tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8266103723933393293.post665517416868934268..comments2013-09-17T00:10:00.721+02:00Comments on Sec&Def Europe: Open Saudi skies for Israel (?)Frederikhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04216493254864534814noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8266103723933393293.post-82139031396105553342010-06-15T19:44:05.384+02:002010-06-15T19:44:05.384+02:00Also, I think we need to be very careful about not...Also, I think we need to be very careful about not confusing nuclear weapons and nuclear energy. <br /><br />Turkey doesn't have a choice but to accept Iran's wish to develop nuclear power, just as the West doesn't have a choice - it's every country's inalienable right. However, weaponizing that technology is an entirely different thing. There is simply no way that Turkey would be happy about seeing Iran developing a nuclear weapons capability. <br /><br />It's interesting that Turkey doesn't seem to have a consensus approach about what they would do if Iran does goes nuclear, but they may well consider following suit. Of course it's yet to be seen whether they would or not, but there is evidence to suggest that nations in that area simply do not want a nuclear armed Iran and may develop their own capability if this materialises. Surely this in itself shows that there is a degree of regional competition, as most of those states would not necessarily need to fear attack from Tehran.Tomhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06093175563572217685noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8266103723933393293.post-81118189504085555572010-06-15T13:26:47.726+02:002010-06-15T13:26:47.726+02:00Frederik,
I don't follow your thinking here. ...Frederik,<br /><br />I don't follow your thinking here. Of course, realities on the ground reflect a nation's status but surely a major aspect of international relations is nations striving to change/adapt/exploit those realities in whatever way suits them best?<br /><br />We in Europe did fight to become regional powers - we tore ourselves apart in doing so, lost the power we had on a global scale and have since realised that there is a better (albeit imperfect) way of doing things, at least in our own nieghbourhood. I suspect people elsewhere would also like to do things differently but external factors may limit their options.<br /><br />Of course a nation or a government will fight others over substantive issues like territory or natural resources but what are these if not means to an end? <br /><br />In that sense, I think being a regional power is very definitely a policy goal and especially for countries (or peoples) who previously were regional powers - or empires - and would like to overturn historical defeats by regaining that status.<br /><br />Aside from Russia, I cannot think of any countries which fit that description better than Turkey and Iran.Patricknoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8266103723933393293.post-77052442621281939462010-06-15T10:39:51.188+02:002010-06-15T10:39:51.188+02:00Not sure about tacit approval, since the Turks app...Not sure about tacit approval, since the Turks apparently deployed an air defense System to the Turkish-Syrian border to "defend Syria, Iran against Israel Raids". http://www.almanar.com.lb/newssite/NewsDetails.aspx?id=137326&language=en<br /><br />Since Turkey extends his nuclear programme (http://en.rian.ru/analysis/20100608/159347024.html), the support for Iran is in Turkeys interest. Both countries seek to diversify their energy sources. A cooperation and mutual support simply makes sense.<br /><br />Apart from that I never really get the argument that countries fight each other to become the "regional power". Either you are a regional power or not. It is not for you to decide. Realities on the ground determine your status. And why do we always assume that the people in the Middle East strive to become regional powers in the first place? Is that really a valid policy goal for governments? Do we in Europe also fight to become regional powers? <br /><br />I guess that governments fight over more substantial issues, such as territories, money, power etc. I don't see a lofty goal such as being a "regional power" being one of them.Frederikhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04216493254864534814noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8266103723933393293.post-21434675165899166262010-06-15T09:20:51.253+02:002010-06-15T09:20:51.253+02:00You raise an interesting point Tom.
The Times ar...You raise an interesting point Tom. <br /><br />The Times article refers to Operation Orchard, when Israeli planes bombed an alleged nuclear facility in Syria in September 2007, crossing Turkish airspace to do so. In fact, the article refers to the strike as a "dry run" for a strike on Iran.<br /><br />That remains to be seen but the Turkish reaction to that raid was along the lines you describe: public condemnation but private/tacit approval.Patricknoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8266103723933393293.post-88447557659058738602010-06-14T19:06:30.789+02:002010-06-14T19:06:30.789+02:00What is also interesting here is the Turkey issue....What is also interesting here is the Turkey issue. Ankara is very concerned about a nuclear armed Iran and view Tehran as one of their main competitors for regional influence.<br /><br />Note here the recent fuel swap deal that Brazil and Turkey agreed with Iran but the U.S. and its allies rejected. It's going to be interesting to see what Turkey's reaction could be down the line if Iran does carry out a unilateral air strike. They will probably condemn Israel publicly but quietly give a sigh of relief. There are suggestions that a nuclear Iran could spark a proliferation cascade in the region and one of the most interesting cases is Ankara - it's unclear what their response would be, it seems like Turkey doesn't really know itself.Tomhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06093175563572217685noreply@blogger.com