US-Turkey Relations and future of NATO

At present, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) faces more challenges than ever. For some, NATO is ‘clinically dead’. After the fall of the Soviet Union, NATO has become a Cold War remnant of a global security organization, whose mission and existence is being questioned openly.

Geopolitical developments over the last three decades have further marginalized NATO’s role around the world. In the past, military intervention decisions were usually made within an alliance framework by some powerful NATO member states.

The biggest challenge facing NATO cohesion is the US-Turkish antagonism that has arisen mainly as a result of the different geopolitical priorities set by Ankara and Washington in the Eastern Mediterranean and the Middle East.

The US sanctions against Turkey have highlighted deficiencies in the Alliance’s ranks. Among other urgent issues, the new US administration will need to focus on NATO cohesion issues and take important initiatives along with other member-states about the future of the Alliance.

The new US President faces the difficult task to restore trust in US-Turkey relations. This dialogue will entail existing and new areas of collaboration to de-escalate tensions in bilateral relations. Yet, such de-escalation presupposes a US initiative require US concessions for Ankara. The next few months will be of utmost significance both for the prospects of US-Turkey relations and the NATO future of Turkey.

The US sanctions against Turkey are a source of concern in the ranks of the Alliance. The suspension of the shipment of F-35 fighters to Turkey based on the signed purchase contract and their prepayment by Ankara was an introductory part of these sanctions.

Their significance is mainly psychological and confirms the tense US-Turkish relations and lack of trust as a result of developments in North Syria. Ankara’s calm reaction to the US sanctions in terms of words and actions does not mean that there is no US-Turkey crisis or the issue is over.

It is the Russian-Turkish approach that has challenged US-Turkish relations, because the revisionist policy of Moscow and Ankara aims to reshape the post-WW2 power balance in the Eastern Mediterranean and the Middle East.

The existing power vacuum in the region and the inability of the US to fill it allows new revisionist forces to emerge and fill the gap. Russia and Turkey are in effect seeking to redistribute the geopolitical power share in the region.

Turkey is the first NATO country to use both Russian and US technology. Many believe that Russian-Turkish cooperation is just the beginning, and other forms of such cooperation will follow against the NATO set of principles and modus operandi.

US must lift curbs before Iran rejoins deal; Khamenei announces final and irreversible decision

Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said on Sunday that Tehran’s “final and irreversible” decision was to return to compliance with the 2015 nuclear deal only if Washington lifts sanctions on the Islamic Republic, Iranian state TV reported.

The deal between Iran and six major powers limited Iran’s uranium enrichment activity to make it harder for Tehran to develop nuclear arms - an ambition Iran has long denied having - in return for the easing of the US and other sanctions.

It may be recalled that former US President Donald Trump had abandoned the deal in 2018, denouncing it as one-sided in Iran’s favour, and reimposed sanctions that have crippled Iran’s economy.

“Iran has fulfilled all its obligations under the deal, not the United States and the three European countries ... If they want Iran to return to its commitments, the United States must in practice ... lift all sanctions,” state TV quoted Khamenei as saying in a meeting with Air Force commanders.

“Then, after verifying whether all sanctions have been lifted correctly, we will return to full compliance ... It is the irreversible and final decision and all Iranian officials have consensus over it.”

Western media has been saying that in response to Trump’s withdrawal, Tehran has breached the deal’s key limits one after the other, building up its stockpile of low-enriched uranium, refining uranium to a higher level of purity and using advanced centrifuges for enrichment.

US President Joe Biden, who took oath last month, has said that if Tehran returned to strict compliance with the pact, Washington would follow the suit and use that as a springboard to a broader agreement that might restrict Iran’s missile development and regional activities.

Iran has repeatedly said it could quickly reverse those violations if US sanctions are removed but has ruled out any talks over the country’s ballistic missile programme and Tehran’s influence in the Middle East, where Iran and Saudi Arabia have been involved in proxy wars for decades.

Will United States allow Iran to meet global gas shortage?

Qatar witnessed a prosperous start to 2021, first scoring a major political goal by restoring diplomatic relations with Saudi Arabia and ending its almost 4-year long embargo. Qatar’s capacity to meet the global demand for LNG has elevated the Middle Eastern state into worldwide limelight.

