From Celil Sagir, Zaman:  Turkey has blocked Israel’s participation in NATO’s upcoming Chicago summit in a sign of Turkey’s determination to prevent its new foe from cooperating with the alliance following a deadly ship raid.

Turkish and Israeli relations worsened in May 2010 and have remained strained since then after Israeli naval commandos stormed the Mavi Marmara, a ship carrying humanitarian aid to breach Israel’s Gaza blockade, killing nine Turkish civilians.

Turkey said it will not allow Israel, a member of the Mediterranean Dialogue, a NATO outreach program with seven non-NATO nations, to take part in the alliance’s new “Partnership Cooperation Menu (PCM),” during a NATO meeting in Brussels last week attended by Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu.

Because of Ankara’s veto, Israel will not attend the NATO summit due to take place from May 20 to 21 in Chicago, an important diplomatic summit to be hosted by US President Barack Obama.

According to information obtained from Turkish diplomatic sources, Davutoğlu reacted to the criticism raised by some NATO members in the Brussels meeting who claimed bilateral problems should not be brought to the alliance by underlining that Turkey cannot consider a country which killed Turkish citizens in international waters as a partner.

Davutoğlu reminded the members that Turkey was a country that rescued citizens of other NATO member countries who were detained by Israel during the Mavi Marmara raid. “Go and tell Israel to apologize for the incident and to pay compensation for the Turkish citizens whom it massacred,” Davutoğlu said… .

A senior diplomatic source said Turkey’s bargaining power is too strong. “We [Turkey] are blocking Israel in many areas. We avoid contact with Israel in any international meeting,” the same source said.

Another diplomatic source emphasized that NATO-Israel relations could not be restored until Turkey-Israel relations are normalized. 

From Hurriyet Daily News: Some ministers of the allied countries including the United States, France and Secretary-General Anders Fogh Rasmussen indirectly criticized Turkey for bringing its bilateral problems with Israel to the NATO platform. Some ministers went so far as to vow to veto the participation of Egypt, Mauritania, Algeria, Morocco and other partner countries in the activities of the Mediterranean Dialogue if Turkey continues to do so against Israel, something they called “a violation of NATO’s values.”

Criticism from Davutoğlu

In response to such statements, Davutoğlu harshly criticized his counterparts sitting around the same large table. “You are talking about being partners and partnership values. But partners, first of everything, should act like partners, so that we’ll treat them accordingly,” was the main message Davutoğlu delivered to his NATO colleagues. He elaborated:

- The army of a country which you call a partner killed our citizens upon a political order given by its administration. We do not call this kind of country a partner.

- Turkey evacuated from Israel not only Turks but citizens from many countries, after they were detained by Israeli forces due to Mavi Marmara incident. It also evacuated citizens of all nationalities from Libya and Syria without making distinction. Our expectation from all allied countries is to pay the same respect to our citizens as we do to yours.

- I assure you that Turkey will be the first country acting to protect the citizens of NATO countries in a similar incident. We believe in the notion of solidarity in NATO much more than the discrimination some of you have expressed.  (photo: Reuters)  (via @WPReview)

From Celil Sagir, Zaman:  Turkey has blocked Israel’s participation in NATO’s upcoming Chicago summit in a sign of Turkey’s determination to prevent its new foe from cooperating with the alliance following a deadly ship raid.

Turkish and Israeli relations worsened in May 2010 and have remained strained since then after Israeli naval commandos stormed the Mavi Marmara, a ship carrying humanitarian aid to breach Israel’s Gaza blockade, killing nine Turkish civilians.

Turkey said it will not allow Israel, a member of the Mediterranean Dialogue, a NATO outreach program with seven non-NATO nations, to take part in the alliance’s new “Partnership Cooperation Menu (PCM),” during a NATO meeting in Brussels last week attended by Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu.

Because of Ankara’s veto, Israel will not attend the NATO summit due to take place from May 20 to 21 in Chicago, an important diplomatic summit to be hosted by US President Barack Obama.

