Articles and Comments 

Archive

THE WORLD’S NEW AFFAIRS
THE GLOBAL AND REGIONAL SECURITY BALANCE:
USA-EU AND TURKEY; “INDISPENSABLE CYPRUS”

I.                    Introduction: “The New Process in Cyprus”

Maintaining intense arguments of the global political agenda for certain periods, Cyprus yet increased its significance in 2003 becoming the issue of important arguments and negotiations in both internal and external, together with, in national and international platforms and secured its stance in public opinion through dual and multidimensional evaluations.

Cyprus is being shown as a significant and particular party in arguments regarding the affairs between the European Union-Turkey, which is the priority aim of the Turkish Governments foreign policy.

Looking from the European Union perspective, a new era commenced for Cyprus with the approach reflected in the declaration of the EU Helsinki Summit which set as a pre-condition for Turkey’s presumed membership negotiations the aim for the parties in Cyprus to mutually conclude a model they agree on.

II.                  The Troika of Cyprus

The negotiation marathon monitored by the United Nations Secretary-General and in the framework of his Plan, which began together with the process mentioned above, is being staged as a new troika theatre between the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (TRNC) and the Greek Cypriot Administration (GCA), and is desired to be finalized, despite all difficulties.

On one hand of the troika stands the UN, the European Union term President Greece and GCA and on the other hand, Turkey and the TRNC.

In this global political platform, regarding steps to be taken on models to be submitted and solutions to be found on the issue of Cyprus, there is an effort to leave Turkey in a passive position.  However, within the new global balance and the new security Building, Cyprus as a basic strategic point of its region; acquires as regarding Turkeys future security a point of indispensable significance.

Therefore due to this significance it is quite natural that arguments regarding Cyprus are carried onto a different platform because of the internal effect of foreign security strategy expansion of Turkey’s international and national security policies.

III.                The Future Projection

This will be evaluated below in three different ways.

1. Global Security Balance:

The global and regional level of security balance strategy of the multilateral new affairs of the world formed following the bi-polar power balance termination, rests on two main axis’s.

The mid-line security band carrying the tension of these new axis’s; the Transatlantic (USA) and the West (EU) is a delicate scale between the two scales of balances.  While in the West scale of balance the Eastern Mediterranean and the Middle-East area is present in the East scale, India-Pakistan- Afghanistan (the Indian triangle) takes its place.  It is clear that the strategic security points balancing these areas are; Cyprus (TRNC-GCA) and Palestine (Israel).

2. Eastern Mediterranean Security Building: “Core Security area”:

The lower south-west Caspian region, the west of the Gulf region and the over crossing point of the Afro-Eurasia joints, the Eastern Mediterranean area, defined as the core security area, has a structure of its own (sui generis) and with this structure aims at achieving a new internal regional balance qualification within the global balance.

This geo-strategic characteristic owing to its natural structure is becoming more effective and determinant on global-regional strategic balance systems.

This geo-strategic characteristic, in the European Union perspective (the Europe-Mediterranean/Barcelona process) is defined as “South-East European Security Building”;  in the perspective of Turkey (USA, England, Israel and Egypt) is defined as “Eastern-Mediterranean Security Building”.

The Eastern Mediterranean Security Building is the main control point of the area between central Eurasia and Afro-Eurasia.  Cyprus is the central base for eastern Mediterranean Security Building.  Another strategic interregional balance point for Cyprus is Palestine.

However, the central base for the southeast European Security Building is Central Balkans.  The regional security Building of its lower boundary point of the southeast central boundary of Europe is once again Cyprus.

In the worlds new affairs, within the strategic framework of being effective and in charge of the global balance; the definition of the Eastern Mediterranean Security Building and the strategy of Cyprus’ positioning, is directly proportionate. 

With the Eastern Mediterranean Security Building, in the near future, an “Eastern Mediterranean Strategic, Economic Partnership” comprehensively with Inner Mediterranean and the Near East is aimed to be created, therefore, to attain a peaceful and stable atmosphere.  Naturally, this strategic cooperation and partnership will therefore become the common benefit of the USA, Turkey, Israel, Egypt, Syria and other countries of the region.

In this structure, instead of an effective EU, another global status membership of the EU will be in question. Turkey’s geo-political influence area of Eastern Mediterranean Security Building will be more effective without non-geographic partners. Geo-political conflicts and the tendency to internally encompass the other party within cooperation activities taking place in areas of geography will gain weight.

3. Turkey’s National Security: “Close Circuit Security”: Except for global-regional positioning, within Turkey’s national security policy, the most significant concept in external security is “Strategic Perception and Comprehension of Close Circuit Security”.  In Turkey’s internally effected approach to external security, with the variation of NATO global security policies, the  “variation of levels for National interest” is effective.

Along with geo-political positioning advantages (potential interests), Turkey has geo-political disadvantages (potential threats).

The hot threat level in the East and South, the instability in the North and West direction, creating a cold threat level, tenders activity.  The Cyprus issue should be evaluated in such a perspective where the mixture of the hot and the cold threat is wrapped in a diplomatic nature, qualified as “Warm War Strategy” or “Pressure of Asymmetric Threat”.

In the framework of a unilateral EU directive, in the process of the GCA with the qualification of representing the whole of Cyprus to become an EU member, the GCA serving as means for Greece’s national interest, is at the same time enlarging EU’s security and geo-political influence area that will constitute a risk for Turkey’s close circuit security.

