Turkish-Syrian relations and the Syrian Spring: New Prospects for the Middle East

Of all Turkey’s neighboring states, Syria is considered to have the most complex and difficult relationship with it. The historical mistrust and territorial disputes, which originated in the early years of the tenth century as a result of the Arab struggle against the Ottoman Empire and continued in the French Mandate of Syria, worsened during the Cold War. In the 50s opposition was mainly ideological and it caused suspicions and hostility between the two countries that considered themselves the antithesis of a bipolar world. Turkey was the bastion of Western interests in the Near East and it maintained close relations with Israel while Syria aligned itself with Nasser and the Soviet-bloc. In the 80s and 90s the problem of exploitation of the waters of the Euphrates river caused another source of friction which, together with the various attacks and the territorial claims (such as the province of Hatay, formerly Sanjak of Alexandretta), stiffened the already difficult bilateral relationships.

An opening in relations between the two countries took place in 2004 following the outbreak of the Iraq war with the official visit in Turkey of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. During the same visit, in addition to signing a series of economic agreements on tax issues, investment and tourism, the territorial integrity and unity of Iraq was reaffirmed. After the Iraq war and the loss of Syrian control of Lebanon, the Syrian-Turkish relations increased also because Damascus was trying to overcome isolation and regional impasse. The common interests between the two countries were linked to the Iraq conflict and to the fear of the formation of a Kurdish state in northern Iraq. Furthermore, between the summer of 2007 and that of 2008, Turkish diplomacy, in addition to having made possible the implementation of important agreements in various subjects, took numerous actions to promote the signing of a real peace agreement between Syria and the State of Israel. For Israel, the core business of the peace process was based on the return of the Golan Heights to Syria, while it would have to suspend all support for Hezbollah and Hamas and to expel from Damascus the Hamas political leader, Khaled Mashaal. In addition, Syria would promise Israel an easing of diplomatic relations with the Islamic Republic of Iran. The insertion of Turkey within the peace process, inspired by the policy inaugurated by Ahmet Davutoglu, the “zero problems with neighbors” was severely compromised, between December 2008 and January 2009, following the launch of the Military Operation Cast Lead by the Israeli government against Hamas in the Gaza Strip. Those actions taken by the Israeli government and the subsequent sanctions against the occupied territories caused a strain in the diplomatic relations between Turkey and Israel that not even the inauguration of Barack Obama at the White House in January 2009 was able to relieve. In Autumn of 2010, Syria asked Turkey to vigorously resume the process interrupted in summer 2008. However, the first uprising in Dara’a in February / March 2011 were now close and the harsh repression perpetrated by the regime of Bashar al-Asad in tackling street protests of the Syrian spring has rapidly deteriorated Turkish-Syrian diplomatic relations to the point that Turkey has openly criticized the actions of the Alawite regime and has disrupted diplomatic relations between Ankara and Damascus.

Between May and June 2011, the Turkish government offered the Syrian people and the opposition of the Syrian Alawite regime the possibility of providing international resonance to its dissent, hosting in Antalya the Syria for Change conference, which subsequently facilitated the establishment of the Syrian National Council, or rather the main platform of opposition to the Ba’athist regime of Bashar al-Assad. This gradual rapprochement of Turkey to the forces of opposition to the Syrian regime and the parallel disruption of diplomatic relations with Ba’athist Syria has inevitably provoked tensions between Ankara and Tehran. The response was swift. In October 2011, the former commander of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards, Rahim Safani, harshly criticized the Turkish government, its projection of regional power, the weight of its relations with NATO forces and particularly the process of secularization promoted by Ankara towards Islam. The actions that Damascus decides to take towards Turkey will certainly be influenced by the position the latter will assume in relation to a hypothetical scenario of an armed intervention in Syria.