According to information obtained from Turkish diplomatic sources, Davutoğlu reacted to the criticism raised by some NATO members in the Brussels meeting who claimed bilateral problems should not be brought to the alliance by underlining that Turkey cannot consider a country which killed Turkish citizens in international waters as a partner.

Davutoğlu reminded the members that Turkey was a country that rescued citizens of other NATO member countries who were detained by Israel during the Mavi Marmara raid. “Go and tell Israel to apologize for the incident and to pay compensation for the Turkish citizens whom it massacred,” Davutoğlu said… .

A senior diplomatic source said Turkey’s bargaining power is too strong. “We [Turkey] are blocking Israel in many areas. We avoid contact with Israel in any international meeting,” the same source said.

Another diplomatic source emphasized that NATO-Israel relations could not be restored until Turkey-Israel relations are normalized. 

From Hurriyet Daily News: Some ministers of the allied countries including the United States, France and Secretary-General Anders Fogh Rasmussen indirectly criticized Turkey for bringing its bilateral problems with Israel to the NATO platform. Some ministers went so far as to vow to veto the participation of Egypt, Mauritania, Algeria, Morocco and other partner countries in the activities of the Mediterranean Dialogue if Turkey continues to do so against Israel, something they called “a violation of NATO’s values.”

Criticism from Davutoğlu

In response to such statements, Davutoğlu harshly criticized his counterparts sitting around the same large table. “You are talking about being partners and partnership values. But partners, first of everything, should act like partners, so that we’ll treat them accordingly,” was the main message Davutoğlu delivered to his NATO colleagues. He elaborated:

- The army of a country which you call a partner killed our citizens upon a political order given by its administration. We do not call this kind of country a partner.

- Turkey evacuated from Israel not only Turks but citizens from many countries, after they were detained by Israeli forces due to Mavi Marmara incident. It also evacuated citizens of all nationalities from Libya and Syria without making distinction. Our expectation from all allied countries is to pay the same respect to our citizens as we do to yours.

- I assure you that Turkey will be the first country acting to protect the citizens of NATO countries in a similar incident. We believe in the notion of solidarity in NATO much more than the discrimination some of you have expressed.  (photo: Reuters)  (via @WPReview)

Although not on the official agenda of today’s meeting of NATO Foreign and Defense ministers, the continuing violence in Syria forced NATO leaders to discuss the issue and its impact on the alliance.

When asked if Syria had been discussed by the assembled NATO leaders, Secretary GeneralAnders Fogh Rasmussen responded that “we [NATO] have no intention to intervene in Syria. We’re not considering taking action.” In regards to how NATO would respond to a request by Turkey to invoke the alliance self-defense clause, Article 5, Ramussen replied; “if there is a request from any Ally to consult on a security situation we have the very clear rule, it’s also clearly stated in our Strategic Concept, that we are prepared to consult on any issue that may be raised by any Ally. But so far we have not received a request.”

Rasmussen’s statements were consistent with NATO’s efforts to avoid becoming entangled in another Middle East conflict. After Afghanistan and Libya, the West is weary of war and would rather the larger international community, the UN in particular, deal with the geo-strategic and humanitarian complexities of Syria.

Nevertheless, not long after Rasmussen’s press conference, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton boldly and explicitly linked NATO to the violence in Syria. Rather than trying to keep the topic of Syria at arms length from NATO and the consultations of its Foreign and Defense ministers, Clinton declared;”make no mistake about it; this conflict is taking place right on NATO’s border. We saw, just last week, the shelling across the borders into Turkey and into Lebanon. Our NATO ally, Turkey, has already suffered the effects of not only the influx of refugees that it is very generously housing, but also having two people killed on their side of the border because of Syrian artillery.”

