with welcome to was apart. as the warning ukraine approaches it's 6 months mark, the only party that seems to be eager and willing to mediate is turkey, which is all the more astonishing, given that current continues selling weapons to your brain. and growing its trade with russia, well, also remaining a willing, although a bit disruptive member of nato is there is something about these guys that present everyone understands and others don't want to discuss it. i'm now joined by building a church researcher and they set a home based for political, economic and social research in ankara. is that all you're going to great to talk to. thank you very much for your time. thank you very much. now one of the most cited and popular metaphor is in turkey. political very nice killer is that of a breach, a breach that's been east and west, that's been political religiosity, and secularism etc. and while i don't think that turkish policy is athletic, i think it can be pretty cynical terms. i do think it's remarkable in a sense of being able to reconcile, be irreconcilable and hold the offices that other countries are not able to hold. what do you attribute that to me? well, i personally don't like the metaphor of being a bridge. and there were periods that turkey preferred other metaphors rather than a bridge based on, based on their transforming will do and trans transport me perception of their own capacity and power. that's why the ra, a number of people who don't agree with the medical bridge, and i'm one of them. okay, which one you prefer for the current times? what are which metaphors do you think describes the current stance of turkey, the bad random metaphor for a very long time. many turks preferred rather more, rather more active role attributes, attributes to so as being a bridge is kind of a passive metal. basically bridges something where, you know, vehicle you know, people just, you know, puff over. so turkey does not obviously want to be such as such a passive being, it has its own, it has its own claim for itself. it has the sort of things that contribute to gold and when it comes to international stature, so on. so that's why rather than a metaphor cookie and from from a turkey that has national interest, it is capable of seeing its own national interest, but at the same time being and meaningful and valuable member of international community. in the, in the previous decades, we use this as, okay, must be a core country rather than a bridge and you know, in line with the increased increase claim or so to miss foreign policy. so that's, that's a little bit of summing up of how we think about this now, while we haven't been able so far to come up with the matter for, i think one term that would describe tricky sounds at this point of time is edgy because president eric on has down things that are pretty polarizing. i mean i, he was pretty straightforward and calling on me to resist the so called russian aggression in ukraine. and then the same time he managed to not only maintain, but i think deep and he's dialogue with the kremlin. is that about the personality of the leader, or is it as something institutional? you know, the country stands rather than the influence of the particular personality? i would say both because there are, there are certain elements even in the opposition, and he appreciate the appreciate how prison avalon is handling this issue. while at the same time, there are, there are still opposite to figures. he called for full engagement with the, with the western block, so to speak, against russian songs. so i would say both, there are the right elements, both in person, in his personality and turkey, as a, as a country, i would say, as a country, what he's being doing has been being appreciated by the why the public. on the same time, it depends on his personality is kill us. managing these, managing these, let's say contradictory conflict through roles and stances. and when it comes to, when it comes to his, let's say, why, why not rushed? why not natal is doing enough. it was basically calling for consistency and rather than rather than being rather than being hawkish against russia. so as a nathan member of course, numbers, who would we, you, we would call as a war monger it, but at the same time and nothing, nothing or things were not enough to let's say, need the worst. that's why that's why was calling full action just to just in just do they invite the other other members to consider what he was there to provoke in this regard. but if we are serious, what kind of action do you think he was calling for? what kind of action native could really take this to deter the so called russian aggression? no, it's, and it's because like talking isn't it a member? and when the law certainly the members who are calling for let's say, the reactions to just the brain. turkey, it was aware that it would have to, you know, it was somehow in influencing impacts took his policy or construct the area of maneuver. that's why, and this is, this is what everyone has done in the us. you know, they will call an out some contradictions, especially when it comes to where catching that love to put it more quickly. now you wrote recently that the war war in the ukraine, turkey, where it's the most, that is the economy driving of the energy prices and decreasing the flow of tours from both russia and ukraine. but there are also some offsides, for example, be the sales of turkish drones and other weaponry has, have increased dramatically. the prominence of turkey as the natural gas hub also has risen, especially in the aftermath of the decision to decrease its reliance on russia. energy sources on balance has really been all the negative, or anchor and bellows. i would say it's not clear, yes, but i