As is known, despite the recent condemnation of the massacre in the town of Hula by the UN Security Council and the incessant demands to Syrian authorities to stop the violence and to respect its commitments under the ceasefire, the use of military force in Syria does not seem to be a viable option because of the vetoes by the Russian Federation and the Republic of China. In recent weeks it seems rather more feasible that the prospect suggested by U.S. President Obama, following “the Yemeni model”, could open the way toward a “soft landing” which provides, in agreement with the Russian Federation, the exile of Bashar al-Assad, leaving a part of his government in power.

In addition to supporting the efforts of the Syrian opposition, it is evident that in this transitional scenario, Turkey could stimulate a dialogue with the various ethnic and religious groups of the country.

Among the alternatives to the regime of Bashar al-Assad, in fact, there is a direction towards an Islamic Syria, and from this point of view on several occasions, the Muslim Brotherhood said they were enthusiastic admirers of the Turkish model or a model able to overcome the secular authoritarian military creating a traditional and conservative system in terms of values, but distinctly liberal in terms of economic reforms.

A “new” Syria that is able to rise from the ashes of the regime of Bashar al-Assad will probably hasten to restore diplomatic relations with Turkey which were abruptly interrupted, could facilitate dialogue with Israel and would be forced to review their relations to the internal Iranian-led Shiite axis.

 

 

Nicola Censini LLM

“Government falls – make a wish…”, Slovakia after the elections in 2012

11th October 2011, 22:11 pm. The Iveta Radičová’s government, the first female Prime Minister of Slovak history, ends after 461 days of its appointment.

 

“I wonder what did they achieve. We had to be excluded from the euro zone and European Union? No responsible Prime Minister would sign under this. I accept the Vote of the National Council with humility, but with my head held high.” Prime Minister justifies her decision to join the votes on ERM/EUROVAL with the vote of trust to the government.

Liberals from SaS and three out of four „Ordinary People“ faction didn’t partecipate to the vote. This is the end of the first and less stable right wing coalition government in the history of Slovakia. The citizens of Slovakia were witnesses or supporters for a year and three months of various national and internal quarrels of the fragile government, which tried to face strong opposition, but also its own controversy when they managed to form a coalition govern with its only four member majority. Foreing media called it a patchwork, because from the very beginning it was so weak that only few believed it could come to the end of the government period.

For the country, the nation and people …

Political newcomer Freedom and Solidarity, known shortly after the election for its anti-European oriented policy, under the world’s spotlight persuaded the conflicting interests which declares in its name, since its establishment. “We have not produced these problems, so we don’t have to pay them. Slovakia is on the road to serfdom. We will not know how to undo it.” (SAS chairman, R. Sulik, in his speech before the vote on the promotion of ERM/EUROVAL). This behaviour is strange and incredibly irresponsible, especially from a party affiliated to ELDR (ALDE fraction).

Two days later were announced early parliamentary elections, dated the 10th march 2012. Radičová reports that after the early parliamentary elections, would be leaving the SDKU èarty and politics at all.

“The development of the political situation before early elections

 

October 2011

– After a year and a half of instability and constant chaos Iveta Radičová government falls, the direct reason was ERM/EUROVAL

– The former coalition parties remain within the government, but only to attack each other, most attacks are between SAS and SDKU

 

November 2011

– Scandal of illegal interception of a journalists coming from the Military Defence Intelligence, the Prime Minister for it eventually withdrew Mr. Lubomir Galko (SaS) from the post of Defense Minister

 

December 2011

– Just before Christmas appeared on the Internet the alleged SIS file with the codename Gorilla describing corruption practices actions between years 2005 and 2006, in which were involved the then leading politicians, especially from the SDKU, and representatives of the financial group Penta.

 

January 2012

– Tensions between right-wing parties are escalating, SAS urges SDKÚ bosses Mikulas Dzurinda and Ivan Miklos to leave politics

– SDKU sharply starts to lose preferences

– Thousands go on the streets to protest against the scandal Gorilla

– End of the month broke the case Sasanka, which shows the text correspondence (sms) during the time of election of the General Attorney between Richard Sulík, then head of Parliament and the controversial businessman Marian Kočner, which media associated with the mafia.

