Where do the US, UK stand vis-a-vis Türkiye’s peace quest?

Ankara’s efforts to pave the way to peace – or at least a “ceasefire” – between Russia and Ukraine is continuing in a strong manner. Its hard work is ongoing even at a time when Russia is bombing all of Ukraine, in other words, even under challenging conditions. 

 There is an ambitious frame proposal that the U.S., Germany, the U.K., and the EU will be brought together with Russia in a meeting. Moscow confirmed that this can be discussed as well. Now, President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin will meet in Astana, Kazakhstan. 

 Russia’s annexation decision and Ukraine’s official NATO membership application are steps strengthening the primary subjects of dispute, and making difficult the search for peace. This thus makes Türkiye’s sincere efforts toilsome. The ground is already obvious. Türkiye is still focused on the ideal objective, which is the right thing to do. 

 Ankara describes the process derailed following the Istanbul agreement, as the closest position to peace. It has not forgotten the fact that it was “sabotaged.” Naturally, while following the new agreement processes, it keeps this in mind. 

 Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu’s statement, “The Istanbul meetings was a great opportunity. Third countries wanted the opportunity to be missed,” is a historic evaluation in every respect, but what is the current situation? 

 The proposal to set a table including Kiev as well as the countries mentioned above raises the question of whether a new conjuncture is in store. 

 Recalling the time period leading to war just before February, this is a format similar to the proposal for Moscow to sit with the said countries and NATO to make a new deal between Russia and Europe. This is perhaps what Russia’s “we can talk” response is based on. 

 Everyone knows, and nobody is denying that the U.S. and the U.K. are the sabotagers. Are London and Washington maintaining their political stance regarding the continuation of the war, are they continuing their encouraging role in this regard? 

 The general opinion is that the “anglosphere” will continue their plans to prolong the war. This brings us to the question os whether Türkiye is continuing relations or a negotiation with the U.S. and U.K. over this matter, and if so, what those involved are saying. 

 This is where the secret lies. 

 Otherwise, it seems impossible for Ukraine to sign a deal with Russia on its own, let alone sit at that table. 

 We know that the Ukraine-Russia war is an “energy” war as much as it is a war between the U.S. and Russia, between the East and West. Including Europe, a series of regions will “feel” this within a few months. 

 Energy and its instruments, from the East Mediterranean geopolicy to savings measures, from the deadlock of industries to global economy, are at the same time political maneuvers. 

 Thus, while the “stoppage” decision, which signifies rising problems instead of dropping them, by OPEC+ countries, in other words the countries that supply fuel to the world, halts the plan to economically collapse Russia, it can also be considered the first vote cast in the upcoming November U.S. elections. Obviously, that vote is not going to U.S. President Joe Biden.  

 The “voters” are obvious: Saudi Arabia and gulf countries. We already know what Russia will vote. 

 It is clear from the statements that the White House is furious about the shortage when instead it was expecting a production boost, in fact when the president paid a personal visit to the crown prince. But the real subject of anger is the fact that this message is read by Washington’s political elite as well. The November elections aside, this is a hard blow for Biden and his team, who are trying to present the image that he will run in the second period as well. Because the message from the Gulf includes the implication that, “It doesn’t have to be like this after Biden.”  

We need to understand well its impact with respect to Russia as well. One, the fuel stoppage will affect OPEC+ countries. Which countries will implement the stoppage and how much? While each one of them will cut down tens of thousands of barrels, Russia will not, and will continue selling. How much more can one curse the U.S. in diplomacy? 

Two, Russia’s energy market share to Europe is now less than before, but when the prices are so high, it does not change Russia’s earnings. In fact, it is earning more with the substitution countries. Three, there are interpretations that make an association between the OPEC+ decision and the sabotage on the Nord Stream pipeline! Putin’s statement Monday – true or not, we don’t know – that a sabotage targeting the TurkStream pipeline was prevented becomes interesting. 

 We are sure that the U.S. adds other elements to these developments, each of which creates great difficulties. For example, like Saudi Arabia and some Gulf countries joining the Shanghai Cooperation Organization – especially considering what these steps can do to the “petro-dollar,” which is considered a keystone of the existing order. Too many fears.  

The historical legal acquis of Washington-Riyadh relations reminds that a strategic detachment between the two countries will be surprising/difficult, and it is right. But this is the picture. That might be Saudi Arabia’s investment message for the “post-Biden” term, but there are also those who mention U.S. fury is likely to lead to a coup in the Gulf. Are there conditions? This too seems difficult. 

 One of Turkish domestic policy’s mottos was, “You may come to power despite the U.S., but you cannot remain in power despite the U.S.” 

 The "was” refers to Erdogan. He is the exception. He remained in power despite the U.S., and for how many years! Even now, he is in power, “despite” the U.S. 

 If the opposition Republican People’s Party (CHP) and/or the 6+1 table comes to power, will it be there “despite” the U.S.? No. It will be there through “normalization with the U.S.,” it will be there “together” with the U.S. 

 What CHP leader Kemal Kilicdaroglu did during his U.S. visit, who he chose to meet or not is insignificant. This answers all questions.