According to Clinton’s description, the spillover of violence across Syria’s border with Turkey is not a hypothetical issue that NATO can avoid, but a serious and pressing security concern for the alliance. Furthermore, Clinton acknowledged that the topic was receiving widespread attention behind the closed doors of today’s ministerial meetings. “Syria was a subject of conversation among many of our allies today. Every country in NATO is watching the situation with concern.”

Clinton’s forward leaning language connecting NATO to the situation in S\yria may have been a result of bilateral conversations with Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu. After all, it was only a few days ago that Turkey’s Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan responded to violence across its border with Syria with the warning that “NATO has a responsibility to protect Turkish borders,” According to CNN, last Monday, Clinton and Davutoglu discussed creating a buffer zone in Syria. In the words of one US official, “It would be correct to say this idea is getting another look in the last week or so,” Clinton and Davutoglu may be closer to agreement on this after today’s discussions at NATO headquarters.

Clinton’s language today at NATO may be the most aggressive expressed yet by the Obama administration on Syria. According to Clinton, “we are at a crucial turning point. Either we succeed in pushing forward with Kofi Annan’s plan in accordance with the Security Council direction, with the help of monitors steadily broadening and deepening a zone of non-conflict and peace, or we see Assad squandering his last chance before additional measures have to be considered [emphasis added].” 

Last week, the Assad regime was warned by Erdogan, the Prime Minister of Syria’s most powerful neighbor and NATO’s 2nd largest army. Today the Assad regime was warned by the Secretary of State of NATO’s largest army. Whether intervention in Syria is wise or not, we can not deny that unless the Assad regime backs down, the likelihood of Western action in Syria is higher after today than ever before.  (photo: Reuters)

From Elise Labott, CNN Security Clearance:  With the Syria deal in jeopardy and questions as to whether Syria will truly cease its military operations, particularly after Syrian troops fired across the border into Turkey, discussions within the Obama administration about creating a Syria-Turkey border “buffer zone” have intensified, State Department officials tell CNN.

“It would be correct to say this idea is getting another look in the last week or so,” one official said about the buffer zone.

In a statement issued Monday, Turkey’s Foreign Ministry said “Syrian citizens who took refuge in our country from the brutality of the current regime in Syria are under Turkey’s full protection. We will certainly take necessary measures if such incidents reoccur.”

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton spoke about a possible buffer zone with Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu on Monday during a phone conversation about the crisis, officials said.

State Department Spokeswoman Victoria Nuland told reporters that Clinton invited Davutoglu to address G8 ministers Wednesday afternoon by videoconference to discuss the crisis in Turkey.  (photo: Reuters)

From Hillary Clinton, the Department of State:  Assad will have to go, and the Syrian people must be given the chance to chart their own future.

Given the Assad regime’s record of broken promises, we are proceeding, understandably, with caution. The ministers agreed to remain in close contact in the hours and days ahead. As we speak, our representatives in New York are consulting on a potential UN monitoring mission that would go to Syria under the right authorities, circumstances, and conditions. The United States supports sending an advance team immediately to begin this work. And both will need complete freedom of movement, unimpeded communications, and access throughout the country and to all Syrians, as well as firm security guarantees from all parties… .

[O]ur teams are working in New York on a UN Security Council resolution that calls for Assad to fully comply with all points in the Annan plan and that supports Kofi Annan’s request to send a UN advance team to Syria immediately to prepare the way for a full, robust international monitoring mission. And let me be as clear as I can: That monitoring mission will only be a force for peace and security if it enjoys the full freedom of action within Syria. That means freedom of movement, secure communications, a large enough ground presence to bear witness to the enforcement of the six-point plan in every part of Syria.

QUESTION [Scott Stearns, VOA]: [C]ould you tell us whether you support NATO protecting the border between Turkey and Syria? …

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, with respect to your first question, there is nothing of that nature pending and I’m not going to comment on hypotheticals.