 

February 2012

– Igor Matovič’s Ordinary People candidates fell apart for the reluctance of some members of the movement to show incorruptibility to a polygraph, and immediately Matovič must admit that even he gave bribes

– The Internet has emerged another transcript, where it seemed that Interior Minister Daniel Lipšic, who publicly promised a thorough investigation of Gorilla, cooperated with secret services

– Conflict on the right side of the political spectrum are transferred also between KDH and SDKU. SDKÚ says KDH after the elections wants to go along with SMER, and therefore did not support their proposal “(S. Pachnerová, dirtiest election campaign in 22 years, spravy.pravda.sk, 02/08/12)

 

The period from late October to early March was characterized by clearly most diverse events. The emergence of new marketing parties (which seemed to believe that they manage to repeat the exploit of SAS), the dirtiest political battle ever, which breaks down all the values ​​and discouraging for many because of the mega scandals… squares full of dissatisfied citizens, egg attacks on the presidential palace, the request for Law and order… and so ran the time from the collapse of the fragile right-wing coalition to the date of the “CHANGE”!

10. march 2012, overall turnout is 59.11%. The clear victory in parliamentary elections of Smer-SD, has no counterpart in the democratic history of Slovakia. With the result 44.41 percent of voters in parliamentary elections is not only a result of his policies, but apparently also of the “fratricidal war” among the right wing parties during the election campaign. The biggest defeat of the ruling parties was suffered from Dzurinda’s SDKU – DS with 6.09% and also the SNS, with a result of 4.55% fell apart the Parliament.

What will happen with the once powerful HZDS, which fell to 0.93 percent? Before the elections, Meciar claimed that if the HZDS doesn’t get into Parliament, he would drop the function along with his vice. After the election, in which the party received less than one percentage of votes, he didn’t show up. Dlho očakávaná správa prišla 27. Apríla

2012. Oficiálne Vladimír Mečiar končí na čele HZDS – ĽS a odchádza z politického života.

The long-awaited news came 27th April 2012. Vladimir Meciar officially ends at the head of HZDS – ĽS and he´s leaving the  political life.

The party is in absolute disarray. The  closest associates are unable to agree on

how to proceed. There the voices of the termination of the movement itself.

For the first time since November 1989 Slovakia will have a one coloured government.

In an interview for Financial Times released on Wednesday 18 April under the name “Former critic promises fidelity to Brussels” Robert Fico declared: “I will be honest. Slovakia is a small country. We are completely dependent on the economy of Germany and France. We understand that we are members of the club, we understand that the euro has been a successful story for us, till yet. We understand that without Europe, we are unable to survive in this region. These are the reasons why we want to be normal partners, when deciding on the EU agenda”. (Source: vlada.gov.sk)

New times are coming for journalists and considerably less information on the political backstage. Direction acts as a well organized army – party members don’t know much and the others pay great attention to the information leaks. Fico’s clever tactic serves as a great tool for identifying the source of disclosure that allows for almost no leakage. The heart of the matter is just talking important issues with very few people, away from party forums, between four eyes. It is certain that after his first era when he resembled a warrior rather than a statesman, he learned and pragmatically opted for a new style of politics.

Fico surprised people after the elections with a peaceful radiation, pleasantness with the journalists and generosity towards the opposition. In Slovakia after the early parliamentary elections didn’t come a new political culture, it’s only that the currently most powerful man in the State decided to change political tactics…

Though Fico dominated the country, we should not forget that despite the current lower depending on sponsors, his party is still dominated by powerful interest groups.

The first evidence of a big disappointment, when he received a harsh criticism from the public, was the distribution of ministerial positions. During the formation of the government the prime criterion sadly wasn’t the real needs of individual resort or nominees’ expertise. It is obvious that this was only the deployment of people that could not be bypassed for some reason. Of the total nominations may be taken for good perhaps only the Foreign Minister Lajcak. In a big expectation the eyes of the people are clamped on independent Ludo Borec, Minister of Justice, although his views on some issues of the sector are still shrouded in mystery.