can, i can only, i can only agree that there are both ups and downs, but i would, i would say that downs and negative 5 much more prevalent on those points that you mentioned constantly with them fully because in terms of drone exports, even without even without the ukrainian crisis. and the drone exports were doing really well. and actually, there was no, there's no regulation with a ukrainian war with android experts, turkey. and that's why that's why i seeing turkey definite, the woods prefer, and in the absence of war, for its full export of drones rather than the present war. and at the same time, when it comes to being a hub of natural gas or transfer transport, european natural gas needs, in theory. yes. other other hubs, the other, let's say markets will be, will be important. but in practice, we haven't seen yet any, any concrete project that was, that is put in place toki could test. so that's why the to mean the 2 main ports of advantages you mention, i don't thing on those because turkey benefitted. that's why negative thoughts are much more greater than the 5. well i, if i may and just mentioned that it seems to be a little bit reserved about the weather in the ukrainian company has led to the increase sales of turkish jones. and i can say from russia's experience, that russia dissipation and syria has dramatically contributed to rising sales. and there is nothing particular shameful there. because once you demonstrate the advocacy of your products on the battlefield, many countries, and in fact, i've seen some statements coming from countries that are willing to purchase, purchase your equipment, saying that they, they've seen those drones in action. and that, that is what influenced our decision. i'm not suggesting that turkey is benefiting from this war purposefully, but there are obviously some indirect benefits also, when it comes to weapon sales. now that is, the better is that it's made. there was the exact point why i don't see the plaintiff war, you know, increase the sales any because when it comes to showcase your products efficacy and marketing, it's carol box, libya, syria, all already you know quite enough. and equating across it to be fair, to be strong, as are not at the very forefront. that's why i think if there are any impact ukrainian crisis, positively speak onto the export, it is the minimum. that's why this was, i said, you know, even without the war, that's why and be with the truth or war even for the staple wouldn't. well, i think we would prefer that to, i mean, if russia could solve this issue in any other way, i'm sure it would do that. speaking of which i remember when they were in syria was proceeding. it was very vocal that if you cured concerns, there were impinged upon by the americans, by the dealings with the courage, by the arming of the courage, by forming certain areas that could be used for attacks against turkey, men, mainland. and i think that, that back down, moscow was pretty accommodating of anchor as concerns up to a certain point. now, we have a situation in ukraine where russia 4 years have been saying that if security interest in ukraine being violated by the west, arming ukraine and using it at least from most perspective as the prophecy, platform for an aggression, for a negative sense against russian. do you think those issues are comparable, the kurdish question and the ukranian question, could they be compared to states 1st, the close follow up to an issue? that's why i know the details and time time spent all of the events, and that's why i have a reservation of your, of your statement about when it comes to russian be much more accommodated to is national interest because there were pretty clear incidents that you know, threatens turkey, the interest of his assets on the ground. and yes, basically it took me as much more suffering from united states on the part of the a p y, d y, p g presence. but that is not the only took of national interest or security interest in northern syria. the influx of refugee is another issue. and i would say if the example russians sponsor, the russian bags, which in bombardments, have been much more damaging. this is an interest of security at times more than maybe more than probably what the g y, p g is threat. so in that sense, yes, locally speaking, when it comes to discourse and narrative. yes, russians are much more accommodated. is national interest, but we've come suppressed this picture is not that's not that clear. absolutely. and you know, to give everything, i mean, i think, to some extent, rushing her to present a very interesting pair of countries that have tons, divergent security interest. as we all remember, at least in russia, the 2015 incident of, i'm camera shooting down, they slide, i just, russian fighter jet over syria. how relations deteriorated, almost over nice. turkey became a enemy almost overnight. and the 2 countries have been able to walk that back and resume some practical corporation. what do you think allowed for that? and do you think that could serve as a model for, for other conflicts? well that's, that's the tells you, tells me enough about the complexity and special build this relationship. it includes both elements of, you know, come competition and even even conflict. but at the same time, it involves the elements of corporation on the one hand, and i, and i call this 3rd 5th, is a 3rd area of interest in those areas of interest. russian interests are quite comfortable in almost in almost all geographies regions that we had with. we have interest. we find ourselves on the other side of the camp on the other, on rival camp. but when it comes to buy lexical relations, we have very deep, very strong relationship relation. and that's why and for the staples, i believe, for