The LNG price hike in Asia was a combination of 3 key factors – low temperatures, low spot cargo availability and persisting COVID-19 ramifications. All three were badly intertwined; low temperatures by themselves need not cause a market distortion if there is ample LNG availability in the market. Qatar’s competitors, due to their geographic location and previously concluded commercial commitments, could not reorient such volumes towards Asia.

The fact that Asia needed LNG urgently was further supported by the fact that January 2021 LNG arrivals have reached an all-time high of 28 million tons LNG. A whopping 23% of this came from Qatar and only 6% and 5%, respectively, from the United States and the Russian Federation.

Under the prevailing circumstances, the world has to find another dependable source of supply, which is Iran, to the utmost displeasure of United States and its Middle Easter allies. To save the world from tyranny, Iran must be allowed to sell its gas.

Lately, Managing Director of Pars Oil and Gas Company (POGC), responsible for developing Iran’s giant South Pars gas field, has said that the development of the mentioned field is nearly completed and all phases of the field will be fully operational in near future.

South Pars, which Iran shares with Qatar in the Persian Gulf waters, is currently divided into 24 standard offshore phases, the output of which is processed by 14 gas refineries on land.

South Pars gas field covers an area of 9,700 square kilometers, 3,700 square kilometers of which are in Iran’s territorial waters and the remaining 6,000 square kilometers, called North Dome, are situated in Qatar’s territorial waters.

The first train of the South Pars phase 14 Refinery is going to go operational early next Iranian calendar year, after which every three months another train will be inaugurated, and by the end of the next Iranian calendar year this refinery will be fully operational.

Underlining the reliance of domestic capacities and capabilities for the development of the mentioned field, it is worth noting that only 33% of the required equipment for this field was produced in Iran, but at present 75% of the necessary equipment has been indigenized.

Initially, the first two projects of the field, namely phase two and three and phase four and five, were carried out with the participation of France’s Total and Italy’s Eni, but after that the remaining phases were completed by the Iranian companies.

At the beginning of the work, five platforms were built abroad, but after that all the remaining 35 platforms were built within the country.

Iran has attained complete self-sufficiency in all aspects of gas production from South Pars field that include drilling, platform building, pipeline construction, and onshore refineries, which are the four main sectors in extracting gas from South Pars field. All equipment and machinery have become indigenized and the operators are also domestic companies.

OPEC is dead, long live OPEC plus

OPEC has been the most important factor in global oil markets with the ability to influence prices for decades. The shale revolution in the United States has brought much uncertainty for traditional producers due to the vast amounts of oil and gas that are flowing from the American energy heartland in a short period. 

The looming threat is so big, that the traditional competitor Russia agreed to align its policies with that of cartel. Moscow seems eager to squeeze all it can from the agreement, leaving little for Saudi Arabia in particular who risks losing much more due to the particular phase of the country’s economic development.

Over the years, geopolitical and economic developments have transformed the power balance between the organization’s members. One factor that determines influence more than any other is production capacity. In this context, Saudi Arabia has been the undisputed king for decades.

The level of professionalization of national oil company Saudi Aramco has made it into a formidable energy king that controls the world’s second-largest conventional oil reserves. While Venezuela's reserves are bigger, Aramco's low production costs continued Western, in particular the US political support, and relative political stability have gradually increased and maintained OPEC’s largest production capacity.

Influence is not only derived from how much one can produce but more specifically from how much one chooses not to produce. Spare capacity is the defining factor behind leverage over price development. In this area, none is bigger than Saudi Arabia. The geography and type of wells make it possible for Aramco to ramp up and bring down production relatively quickly. On average, the Arab country has usually kept 1.5 - 2 million barrels per day (mbpd) of spare capacity on hand, which is 1.5 – 2 percent of global oil demand before the Covid-19 pandemic.

The unprecedented threat of the US shale industry drove Moscow and Riyadh into each other’s arms in 2016. The first time an agreement was struck, the participants agreed to cut production by 1.8 mbpd (1.2 from OPEC and 600,000 from non-OPEC). Despite some friction and disagreements, the OPEC+ format has survived for years.

However, the disparity in interests and share of dependence on oil revenues is a continuous source of instability. According to Ronald Smith, a Moscow-based analyst at BCS GM, “as long as oil is US$45/barrel or below, it is pretty easy to get everyone in OPEC+ on the same page and cut production. And when it is US$65-70, everyone agrees it is time to put oil back on the market. But between US$50 and US$60, that is where the interests diverge.”