“It turns out that Fico has learned a lot from his first term. He’s incredibly friendly to the opposition, but paradoxically this leads to even greater disruption in it. The offer of two Vice-Presidents posts to opposition, as we might expect, caused a storm in a glass of water and lead to mutual verbal attacks. The old coalition failed to agree even to the division of leadership committees, which resulted in conflicting boundary between KDH and SAS (Miskov versus Hudacký) for the Committee on Economic, and respectively KDH vs. SDKU, thus Lipšic vs Fedor for the committee for control of the SIS (information services).” (R. Michelko, Each Fico’s step accompanied by hyper critics, Slovak national newspaper, 18/04/12)

The Govern Manifesto will build on the focus of the program, with which party Smer – SD won the parliamentary elections.

“The Govern Manifesto is quite obviously made by the Government and its departments, which represent this government. But I thought it would be a big mistake if we did not use the capacity, potential and experience of the social partners but also other major institutions working in Slovakia. So I asked the official representatives of social partners for cooperation, so we could seek together breakthroughs in the creation of the government program, where it is possible, “said chairman of SMER-SD Robert Fico.

Representatives of churches, trade unions, employers, employees, local government, retirees union and representatives of the Slovak Education and Science were invited to the public discussion. The main motto of the Manifesto is not only restoring the public finances, but also promote economic growth, employment and protection of people’s living standards.

The government must submit to Parliament a policy statement within 30 days from the appointment. The Parliament meeting from which must be approved the government program, was scheduled on the second May.

On 24 April 2012, Prime Minister Robert Fico, along with Finance Minister Peter Kazimir and Foreign Minister Miroslav Lajčák has travelled for a one day working visit to Brussels.

“The theme of common negotiations with leaders of the European Commission and NATO are priorities for the new government in relation to European issues, efforts to further familiarize the European Commission, especially on the economic intentions of the government, including steps in the consolidation effort and in furthering the process of the EU 2020 Strategy, the situation in the euro area and meeting about the multiannual financial Framework 2014 – 2020 as well as confirmation of the continuity of foreign and security policy of the SR to continue the reform and construction of the defence sector politics in Slovak Republic to match the evolving international security situation and allow the SR to meet its alliance commitments. ” (Vlada.gov.sk)

 

Wednesday 02/05/2012 Robert Fico submitted to Parliament for debate Program

statement of one party. 65 – page document says about the “Government of security ” orientations. 

Immediately after launched in the political arena at the Parliament  started strong debate between opposition and SMER-SD. 

What was generally expected were the  finally confirmed : Fico presented

65 pages with general phrases to  try to satisfy everybody. To satisfy the entrepreneurs also social partners and of course especially the voters.

Quarreling opposition sensed a chance after the first elections to the criticism of the ruling party and finally at least agreed that the mission statement on this form is not possibile to controll.

Few specific measures, many general and demagogic phrases,skipped issues as Roma issue, vague suggestions for reducing the deficit, lack of minority issues.

There are no concrete steps how they want to tackle youth unemployment.

The most of opposition revulsion brings the fact that the government is preparing to cancel or interference II. pillar pension savings, repeal flat tax, read-in millionaire tax, which

is becoming more and more generally and the results are that the taxation touched not only rich but unfortunately also the middle class, becuase the “Government of security” is not able to define the words LUXURY and RICHES.

Hurly-burly discussions will continue in the parliament where the oposition will try to show the face they lost after the elections and maybe the new leader will be formed.

The forecast is therefore too early, it remains just to follow the steps of the new Fico government under the spotlight of his supporters, the opposition, the European Union and the whole Slovakia. Surely Mr. Premier took a very big responsibility on his shoulders, because unlikely as during his first govern he hasn’t got any coalition partners which can take responsibility for unclear practises, which may de facto mean a great value added for Slovak people, because the new government would be forced to be correct.

