate such alliances in the Middle East because they target Arab security.⁹ The Greek government also has condemned strongly the Israeli-Turkish axis. ¹⁰ “Greece views the alliance as constituting a grave danger against Greece,” said former Foreign Minister Theodore Pangalos, “and it is an alliance of wrongdoers that brings us to a Cold War situation.”¹¹

The Pact and the U.S.

The United States denies any role in this military compact, although Israeli Defense Minister Yltzhak Mordechai has confirmed that the pact was reached with the backing of the United States.¹² Apparently, U.S. policymakers believe that the axis could be a bulwark against Islamic fundamentalism and a stabilizing force in the Middle East. However, how could Turkey be a force against Islamic fundamentalism given the strength of the Islamist elements within its own borders? Turkey is occupying 37 percent of Cyprus, has imposed a brutal blockade against Armenia, has threatened Syria with armed conflict, and has routinely challenged Greece over the Aegean. ¹³ Can a belligerent Turkey bring stability to the region?

In fact Turkey is suffering from schizophrenic policies, unrealistic denials of her minority problems, an outdated Kemalism, Islamic fundamentalism, a sick economy, growing corruption, heavy debt, and the costs of the Kurdistan war. Turkey’s chances of joining the European Union are slim despite its new status as an EU candidate nation.¹⁴ Turkey’s large population and the free movement of workers within the European Union make its admission problematic. Will the EU allow millions of additional Turks and Kurds to flood Germany and Western Europe?¹⁵

Kemalism, the ideology of Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, founder of the modern Turkish Republic, denies the existence of other peoples in Turkey, and creates additional problems with its assertive nationalism, militarism and secularism. ¹⁶ Many Turks are fundamentalist Muslims, and Islamist parties that hold traditional values win elections. The military, which is the real power in Turkey, has outlawed the Islamist party. This deep chasm might eventually cause Turkey to disintegrate. ¹⁷

Nevertheless, Washington continues to bestow generous military gifts on Ankara that place Turkey just behind Israel and Egypt as America’s most favored arms client. President Jimmy Carter lifted the arms embargo imposed by Congress in response to Turkey’s 1974 invasion of Cyprus, and in 1980 Washington negotiated an extensive defense cooperation pact with Ankara.

The United States supplied 76 percent of all Turkish weapons between 1987 and 1991, and 80 percent between 1991 and 1993. An extensive military aid program has provided Turkey with more than $5 billion between 1986 and 1995. Turkey has also received large deliveries of surplus U.S. and NATO weaponry for free.

Further, a number of U.S. weapons systems, including Lockheed’s F-16 fighter plane and the FMC Corporation’s M113 armored personnel carrier, are produced in Turkey at American expense. Turkey has amassed a huge fleet of 360 F-16 fighter jets, thousands of tanks and armored combat vehicles, and 57 Black Hawk and 38 Cobra helicopters.¹⁸

Israel, a “democracy” without a constitution which practices discrimination in most walks of life against its sizable non-Jewish minorities, and the biggest recipient of American aid, cannot be a stabilizing force either. It is occupying illegally southern Lebanon, the Golan Heights, the West Bank and East Jerusalem, and is oppressing the Palestinians.

The United States even had to buy Israel’s non-involvement in the 1990-91 Gulf war to prevent the destruction of the fragile Gulf war coalition. A $650 million supplement was added at that time to Israel’s annual foreign aid grant of $3 billion. Israel also received $700 million worth of used military equipment, $117 million worth of Patriot missiles, and $400 million in housing loan guarantees.¹⁹

Finally, Israel’s nuclear arsenal is destabilizing the Middle East.²⁰ Egyptian Foreign Minister Amr Moussa has bluntly stated that the Middle East cannot tolerate only one nuclear power, because that power will control the region.²¹

The military benefits of the pact are enormous for both nations. It allows Israel to station fighter planes at Turkish air bases close to the Syrian, Iraqi and Iranian borders.²² Turkish F-16 pilots and crews are learning electronic warfare in Israel. Turkish squadrons of F-4 Phantom jets have been reconfigured with Israeli electronics so they can destroy Syrian surface-to-air missiles, while Israeli pilots practice long-range flying over mountainous land in preparation for missions against Iran. ²³