the sake of those critical and strategic corporation areas. in bilateral relations, we tend to overcome the difficulties and differences over the areas and regions and where when it comes to even the, even the, even the height of christ, such as the bellman of the russian jets. i believe the existence of those critical strategic by little pies helped help to overcome this difficult. and at the same time as there's a very, very determining factor, i believe the personal chemistry between present $150.00. so when it comes to the russian relations and this spring, i believe avalon and bilateral relationship is very determinative to the extent that if both leaders are out of office we can't, we come to, you know, let's say picture, same level of engagement on both sides of the relation while mister, our 3rd on that's what i actually disagree with you strongly, but we will continue our discussion in a few moments after a short break. thank you. ah ah ah, ah . ah ah welcome back to will depart a researcher at bisetti foundation of political, economic and social research in m correct. mr. austin, before the break, he mentioned this unprecedented personal relationship with been president putin as president. and let me quote you here in one of your articles, he suggested that putin knows no one who is more reliable and trustworthy than air, though on. and i don't know how you know, with those. but i know from my sources that present i go on is perhaps one of the least trusted leaders for the kremlin. but that's that, that is what makes dealing with him so much easier because it's not about trust or principal for the crime. and it's about sober calculation to hold your partner's interests and motivations and trying to need them half way, you know, have certain things for yourself, and also making sure that your partner is satisfied to at least to some extent, until idealizing the personal relationship. but then put in an area on with what does that mean? it is a result of the outcomes, the result of a calculation and knowing, knowing your partner role. but i still think that there was a, there was an extra elements in this personal relationship that is maybe like in other personal relationships, both $1.00 and $2.00 can, let's say respect each other as the respectable leaders. and when it comes to and i can't speak before present picking, obviously, but i can see the present one as i know him as a citizen and of an observer of his politics. and he's, he's a leader who is personalizing his relationships with other leaders, with other leaders. and when it's trust is betrayed, is, is, you know, they're gravely annoyed. and there are, there are consequences in those occasions. and that's why i believe, despite all the difficulties between turkey and russia, eastern leaders somehow managed to see, you know, sol, their problems. and this is, this is based on the list a track record with, with one another for the past, for the past, let's say experience in their relationships. and i believe both leaders think that when we agreed on something, the other one will deliver will keep his word. and i think this is not always the case with being leaders. and that's why i believe these to leave the slide all the differences. they hold this element daily, both as one and 2 team. and that's why i think that's why i bet that in the nose, no one more trustworthy than everyone. i think i think it won't be for sure. i know that the other ones will keep his word and it is, and it's to the well again, this is something that is pretty contestable because if you remember back in 2015, we can describe that attack by a turkish armed forces against the russian just as a stab in the back, it was a betrayal of trust for him and for him as a, as a person, not just as a leader, but as a person, as a man. that was, that was huge. but i think the, the reason why they have been able to overcome that is because both leaders have an ability to put that country's interest before their personal sentiments. so regardless of whether they liked each other or not, they see the value in collaborating with one another. speaking of we do you think that incident of 2015 is taken into account by the turkish strategist as they devised best strategy in the ukranian conflict? because for now and for it has been pretty artful in balancing its interest in ukraine. its interest in russia, its interest with what the west, but he shows it can turn into a russia down to me almost overnight about the incident. i understand that there was the russian side of the story as the in the back. and we be also followed those coverages at the time. but those also the side of the story and incidence and prices or accidents happen in a relationship. and if you ask the side of the story and they would reply that, there was reply that there was them, there was an, an identified, warplane was constantly, it was constantly, you know, violating the s face. that's why we had no choice but down. and so there are 2 versions of the story and when it comes to whether this can be likened to the teacher and the, and the current situation and the ability to turn into a conflict between the 2 side. i don't think so. i mean, not just because of the accidents in the past, down the jet and by the same time and took and you know, off of those incident as been, it's been years and in total russian relations, many things happen since then we had, we had close relations we had, we had inexperienced, over the working together in the, in the format of us on a we had, we had other mechanisms and even took us to dream for example, after that incident. so so many things happen and i think the trust and the relationship or the regime or the relationship matured and gained a lot of experience. and that's