PARIS - The problem with making statements when you are the President is that you have to follow through.
Before the French intervention in Mali, President François Hollande said on Jan. 11 that in Mali, France had "no other purpose than to fight terrorism.” On Jan. 15, he revised his motives: now, on top of “stopping the terrorist aggression,” France wanted to “help Mali recover its territorial integrity” and make sure there were “legitimate authorities and an electoral process.”
No one is denying the seriousness of the situation in Mali. The armed groups from the north – ruthless jihadists committing atrocities – were heading south and threatening to take the capital, Bamako. France stepped up to make sure this African state wouldn’t fall under the rule of extremists – with all the regional consequences that this could entail.
But as military operations are amplifying and gaining momentum, France’s purpose and mandate would benefit from a little clarity.
No one can blame France for deciding to use force in Mali without a legal international mandate – it had received a formal appeal from authorities in Bamako requesting emergency bilateral assistance. Whether this intervention is legal in a strict “UN sense” is a different matter, though. France deployed ground troops without the explicit approval of the UN – the United Nations Security Council resolution passed in December only allowing for an African-led intervention.
When a war – any war – starts to drag on longer than expected, people start asking questions. To justify its decision and be transparent with its partners, Paris should clearly state the length, scope and objectives of its military action in Mali.
This is the best way to avoid “mission creep,” i.e. getting caught in a quagmire of endless new military objectives – with a military effort that keeps expanding, troops going deeper into the country and military excesses waiting to happen. This is exactly what happened in Afghanistan.
There is something else that we have learned from the Mali intervention: when the interests, the strategy and the values at play demand it, François Hollande’s France is capable of emancipating itself from the UN resolutions’ rigid stranglehold.
In 1999 in Kosovo, as Slobodan Milosevic’s deadly militias were threatening the stability of a whole part of Europe, French Prime Minister Lionel Jospin took a similar stand. The absence of a UN resolution (vetoed by Russia) did not stop France from doing what was geopolitically and morally right.
Wars come and go; every situation has its specific characteristics, and the ghost of Iraq’s traumatic war – based on lies and carried out without UN support – is still in everyone’s minds. France has always considered itself as a “daughter of the UN.”
But Mali and Kosovo are proof of what democracies are capable of when their actions stop being contingent on a Chinese or Russian veto. This resonates particularly strongly as we watch the slaughter of the Syrian people, arguing that we are powerless and hiding behind the UN “paralysis.”
As Turkey fears the EU closing ranks over defense, Turkish President Erdogan is looking to Boris Johnson as a post-Brexit ally, especially as Angela Merkel steps aside. This could undermine the deal where Ankara limits refugee entry into Europe, and other dossiers too.
BERLIN — According to the Elysée Palace, the French presidency "can't understand" why Turkey would overreact, since the defense pact that France recently signed in Paris with Greece is not aimed at Ankara. The agreement covers billions of euros' worth of military equipment, and the two countries have committed to come to each other's aid if they are attacked.Although Paris denies this, it is difficult to see the agreement as anything other than a message, perhaps even a provocation, targeted at Turkey.
Officially, the Turkish government is unruffled, saying the pact doesn't represent a military threat. But the symbolism is clear: with the U.S., UK and Australia recently announcing the Aukus security pact, Ankara fears the EU may be closing ranks when it comes to all military issues.
What will Aukus mean for NATO?
Turkey has long felt left out in the cold, at odds with the European Union over a number of issues. Yet now President Recep Tayyip Erdogan is setting his sights on another country, which also wants to become more independent from Europe: the UK.
Europe's approach to security and defense is changing dramatically. Over the past few months, while the U.S. was negotiating the Aukus pact with Britain and Australia behind the EU's back, a submarine deal between Australia and France, which would have been worth billions, was scrapped.
The EU is happy to keep Erdogan waiting
Officially, Turkey is keeping its cards close to its chest. Addressing foreign journalists in Istanbul, Erdogan's chief advisor Ibrahim Kalin said the country was not involved in Aukus, but they hope it doesn't have a negative impact on NATO. However, the agreement will have a significant effect on Turkey.