Israel’s sales of advanced military technologies and hardware to Turkey are enormous. Israel will produce its advanced Merkava III tanks in Turkey, replace 500,000 assault rifles with newer versions, and Israeli Aircraft Industries will upgrade 54 F-4 Phantom fighters with improved firepower and better vision and electronics. Israel will finance the $650 million cost of this modernization.²⁴ Israel will also upgrade Turkish F-5 planes and M-60 tanks in a $300 million deal. The deal also includes Popeye I and Arrow missiles, Falcon earlywarning aircraft systems, a radar system for detecting plastic and conventional mines, and fences and radars to seal off Turkey’s borders with Syria and Iraq to prevent PKK infiltration. The two sides also plan to invest $150 million to produce hundreds of Popeye II and Delilah long-range missiles. ²⁵

The pact’s economic aspects are equally important. There is a Turkish-Israeli freetrade zone, and trade between the two countries is increasing by 30 percent a year. Turkey now is the number one tourist destination for Israelis, and plans exist for Turkey to send fresh water to Israel.²⁶ Israeli companies purchase Turkish-made goods, re-label them in Israel, and then export them duty free to the American market through the Israeli-American Free-Trade Agreement. Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan (D-NY) has even introduced legislation for a U.S.-Turkey commercial agreement. ²⁷

Support from Israel’s powerful lobby in the United States is a dream come true for Turkey, which has been frustrated for years by opposition to the flow of U.S. arms to Turkey from the Greek and Armenian lobbies. ²⁸ Like many other Third World countries, Turkey wanted close relations with Israel because of Israel’s close ties to the United States.²⁹ The Turks know that friendship with Israel means support from America because “nobody can defeat the Jewish lobby in Washington.”^30,31

In their haste to praise the Turks their U.S. Jewish supporters have even accepted the Turkish insistence that the 1915 Turkish massacre of 1.5 million Armenians did not constitute genocide and was not the first holocaust.³²

Will the Turkish-Israeli pact form a hub of reliable and ostensibly democratic American surrogates? Although Egypt refused an invitation to join, weaker states like Kuwait may join at a later date.³³ Jordan has tacitly joined the pact by observing the three-day trilateral exercises code-named “Reliant Mermaid” in January 1998.³⁴ The Clinton administration believes that the pact “strengthens two pro-Western allies in the region and helps both to modernize their defense capabilities.”³⁵ The specter of Iran and Iraq, however, should remind Washington of the limits of paternalizing unpopular regimes.

Who Benefits?

The opportunistic Turkish-Israeli pact is already causing problems in domestic American politics. There is a Jewish-Armenian split developing on Capitol Hill and some Greek Americans have pulled their support from Israel.³⁶ The axis is also undermining the southern wing of NATO. Greece has held military exercises near Turkey and is solidifying ties with Russia, Syria, Armenia and Iran.³⁷ Greek President Costis Stephanopoulos and Iranian supreme religious leader Ayatollah Sayyed Ali Khomeini have stated that Greece should be the bridge between Europe and Iran.³⁸

The American government must recognize that Turkey might implode like the Soviet Union, Yugoslavia, and Czechoslovakia. Turkey is so heterogeneous that even Turks fear that it might fall apart.³⁹ Istanbul, Izmir, and Ankara account for almost 90 percent of Turkish trade and industry. East of Izmir lies Anatolia, full of Kurdish aspirations and Islamic fundamentalism. The schizophrenic policies of the Turkish military toward the Islamists and the lack of a social contract among the disparate groups in Turkey might push Turkey into the abyss, as happened in Algeria.

If the Islamists come to power, will Turkey be drawn closer to a rejuvenated Russia? What will the Alevis do in an Islamic Turkey? The U.S. policy toward Turkey is uncomfortably reminiscent of both the attempt to win the allegiance of the shah of Iran in the 1970s and the romancing of Iraq in the 1980s. The Iran precedent may be repeated in Turkey.

