Tip:
Highlight text to annotate it
X
Peter Stegnyi, Russian diplomat, member of the Russian Council on International Affairs (RCIA)
On the Turkish-American relations ... this has always been a strategic partnership.
Turkey is a member of NATO, it operates under the strategy of Euro-Atlantic security.
Of course, functionally, its role has changed.
Prior to 1991, Turkey was an outpost of the Euro-Atlantic alliance against... in connection to the Soviet threat.
After 1991, the situation has changed, and Turkey supports a lot of trends for which we stand.
The development of active relations with Turkey in the 2000s, between Russia and Turkey, the huge increase in turnover up to $38 billion a year, and now the aim has been set to $100 billion.
It, of course, raises questions among the Western allies of Turkey.
And this is also one of the manifestations of such slightly paradoxical dual identity of Turkey.
On the one hand, it is a European country, on the other hand, it is an Asian country.
On the one hand, it is a member of NATO, on the other hand, it has very important interests with Iran, which is its very important, and with the Arab world.
And so here. Whatever you take, as regards Turkey, everything is this way.
Hence, it seems to me, some tactical differences that arise between the Turks and the Americans.
Why do I say "tactical"? Because when it comes to strategy, the contacts in the field of missile defense, the Turks agreed to put U.S. missiles on its territory, although it was accompanied by a number of conditions that take into account Turkey's relations with both Russia and Iran.
As for the Gulen factor in the Turkish-American relations, I do not think he is playing a special role now.
During the last visit of Erdogan to Washington, DC, as recently as last month, one of his deputies met with Gulen, according to newspaper reports.
I would not draw a direct link here, there are more serious, more long-lasting things than this.
As for Gulen as a kind of a conductor from Houston, here I also think that all the comparisons with and memories of Erbakan, do not have grounds.
Because firstly, the ruling party has gone far ahead, and it is very interesting for the whole region and even in a global sense, the search for the real co-existence of democracy and Islamic culture.
And it certainly remains on a secular position, so here to put together somehow artificially Erdogan and Erbakan, I think it is a politically flawed position, and we should not go into this direction.
As for the overall work with the media, here, too, the question has been asked.
We all remember what blew up the situation, that little detail that CNN Turk, one of the most popular TV stations, broadcasted a culinary duel during the peak of the events at Taksim, and this has raised a questions in the community.
There began to emerge some amateur webcasts, live TV broadcasts, and radio stations such as T-24, which is very popular in Turkey at the moment, even the Nobel Prize winner, Orhan Pamuk, appeared on it and shared his assessment of Taksim.