The price of oil currently is hovering around US$55, which means that Riyadh finds the alliance with Russia more important than the other way around. The IMF estimated that Saudi Arabia's fiscal breakeven oil price for 2021 is at US$68. Russia, in contrast is US$46. Furthermore, a larger share of the Saudi production is exported while Russians consume more of their produce domestically. Also, the economy of the latter is more diversified which gives it another trump in its negotiations with Riyadh.

Another advantage in the hands of Russian producers and the Kremlin is the weak ruble. While the riyal in Saudi Arabia is fixed against the US$, oil is traded internationally in US$ meaning the export from Russia earns producers a handsome fee when exchanged into rubles. Saudi Arabia does not enjoy the same benefit and won’t any time soon either.

The low production costs in the Arab country give it an advantage over competitors such as shale producers in the US. Riyadh expects demand for oil to return later this year when vaccination against Covid-19 kicks-in. Therefore, policymakers in the Kingdom think they'll claw back customers when oil becomes scarcer.

Recently, Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman announced that Aramco may offer additional shares to the market in the next dew few years. This shows the necessity for Riyadh to voluntarily lower production by one mbpd while Russia will increase by 130,000 bpd. Saudi Arabia is in a rush to modernize and diversify the economy by earning much-needed petrodollars while it still can.

Macron seeks to add Israel and Saudi Arabia to negotiation with Iran

According to a Reuters report, French President Emmanuel Macron has praised decision of the United States to engage with Iran. He also suggested Saudi Arabia and Israel must ultimately be involved in the negotiation with Iran. 

Macron claimed it was time for a new negotiation because Iran was closer to a nuclear weapon.  He also said the international community has to deal with Iran’s missile program.

Speaking with the Washington-based Atlantic Council think tank in a video conference from Paris, Macron noted, “We do need to finalize, indeed, a new negotiation with Iran.”

“I will do whatever I can to support any initiative from the US side to reengage a ... dialogue and I will be here ... I was here, and available two years ago and one and a half (years) ago, to try to be an honest broker and a committed broker in this dialogue,” he added.

Iran has already objected to the inclusion of Saudi Arabia to the JCPOA let alone Israel which Iran does not recognize and that it opposes a nuclear weapons free zone in West Asia.

In remarks on Wednesday, President Hassan Rouhani said there will be no changes to the content of the JCPOA and that no other country will be added to it.

Rouhani was in fact responding to Saudi Arabia which has said if the new Biden administration plans to rejoin the JCPOA its country should also be included. French President Emmanuel Macron has also called for inclusion of Saudi Arabia in the agreement. 

Rouhani emphasized, “The undue words should not be said. We did a job resulted from hard work. It took more than ten years to gain the achievements (JCPOA). In the beginning of the eleventh government, we made efforts during the first two years” to reach the multilateral agreement. 

In 2018, former US President Donald Trump quitted the JCPOA, which was designed to restrict Iran’s peaceful program in return for the lifting of the US and other sanctions. His successor, President Joe Biden, has said that if Iran returns to “strict” compliance with the deal, the US will too.

The Trump administration restored the US sanctions that Obama removed in 2015. Trump and his Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo perused a “maximum pressure” campaign against Iran with the aim of strangulating the Iranian economy. 

Abolfazl Amouei, the spokesman for the Iranian Parliament’s National Security and Foreign Policy Committee, has responded to a French call to include Saudi Arabia in any future talks with Iran about the nuclear issue by saying that there are no links between Riyadh and the issue.

“Saudi Arabia has nothing to do with the nuclear agreement,” Amouei told the Qatari-owned Al Arabi Al Jadid newspaper, declaring his country’s refusal to include Riyadh in any possible talks with the parties to the nuclear agreement reached with Iran in 2015.

He stressed, “The Islamic Republic will not negotiate again about this agreement.”

According to Amouei, Riyadh did not have a place in the nuclear negotiations and that it has nothing to do with the issues related to the nuclear agreement between Iran and major world powers, officially known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA).

Saeed Khatibzadeh, the spokesman for Iran’s Foreign Ministry, put out a statement dismissing the French president's recent remarks about the need for a new nuclear deal with Tehran. He called on Macron to “exercise self-restraint and refrain from hasty and ill-advised stances.”