"Before Aukus, the Turks thought that the U.S. would prevent the EU from adopting a defense policy that was independent of NATO," says Sinan Ülgen, an expert on Turkey at the Brussels think tank Carnegie Europe. "Now they are afraid that Washington may make concessions for France, which could change things."
Macron sees post-Merkel power vacuum
Turkey's concerns may well prove to be justified. Outgoing German Chancellor Angela Merkel always argued for closer collaboration with Turkey, partly because it is an important trading partner and partly because it has a direct influence on the influx of migrants from Asia and the Middle East to Europe.
Merkel consistently thwarted France's plans for a stricter approach from Brussels towards Turkey, and she never supported Emmanuel Macron's ideas about greater strategic autonomy for countries within the EU.
But now she that she's leaving office, Macron is keen to make the most of the power vacuum Merkel will leave behind. The prospect of France's growing influence is "not especially good news for Turkey," says Ian Lesser, vice president of the think tank German Marshall Fund.
Ankara fears the defense pact between France and Greece could be a sign of what is to come. According to a statement from the Turkish Foreign Ministry, the agreement is aimed "at NATO member Turkey" and is damaging to the alliance. Observers also assume the agreement means that France is supporting Greece's claims to certain territories in the Mediterranean which remain disputed under international law, with Turkey's own sovereignty claims.
Paris is a close ally of Athens. In the summer of 2020, Greece and Turkey were poised on the threshold of a military conflict in the eastern Mediterranean. Since then, Athens has ordered 24 Rafale fighter jets from France, and the new pact includes a deal for France to supply them with three frigates.
French President Emmanuel Macron and Greek Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis on September 27 in Paris
Erdogan’s EU wish list
It's not the first time that Ankara has felt snubbed by the EU. Since Donald Trump left the White House, Turkey has been making a considerable effort to improve relations with Brussels. "The situation in the eastern Mediterranean is peaceful and the migrant problem is under control," says Kalin. Now it is "high time" that Europe does something for Turkey.
Erdogan's wish list is extensive: making it easier for Turks to get EU visas, renegotiating the refugee deal, making more funds available to Turkey as it continues the process of joining the EU, and moderniszing the customs union. But there is no movement on any of these issues in Brussels. They're happy to keep Erdogan waiting.
Britain consistently supported Turkey's ambition to join the EU
Now he is starting to look elsewhere. At the UN summit in September, Erdogan had a meeting with British Prime Minister Boris Johnson at the recently opened Turkish House in New York. Kalin says it was a "very good meeting" and that the two countries are "closely allied strategic partners." He says they plan to work together more closely on trade, but with a particular focus on defense.
Turkey's second largest export market
The groundwork for collaboration was already in place. Britain consistently supported Turkey's ambition to join the EU, and gave an ultimate proof of friendship after the failed coup in 2016. Unlike other European capitals, London reacted quickly, calling the coup an "attack on Turkish democracy," and its government has generally held back in its criticism of Turkey.
At the end of last year, Johnson and Erdogan signed a new free trade agreement, which will govern commerce between the two countries post-Brexit. Erdogan has called it "the most important treaty for Turkey since the customs agreement with the EU in 1995."
After Germany, Britain is Turkey's second largest export market. "Turkey now has the opportunity to build a new partnership with the United Kingdom and it must make the most of it," says economist Ali Kücükcolak from the Istanbul Commerce University.
Erdogan is well aware of this, as Turkey is in desperate need of an economic boost. Inflation currently stands at 19%, and the currency's value is consistently falling. Turks are feeling the impact on their daily lives: food and rent are becoming increasingly expensive, while salaries remain unchanged.
- Why Putin And Erdogan Are Both Going After Germany's Greens ... ›
- The Many Reasons Erdogan Plays The Palestinian Card ... ›
- The ISIS Rockets “Made In Turkey” - Worldcrunch ›