why that's why i think the accident, although the incidence, i don't think it's repeatable. but not because, but just because it has become a trauma that toby's basically, you know, a few below repetitions with but do we actually 230 is viewing ukrainian crisis in a, in a company. the difference in a copy of a difference. let's say framework, that's why i don't think it is as comparable to syrian issue. well, the hearing issue was also really complex and i would suggest that the complexities have some similarities. nevertheless, as i said, tricky has been pretty good at balancing its interest in ukraine and right in russia. but when we look at the trade side of things, we know the church was pretty shrewd. businessman, i read somewhere, i think it was in harvard business review, that the big international companies preferred to hire turkish executives because they are good at risk taking. they can push a risk to the limit, but also take necessary precaution. so turn, pretty good when it comes to business trade, this russia is 4 times larger than that trade with ukraine for now they've been able to sort of balance both. but if push comes to shove, de thing turks would choose, would prefer to follow the money. all would they prefer to follow some sort of a principle that the often allude to in your writings. and again, when it comes, when we talk about balancing that is the that is the core interest of turkey. and i understand that if you just compare the importance of the 2 countries to turkey based on praise, the pitch was clear, but the reality is clear. and not only that's all the trade when it comes to our energy projects, when it comes to our defense, you know, co corporation in the palm of $400.00 and other trade and tourism. so on. and so for the relation medical and even based on even based on that there is no comparison. but these reasons are not the, are not the one you know. and determining is attitude to this, to this war. the war is the was damaging and hurting, but took his national interest. it is, it is happening in the immediate neighborhood. it has your political consequences. and ukraine is, is, is another deer, and valuable partner with okie. dokie basically does not want to choose between the 2 and it is and it is gaining. it's a training based on based on this balancing between the 2. so, so it doesn't, it doesn't want to basically choose between the 2. and no matter how big the trade with, with russia and even even other corporation areas. it's not necessarily a reason to, let's say, this ukraine, for the sake of russia now balancing balancing the court, the court interest. and i don't think a russia is actually pushing or pressing turkey in that direction. rushes foreign policy is also based on balancing. but there is another big player there by the time in the united states and the western general, which is willing to make sure that the countries make a distinctive choice. now, a few days ago, as i'm sure, you know, i turned to drop this opposition to nato enlargement by acquiescing to simmons and wittons membership. and i heard you say that it was done because churches, security concerns were listen to you. but do you think tricky security as a member of nato, as a country bound by the collective defense capture? chapter 5, do you think it's security will increase as a result of nathan marching? because clearly that's not going to bring anything positive for the relations between russian. nathan well took is the thing a principal policy even even if they did not did not apply for membership is principles position was favoring neighbors, enlargements, past years. that's why there's no, there is no inconsistency in that. the only the on the point is i'm sure you are well aware that took, it does not have categorical principles opposite to sweden. as long as, as long as they take into account took, is national interest and need, if the month. so that's why, that's why there is no surprise there if they agree taken into consideration took in national ticket with the interest fun. anyone, anyone welcome in natal nato. a line. so that's, that's why that's why it's a quest to that, that number on them. and whether it's bill, whether it will, if they increase security, that is, that is another, that is another issue. and whether, whether be to increase or decrease, i don't think i don't think there was and there's such and such an impact is just basically maintaining your security as it is either you don't necessarily have to increase it. but as long as you make sure that you are secure, you can, you can continue all your role in this alliance. it's interesting that this is pretty much how, let's go with frame it's policy in your brain and you don't want to increase your security, but you want to protect the existing balance of power, but we are out of time for now. thank you very much for your insights today. thank you. and thank you for watching called to see again, well the part ah mm hm. mm hm. i with ukrainian forces launch a rocket attack on a military base, new guns just a day after a deadly attack near kept song left to 7. people that here released is a convicted commander of a fall ride battalion who was found guilty of torturing and kidnapping. people in the dom bus as part of an amnesty for criminals with combat experienced 0 slides to piracy with the us dollar for the 1st time in 20 years with some european politicians now saying the sanctions imposed on russia are a mistake and sure.
Related Keywords
Moscow , Moskva , Russia , United States , Sweden , South Africa , Libya , Ankara , Turkey , Syria , Kremlin , Ukraine , Turks , Americans , Natal , Ukrainian , Turkish , Syrian , Russian , Russians , Asa Nathan , Joseph Burrell ,
vimarsana.com © 2020. All Rights Reserved.