“The JCPOA is a multilateral international agreement that has been endorsed and stabilized by the (UN) Security Council Resolution 2231. It is by no means re-negotiable, and its parties are also definite and unchangeable,” Khatibzadeh noted.

Pointing to the US withdrawal from the nuclear deal and Europe’s failure to maintain it, the spokesman said, “If there is any willingness to revive and save the JCPOA, the solution is easy. The US should return to the JCPOA and lift the whole JCPOA and non-JCPOA sanctions that have been imposed (on Iran) during the tenure of the previous president of that country.”

Aviv Kochav, chief of staff of Israeli armed forces, has recently issued stark threats against Iran while railing against the nuclear deal.

He said that Israel is not welcoming the expected efforts by the US and its European allies to revive the 2015 nuclear deal. The top Israeli general claimed that he had ordered several plans to launch offensive operations against Iran while voicing Israel’s opposition to any efforts to revive the JCPOA or even to improve it.

“I have instructed the IDF to prepare several operational plans in addition to existing ones, which we will develop throughout the coming year. The power to initiate them lies with the political echelon. However, the offensive options need to be prepared, ready and on the table,” Kochavi said in remarks delivered at the Israeli Institute for National Security Studies 14th Annual International Conference.

Apprehensions of Bangladesh Media

Reportedly, leading newspapers in Bangladesh have expressed frustration over a media environment in which a major investigative report leveling allegations against senior leaders and key institutions in the country had been met with “silence” in the domestic press. 

Editorials in The Daily Star and The Dhaka Tribune noted that media outlets had widely reported on the government response to an Al Jazeera report published on Monday, without describing allegations it contained.

“We are facing the absurd situation of publishing the government response without publishing what the government is responding to. So far, we have neither carried what the Al Jazeera reported nor any synopsis of it,” The Daily Star wrote in its Wednesday editorial.

The Tribune’s editorial, meanwhile, said the nation’s Digital Security Act “has had a chilling effect on Bangladeshi media.”

“The silence of the Bangladeshi media in this instance has been all-encompassing and deafening,” the Tribune wrote.

“The reason for our silence is simple: The current state of media and defamation law in Bangladesh, and how it is interpreted by the judiciary, makes it unwise for any Bangladeshi media house to venture into any kind of meaningful comment on the controversy.”

The nation’s Digital Security Act “contains language proscribing reporting that is so broad in its scope and threatens such draconian consequences that no responsible editor can take the chance of publishing reports that might even conceivably fall into its purview.”

A BenarNews review of at least 10 prominent Bengali- and English-language news portals on Wednesday found that they all based their reports on news releases from the Foreign Ministry and the army, while none of them included Al Jazeera allegations.

The 1st February report by Qatari-based television network Al Jazeera alleged that Bangladesh Army Chief Gen. Aziz Ahmed kept close links with his two foreign-based brothers who are on the run from justice after being convicted of the 1996 murder of a rival political leader.

The Al Jazeera documentary linked Aziz to corrupt deals with at least one of his brothers, who the report said had been able to travel to Bangladesh to meet with the army chief despite being a fugitive.

The report said that Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina had previously hired Aziz’s brothers Haris and Anis Ahmed as bodyguards when she was opposition leader. It alleged that the Ahmed clan’s fortunes “have been long intertwined with that” of Hasina.

It claimed that the military had secretly purchased surveillance equipment manufactured by an Israeli company, even though Bangladesh does not recognize Israel and forbids nationals from traveling there or engaging in commerce with Israelis.

The Bangladesh foreign ministry and army dismissed the allegations contained in the documentary and accompanying stories.

The Bangladesh foreign ministry in a statement on Tuesday described the report as “false and defamatory” and “anti-Bangladesh propaganda.”

It however, did not specifically address any of the charges leveled against Aziz Ahmed in the report.

“The report is nothing more than a misleading series of innuendos and insinuations in what is apparently a politically motivated ‘smear campaign’ by notorious individuals,” it said, linking them to the “extremist group” Jamaat-e-Islami, one of the largest Islamic parties in Bangladesh.

The Bangladesh Army said the surveillance equipment had been procured from Hungary for an army contingent deployed in a U.N peacekeeping mission, and that the Al Jazeera allegation was based on “false information.”