By “squeezing” Syria, Iraq, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and other regional countries, the Israeli-Turkish alliance may be harming the long-term interests of the United States. A precedent is the failed U.S. policy of “dual containment” against Iraq and Iran, which serves the interests of Israel at the expense of America.⁴⁰

The violent demonstrations against President Clinton in Greece last year were not the result of past U.S. support for the Greek military junta or the NATO operation against the Serbs in Kosovo, but vehement Greek opposition to the perpetual American support of the Turkish-Israeli alliance that now simply adds insult to injury. The thunderous demonstrations against President Clinton were only the tip of an anti-American iceberg in the Balkans and the Middle East.

The authors of this article believe the U.S. can better secure peace in the Middle East with a swift policy realignment. Turkish troops should be withdrawn from Cyprus, and Turkey should stop her bellicosity in the Aegean. ⁴¹ Israel should recognize an independent Palestinian state and withdraw from its “Vietnam,” Lebanon. America should normalize relations with Iran with an engagement policy similar to that toward China.

There is already suspicion that the Caspian Sea oil bonanza has been overplayed. If it turns out to be vastly exaggerated, as some believe, America is betting on the wrong horse.⁴² Even if the Caspian Sea reserves prove to be real, Iran’s advantages in channeling the oil to the West and Japan more cheaply, through existing pipelines to Abadan, make a U.S.-Iranian rapprochement a necessity. Iraq, finally, remains a country with enormous natural and human resources that can be tapped quickly, given the opportunity. But Israel and Turkey drive the Iraqis to increased militarization. ⁴³

History, demography and the shifting sands of American, Russian, Chinese, and European Union politics and interests, in the context of a global economy, argue against the destabilizing Turkish-Israeli alliance. It is counterproductive to long-term American interests.

SOURCES

¹Friedman, Thomas, “Turkish Delight: Israelis & Turks Form Military Alliance Against the Arabs,” New York Times, Op Ed Page, June 16, 1996. See also William Safire’s “The Byzantine Alliance,” The New York Times, Dec. 10, 1997, p. A29, and “The Phantom Alliance,” The New York Times, Feb. 4, 1999, p. A21.

²The B’nai B’rith World Center in Jerusalem, Press Release, “Turkey and Israel: Shared Enemies, Shared Interests,” by Alan M, Schneider, Director B’nai B’rith World Center, Jerusalem, 2/19/1999.

³Dorsey, James M., “What’s behind the Turkish-Syrian crisis?” Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, December 1998.

⁴ Kaylani, Nabil, “Israeli-Turkish Alliance may prove to be new destabilizing factor in Middle East,” Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, January/February 1999, p. 47.

⁵ Pipes, Daniel, “Lebanon turns into Israel’s Vietnam,” The Wall Street Journal, March 10, 1999.

⁶David Makovsky and Margot Dudkevitch, “Not a Melting Pot,” The Jerusalem Post , electronic edition, Friday, Nov. 5, 1999.

⁷Waldman, Peter, “Civil War in Turkey Will Be Greece’s Opportunity,” The Wall Street Journal, March 17, 1995.

⁸ Rozeman, Eric, “Israeli Arabs and the Future of the Jewish State,” Middle East Quarterly, September 1999, p. 16.

⁹“What will be the shape of the Arab world?” Al-Ahram Weekly, 18-24 Nov. 1999, p. 4.

¹⁰“Greece condemns Turkish-Israeli military alliance,” ArabicNews.com, 11/27/97.

¹¹“Israel Protests to Statement by Greek Foreign Minister,” Communicated by the Foreign Ministry Spokesman, Jerusalem, Feb. 25, 1998, http://www.embajadaisrael.es/coms/c0103_98/c02251.html. See also Peterson, Scott, “Rocking the Mideast With an Unlikely Alliance,” The Christian Science Monitor, Feb. 27, 1998.

¹² Washburn, Jennifer, “Power Block: Turkey and Israel Lock Arms,” The Progressive, December 1998, p. 20.

¹³Carpenter, Ted Gallen, “Washington’s Turkish Blinders,” The Washington Times, Nov. 18, 1999.