Francia, CAPPA: “Bayrou vota Hollande invocando unità nazionale”

Parigi – “All’indomani del faccia a faccia in TV Sarkozy-Hollande e a poche ore dal voto decisivo per la Francia e per l’Europa, è chiara l’indicazione che François Bayrou, leader del Modem, offre ai francesi” così dichiara Marco Cappa.

“La sua campagna è stata improntata a tesi fortemente europeiste per offrire una strategia che mirasse al superamento della crisi, al rilancio del sistema educativo d’oltralpe e ad una maggiore moralità nella politica” – prosegue Cappa, che guida l’organizzazione giovanile del Partito Democratico Europeo, co-presieduto da Rutelli e Bayrou – “L’Europa e i mercati hanno bisogno di stabilità, di accelerare il processo di integrazione, di rafforzare la connessione economica e fiscale. Non è il tempo delle sirene euroscettiche e turbo populiste della Le Pen o di Mèlenchon.Costoro hanno parlato alla pancia dei francesi, non alla testa. Sarkozy, d’altro canto, ha messo in campo una campagna di rottura rincorrendo la Le Pen.”

Dal suo quartier generale di ‘Rue de l’Universitè’ di Parigi – conclude Cappa – Bayrou ha detto quindi che voterà, a titolo personale, per Hollande invocando però un percorso di unità nazionale che includa le forze responsabili del paese. Auspichiamo quindi il modello Monti anche in Francia per uscire dalla crisi insieme.”

 

Marco Cappa
Portavoce Nazionale API Giovani
Presidente Giovani Democratici Europei

 

Roma, 3 Maggio 2012

Lavoro, Cappa: “Pronti a dare nostro contributo”

Roma – “La disoccupazione giovanile ha raggiunto il punto critico come emerso dai dati Istat pubblicati oggi. All’indomani della festa dei lavoratori, il numero degli under 25 senza occupazione lascia un profondo sconforto nella nostra generazione ma anche una voglia di mettersi in gioco, di non subire soltanto passivamente questa condizione. Siamo pronti a dare il nostro contributo al Governo che lucidamente ha tracciato la volontà di puntare sulla crescita” così dichiara Marco Cappa, Presidente dei Giovani Democratici Europei.

“Complessivamente, nell’Unione europea i giovani senza lavoro sono 5,516 milioni” – prosegue Cappa – “Schieriamo decisi la generazione Erasmus a supporto di un progetto che acceleri la formazione di un’Europa più coesa, con una svolta economica, che porterà come conseguenza più stabilità all’Euro, alle economie dei paesi membri e ai giovani. Confidiamo nella ‘vision’ del Ministro Fornero e del suo Vice Martone. Siamo pronti a presentare loro le nostre idee e contribuire alla costruzione di un futuro che possa essere sempre più a misura di giovani”.

 

Marco Cappa
Presidente Giovani Democratici Europei

 