For Turkey, the border of internal security begins 150 km externally from her borders.  Turkey’s border security is 1500 km externally from her borders.  This area of security at the same time constitutes our close circuit security zone.  Briefly, Cyprus is positioned as a close circuit security point for Turkey in its south sector and also due to positioned external forces qualifies as an asymmetric threat point.

If the EU in its affairs with Turkey, being structured and directed with reciprocal interest and solidarity principles deriving from international agreements, aims at taking into consideration Turkey’s close circuit security.  It is clearly evident that it is necessary, in order to protect the peace in the region, for the TRNC to enter the EU directly as a recognized country or to establish affairs.  Whereas, the EU, with a model finalized with the Helsinki perspective, in the event that GCA enters the EU representing the whole of Cyprus, the danger continues of the probable conception that, the TRNC part (of the so-called Cyprus) is under invasion of Turkey.

In the perspective of the Eastern-Mediterranean Security Building and the Balance of Powers, it is not likely that the EU would risk having a direct hot intervention.  Instead, in the process of the intensified Cyprus negotiations, creating instability in the TRNC area and creating a possibility for an international intervention (in order to obtain peace- indirectly to situate military force) could be perceived as a more realistic approach the EU would take. 

Facing probable pressure from the EU, to remind the national threat risk, creates the end of “falling in to a trap that if we are not imprisoned we shall be hanged”.  Whereas, for Turkey, Cyprus being the priority, other issues in the negotiation process with the EU, the EU to carry anxiety however, Turkey’s synthesis on her national requirements and (above) international norms should be based on necessity.

In the event that Turkey does not eliminate the EU’S “Pressure of Asymmetric Threat” with carefully prepared modification suggestions, heedlessly to fall in a position where she carries this within herself could after a period turn into an ignorant mistake.

4. EU Security and Defense Policy and Turkey: “Tension Strategy and Encompassing the Future”:  In the structure of the European Union Convention, the EU, having prepared its institutional identity and structural constitution, has not yet completed its formation.

In this process, the German geo-political influence scope with its determining effect is generally felt.  The new concept developed by the EU for its Common Security and Defense Policy (ESDP), aims to renew primarily changed sovereignty in regional structures of the east and south regions except for NATO functions.

Therefore, at the points of Albania, Macedonia, Kosovo, Bosnia, Bulgaria, Western Thrace together with Ukraine and Georgia; the EU’s geo-political influence and Turkey’s geo-political influence override and clash.

The decomposition that will become evident in Georgia in the near future, the conflict, which recently increased and continues in the Albania-Macedonia axis, will enter a new process with Cyprus.  Together with this, the Cyprus issue increases the geographic threat level.

The EU is surreptitiously increasing the “threat of limiting skills” of Turkey in her south sector.  This is nothing else but a fragment of the strategy to besiege the future of a county.

IV Conclusion.

Turkey’s strategic significance has become apparent upon the Iraq operation structured to combat terrorism and the threat of weapons of mass destruction.  With the USA and Europe close relations (Transatlantic-Europe Cooperation) and NATO becoming foreground, Europe’s tough approach against Turkey may smoothed.

The new world affairs, just like for every country establishes the need for Turkey also to fulfill certain responsibilities:

Ø       Many political modification requirements, which were lost in the process of affairs with the EU, should be shared with the public.

Ø       As the aim of our national security policies on Cyprus: “two individual states and two separate nations” should be reflected in the conclusion documents of the UN and the EU.

Ø       What would be normal other than, on the condition that “the EU and the GCA recognize the TRNC”, the membership of the candidate states of Cyprus and Turkey to be evaluated as simultaneous in 2004, which shall open the route of the historical Turkish-Greek compromise based on the gist of EU’s priority on historical compromise.  Of course in the contrary situation, this will be perceived as an pressure of asymmetric threat to Turkey’s security; the GCA together with Greece and the EU may be evaluated in the framework of indirect conflict, hence, with negotiations based on potential and strategic balance, the annexation together with its risks of the TRNC before the end of 2004 can even be considered,

Ø       According to the Guarantor ship Protocols (Zurich and London) and the 1960 Cyprus Republic by constitutional status; “not being a unitary state, subject to conditions of its own (sui generis), acquire measures to prevent internal oppression, and has a partnership concept based on the equality of the two founding partners under guarantee.  In order for Cyprus to apply to an international institution, both partners (GCA and TRNC) should agree to this” is legally explicit.

Ø       Under the circumstances, the international community overlooking the “Akritas Plan and the decision of Enosis” and their application, concentrating on the aftermath of 1974, together with damaging its neutrality, tends to bring to ones mind, the question on the line of law and balance of power.  In this case, Turkey should urgently come together with the Guarantor countries of England and Greece accepted as such by the UN so that; in order for the “dreams of peace of the regions children are not made impossible due to the matters they are in breach”, therefore to seeking a settlement, the protection and respect to rights, would be directly proportionate to achieve the above legally and effectively.

Briefly, on the Cyprus issue, it is absurd for the UN and the EU; without establishing a new, lasting, peaceful and acceptable legitimate balance, in cooperation with Turkey,  to attempt to eliminate the previous existing one, which will negatively affect the regional and global balance.

Av. Hakan Hanlý
International and EU Law Expert.