The Daily Star editorial praised the government for its “mature decision” not to block Al Jazeera’s report or “its spread on social media.”

It also expressed frustration over the lack of reporting in the domestic media on allegations that it said raised questions about the security of the country and the integrity of its institutions.

“There are people who served the PM at various times, especially during her days of struggle, who are now taking full advantage of her sense of gratitude and indulging in influence-peddling for payment in some of our highly sensitive areas,” The Daily Star said.

“There is reference to our purchase of sensitive listening devices from Israel, a country that we do not recognize. There are also the issues of false passports, NID cards and bank documents that should be looked into, especially as they involve institutions on whose integrity and honesty our security depends.”

Considered by many the leading English-language newspaper in Bangladesh, The Daily Star has a circulation of 44,000 and an editor who faces dozens of criminal charges over its journalism.

Mahfuz Anam faces 81 criminal charges filed since 2016, one of his lawyers told BenarNews.

“All of the cases were criminal in nature such as defamation and others. Currently, the courts have issued stay orders on the cases,” Chaitanya Chandra Halder said.

Mahfuz Anam turned down a request to be interviewed for this article.

Passed in 2018, the Digital Security Act empowers police to make arrests on suspicion and without a warrant. Fourteen of its 20 provisions do not allow for bail, so that whenever an accused is brought before a magistrate, he or she is almost automatically sent to jail.

A media advocacy group, the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ), said that the Bangladesh media’s decision to self censor was not surprising, while the draconian law requiring it reflected the government’s fear of a free press.

“By and large we are seeing how much of a chilling effect the Digital Security Act has had in Bangladesh,” Aliya Iftikhar, senior CPJ Asia researcher, told BenarNews.

“In the past year, we have seen dozens of frivolous DSA cases filed against journalists, and many of them have been detained for months at a time under the draconian law, for no reason other than they dared to publish critical reports. So it is not surprising that after seeing numerous colleagues in jail, the media in Bangladesh is choosing to self-censor,” Iftikhar said.

“The Bangladesh government is showing its weakness with its constant fear of a free press.”

Turkish exports to Saudi Arabia coming to grind halt

An unofficial Saudi boycott of Turkish goods reduced Turkey’s exports to the Kingdom to a record low in January 2021, despite diplomatic efforts to mend ties between the two countries. Turkish exports to Saudi Arabia dropped by a remarkable 92% in January, from US$221 million to just US$16 million YoY, according to data released by the Turkish Exporters Union (TIM).

Last year, Riyadh ramped up its efforts targeting the Turkish economy after a Turkish court’s decision to accept two separate indictments against Saudi officials said to be involved in the murder of Jamal Khashoggi in Istanbul in October 2018.

Relations between the two regional powerhouses have been at a low since the murder of the Saudi journalist, whose killing is believed by the CIA to have been ordered by Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman.

Since October, the Saudi government has been systematically pressuring local businesses not to trade with Turkish companies and to drop their goods from their shelves.

The statistics indicate a steady slowdown in Turkish exports since then. As a result, Turkey’s annual exports to Saudi Arabia decreased by 24% in 2020, to US$2.3 billion from US$3.1 billion.

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan last year tried to remedy the situation by talking to Saudi King Salman, and both agreed to hold consultations on the issue.

However, Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu’s first meeting with his Saudi counterpart Faisal bin Farhan in November 2020 ultimately failed to change the situation.

 “We have agreed to have a second meeting to discuss the problems,” one senior Turkish official said, speaking anonymously, at the time. Since then, no second meeting has taken place.

Burak Onder, a Turkish houseware and kitchenware manufacturer and exporter, told Turkish media that exports to Saudi Arabia had come to almost a complete halt because goods that had been sent to the country had been held in customs for months without any official explanation.

One senior Turkish trade ministry official, speaking anonymously, told Middle East Eye that from time to time the Saudis would release exports held in the customs after official interventions, but the general problem was still ongoing.

Turkish officials have been considerably muted over the Khashoggi murder and other issues of friction with Riyadh, such as Ankara's relationship with the Muslim Brotherhood, since last year.

"We don't have any issue other than the Khashoggi affair, which we have done as much as we could to resolve," a Turkish official said last November. "It is time to move on."