¹⁴The Economist, Oct. 16-22, 1999.

¹⁵Mallinson, William, “Waiting for Godot Clinton,” The Greek American, Nov. 19, 1999, p. 25.

¹⁶ Kinzer, Stephen, “Kurds Sense a Shift Toward Peace After 15-Year War,” The New York Times, Nov. 27, 1999.

¹⁷Berktay, Halil, “National Memories: Understanding the Other, Taming Your Own,” Point of Reference , Summer 1998, p. 30.

¹⁸Hartung, William D., Weapons at War, a World Policy Institute Issue Brief, ARMS TRADE RESOURCE CENTER, May 1995, pp. 5-8. See also, “Arming Repression: U.S. Arms Sales to Turkey During the Clinton Administration,” by Tamar Gabelnick, William D. Hartung, and Jennifer Washburn, with research assistance by Michelle Ciarrocca. A Joint Report of the World Policy Institute and the Federation of American Scientists, October 1999.

¹⁹Findley, Paul, Deliberate Deceptions: Facing the FACTS about the U.S.- ISRAELI RELATIONSHIP, Lawrence Hill Books, 1993, p. 223.

²⁰Shahak, Israel, Open Secrets: Israeli Nuclear and Foreign Policies, Pluto Press, 1997.

²¹“What will be the shape of the Arab world?” Al-Ahram Weekly, 18-24 Nov. 1999, p. 4.

²² The Egyptian English Weekly, “Al-Ahram” of Al-Ahram Weekly, Feb. 12-18, 1998.

²³Pipes, Daniel, “A New Axis: The Emerging Turkish-Israeli Entente,” The National Interest, Winter 1997/98, p. 31.

²⁴ The Economist, Electronic Edition, Oct. 30th-Nov. 5th, 1999.

²⁵Pipes, Daniel, 1997/98, op. cit.

²⁶The Jerusalem Post, Oct. 8, 1999, p. 30.

²⁷Proini , Thursday, Nov. 4, 1999.

²⁸Tirman, John, 1999, op. cit.

²⁹Washburn, Jennifer, 1998, op. cit.

^{30, 31}Peterson, Scott, “Rocking the Mideast With an Unlikely Alliance,” The Christian Science Monitor, Feb. 27, 1998. Geoffrey Wheatcroft, The Wall Street Journal, Oct. 26, 1999.

³²Fisk, Robert, “Turkey’s Israel Alliance—Working in Both Washington and the Middle East, Mideast Realities, Feb. 24, 1999.

³³Mahfouz, Naguib, “Who’s the Enemy?” Al-Ahram Weekly, based on interview by Mohamed Salmawy, Sept. 17-23, 1998.

³⁴ ”Jordan’s Observer Role in Maneuvers Encounters Stiff Opposition,” http://star.arabia.com, Jan. 8, 1998.

³⁵Washburn, Jennifer, 1998, op. cit.

³⁶Ottaway, David & Dan Morgan, “Jewish-Armenian Split Spreads on the Hill. Strategic Issues Put One-time Lobbying Allies at Odds,” The Washington Post, Feb. 9, 1999, p A15.

³⁷Pipes, Daniel, 1998, op. cit.

^38“ Stephanopoulos Visits Iran,” The Greek American, Vol. 14, No. 37, Oct. 14, 1999.

³⁹Berktay, Halil, 1998, op. cit.

⁴⁰Tirman, John, 1999, op. cit.

⁴¹Tirman, John, 1998, op. cit.

⁴²Cullen, Robert, “The Rise and Fall of the Caspian Sea,” National Geographic, 195(5), May 1999.

⁴³Rowden, Rick, “The Missing Piece in the Mideast Peace Puzzle,” the San Francisco Chronicle, Dec. 15, 1998.

M.C. Geokas, M.D., Ph.D., emeritus professor of medicine and biological chemistry at the University of California, Davis, and A.T. Papathanasis, Ph.D., professor of political economy at Central Connecticut State University, are president and vice president, respectively, of Demokritos Society of America, a think tank devoted to research and publications about events in the Eastern Mediterranean.