He has eaten his words. A good thing, too! (22.12.2016)

The day before yesterday, a meeting was held in Moscow attended by the Turkish, Iranian and Russian foreign and defence ministers. This was a very important meeting unattended by the USA at which decisions that will shape Syria’s future were taken.
The meeting was overshadowed by ambassador Karlov’s assassination. It was not covered in the media to the extent its importance warranted. It was in fact a meeting that deserved to be spoken about, written about and commented on for days.

Let experts make these assessments and comments.
But this non-expert is of the opinion that we are forced to say: ‘Turkey’s entire Syrian policy of recent years has been binned; on top of this, Turkey’s foreign policy has also undergone very fundamental change from that practised until now.’

I will quote a key paragraph from the statement issued at the end of the meeting known as the ‘Moscow Declaration’ and over which it is repeatedly stressed the three countries have reached agreement:
‘Russia, Iran and Turkey are prepared to work towards the reaching of a peace agreement between the Syrian government and the opposition and to act as guarantors of such an agreement. The three countries agree that the priority in Syria is not to overthrow the Assad government, but to combat terrorism.’

Let me now recall a key paragraph in a speech by Tayyip Erdoğan, the architect of Turkey’s Syria policy, a mere three weeks ago:
“We said patience, patience, patience, but finally we could stand it no more and were forced to enter Syria along with the Free Syrian Army. Why did we do this? ... We went there to end the reign of Assad, the tyrant who wields state terror. and for no other reason.”

The two paragraphs that I have quoted one after the other are in stark contradiction.
I have no idea what a contradiction on this scale and such a sharp U-turn is called in the language of diplomacy. I will leave that to the experts. But, in my language (and I imagine on your language, too) this is called “eating your own words.”

There’s more.Let me remind you of one more thing.
Six months ago, on 21 June 2016, Tayyip Erdoğan, setting out his lofty ideas about the organisations that were stomping around Syria, decreed as follows:
‘If those who oppose DAESH are not terrorist organisations, why then do you call Al-Nusra a terrorist organisation? Al-Nusra is also waging a very serious fight against DAESH.’

This sentence is so clear as to require no supplement or comment.
This being so, let me now quote a brief paragraph from the Moscow Declaration announced the day before yesterday:

‘... The three countries attest to their resolve to cooperate both in combatting ISIL and Al-Nusra and in separating the other armed opposition groups from these terrorist organisations. ...’

Come again?

If that is not eating your own words, what is it?

***

Those who define their political stance purely and simply in terms of ‘opposition to Erdoğan’ may construe the expression ‘eating your own words’ to express opposition. They may make comments like: ‘Oh boy, now that’s how you get a man to eat his words.’
This would be wrong.

It is good for the government, out of whatever reason and whatever political preferences, to abandon an irresponsible policy preference that will drag Turkey into a war in which there will be no winner in the Middle East quagmire, accept a neighbouring country’s sovereignty irrespective of how awful its regime is, and redraft its policies along such lines. This is a boon for those who stand in the ranks of peace and not war.

***

But...
The AKP government has also, in so reorienting itself, heralded its entry into a different political orbit. One in which Putin’s Russia, the Mullahs’ Iran and Erdoğan’s Turkey will go hand in hand.

I do not have a column tomorrow. I will try to cadge a favour from the editorial office. If they permit it, tomorrow, otherwise in my next column, I will leave a Claw Mark on the sentence just above.

AYDIN ENGİN