Roma, 2 Maggio 2012

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Roma, 2 Maggio 2012

Jerusalem: A Global and Local Issue

Jerusalem is the holy city for the three major monotheistic religions that share the revelation of the Pentateuch; for Jews it’s the city of the Wailing Wall and of Temple Mount, for Christians the place of passion, death and resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth, for Muslims the set from which the Prophet is believed to have ascended to heaven and where today is the Noble Sanctuary of Al-Haram Ash-Sharif. In the popular imagination, therefore, “the city of Jerusalem” is the Old City, that is enclosed within its walls built by Suleiman the Magnificent in 1538. In addition, it’s universally known that Jerusalem represents a kind of huge concentration of all issues related to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. In the city, in fact, the historical and religious complexity is palpable even in social and economic relations and so, the region (land) inevitably becomes not only place but also subject of conflict. Within the walls of the Old City the control and management of places, considered sacred by different religions are reason of argument; while in the wider area of the municipality of Jerusalem there is a rather profound disagreement on rights of use and transit of the land, and also on administrative boundaries. This state of affairs is now even more complex because of the objective constraints imposed by the construction of Security Fence that envelops the city and saves only the western side. According to Israel, this physical barrier has been erected for the safety of the Jerusalemite people, threatened in particular after the Second Intifadah, according to the Palestinians it is a division both symbolic and tangible that seeks to impose a de facto situation on the ground; a way to create a path of no-return whereby Jerusalem, enlarged and enclosed, would be permanently attached to Israel, despite international law and the many pronouncements of the United Nations. The use and spatial planning represents one of the main causes of division. In this direction, together with the Security Wall, it is the construction of Israeli settlements in the north (Givat Zeev),South-West (Gush Etzion) and East (Maale Adumim, Kfar Adumimand) of the Old Town. This is, overall, a process of spatial fragmentation, linked to a re-territorialisation in progress since the first Arab-Israeli war.

This process, which began to provide “new” Jerusalem a different identity, is causing severe social changes and is exacerbating tensions. Which is Jerusalem? Where does it begin and end? Who and how many are its inhabitants? By analyzing different points of view and international law, it is very difficult to give a clear answer to these questions. What you can instead grasp is the key role that Jerusalem might take, as well as, conversely, the possible marginality. In a context of collaboration and mutual recognition between Israelis and Palestinians, the city may in fact perform a valuable “hinge” function , whether it goes in the direction of two different States which constitute the capital city, or whether it takes into account the hypothesis of a “special” city under international protection, or, again if the prospect of a single multiethnic State was to prevail. Among the two components of ethnic and religious practice there is a clear complementarily: the Palestinian Arab labor can be (in many cases is already) very important for Israel in many fields, such as construction, agriculture, industry and even services, Israelis technology and economic development could instead allow a rapid improvement of living conditions in the city as a whole, for the entire population. In this context, Jerusalem could become again the reference point for the economy of the Middle East and resume its historic role as a bridge between East and West. Jerusalem would again be open and integrated, even more than today, and be destination of large flows of international tourism, which would be an additional driving force for urban development. The city could, on the other hand, merely be an offshoot of the State of Israel, should it continue to remain closed because of the persisting Israeli-Palestinian conflict . The Security Wall, although statistics show a decline in terrorist attacks in the city, it does not seem

to be a long-term solution. It not only divides Israelis from Palestinian Arabs, but even among themselves. In West Bank, in fact, the track cuts the region into two parts and makes connections complex between North/South complicating the connections with other Palestinian centers (Jericho, Ramallah, Bethlehem, Jenin, Hebron). For Israelis, the situation is not at the best because the Security Wall also makes it difficult for relations between those who are inside the path and those who were cut out. Through the land use resulting, the city has lost its traditional hinterland towards all points of the compass except the West, gaining instead preferential links with Israeli settlements within a radius of about ten kilometers from the administrative limits. In conclusion it is right to say that the geography of Jerusalem seems therefore crucial, as well as the city itself, for Palestine and throughout the Middle East, but even for the world as a whole. Although in recent years the general rule prevailed in considering the status of Jerusalem as a problem to be totally submitted to the agreements between the two parties in conflict, one gets the impression that a definition of this thorny issue can only be identified through the involvement of major geopolitical players worldwide, including Europe, since the fairness and stability of the solution rests not only on the balance of local or regional, but also on the credibility of the United Nations and the relations between the Muslim world on the one hand and the so-called “West” on the other.

Nicola Censini LLM

Young Democrats for Europe (YDE)
Jeunes Democrates Europeens (JDE)
YDE is the youth wing of the European Party.We embrace the key role of democratic principles, underlined in the Lisbon Treaty and shrined in our political belief: democracy, freedom, equality, participation, sustainability and solidarity.

Contact us

    OUR PARTNERS