Excerpts from remarks by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton at the conclusion of the G8 Ministerial.  (photo: Getty)

From Hillary Clinton, the Department of State:  [W]e’re not turning away from our old friends and interests in other parts of the world. Our relationships with European and NATO allies who are, after all, our partners of first resort, remain indispensable for our work around the globe. And we need to deepen our engagement in the Asia Pacific region in coordination with them.

So just as we are not losing old friends, we are not seeking new enemies. Today’s China is not the Soviet Union. We are not on the brink of a new Cold War in Asia. Just look at the ever expanding trade between our economies, the connections between our peoples, the ongoing consultations between our governments. In less than 35 years, we’ve gone from being two nations with hardly any ties to speak of to being thoroughly, inescapably interdependent. That requires adjustments in thinking and approaches on both sides. Geopolitics today cannot afford to be a zero-sum game. A thriving China is good for America and a thriving America is good for China, so long as we both thrive in a way that contributes to the regional and global good. Let me go one step further. We will only succeed in building a peaceful, prosperous Asia Pacific if we succeed in building an effective U.S.-China relationship… .

History shows us that a strong regional architecture can bring to bear incentives for cooperation and disincentives for provocation and problematic behaviors. But this kind of architecture does not just spring up on its own, just as NATO and other aspects of the post-World War II architecture didn’t just happen. It takes consistent effort, strong partnerships, and crucially, American leadership. And that is, at core, what our strategy in the Asia Pacific is all about. All of our actions – diplomatic, economic, and military – are designed to advance this goal… .

The extraordinary service and sacrifice of America’s men and women in uniform makes a difference in the lives of people all over the world. In this region, it made a difference in the lives of those people in the Japanese community rescued from the floodwaters, or to the Singaporean sea captain protected from pirates, or the Korean family shielded from aggression. When it comes to ensuring stability and security in the Asia Pacific and beyond, there is simply no substitute for American power. Only the United States has the global reach, the resources and the resolve to deter aggression, rally coalitions, and project stability into diverse and dynamic areas of danger, threat, and opportunity.

Now this is not 1912, when friction between a declining Britain and a rising Germany set the stage for global conflict. It’s 2012, and a strong America is welcoming new powers into an international system designed to prevent global conflict… .

One day soon, you, too, will leave this place and board ships, submarines, and aircraft bound for distant seas. Some of you will sail the Atlantic, renewing old bonds and defending old friends. Others will head to the Pacific to face the challenges of a new time. Wherever you go, you will represent the pride and power of this great nation we cherish. And you will embody our hopes for a freer, more peaceful, and prosperous world.  (photo: BBC)

From Doyle McManus, the Los Angeles Times:  At a meeting in Istanbul last week, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton announced an escalation of U.S. aid to the opposition. In public, she pointed to a doubling of medical and other humanitarian aid, plus the provision of communication equipment. Less publicly, officials confirmed that the new package also includes “non-lethal” help that will go to the Free Syrian Army, the newly formed opposition armed forces, including night-vision goggles and U.S. intelligence information such as early warnings of Syrian troop movements.

And while the United States has decided not to provide weapons to the rebels, it isn’t objecting to military funding or arms shipments from Saudi Arabia, Qatar and other Arab states that would like to see Assad fall… .

If the pace of the killing slows, that could buy time: time for economic sanctions to undermine the regime, time to cajole Russia to switch sides and help pull the rug out from Assad, but also time for the opposition and its new army to organize themselves into a more effective force.

If those measures fail to bring Assad down, the administration appears divided on how quickly to move toward military intervention. The Pentagon is reluctant to get involved in another war, as the Pentagon usually is. Obama’s national security adviser, Tom Donilon, has also weighed in against any post-Libya temptation to “militarize” another problem. Clinton’s State Department has sounded the most hawkish notes — in part, perhaps, because it’s Clinton who has delivered most of the administration’s public declarations that Assad must go.

But even the administration’s humanitarian hawks don’t think the moment for U.S. or NATO military intervention has arrived yet.

They’d like the U.N. Security Council to give its blessing first, or — if Russia and China continue to resist — at least NATO. They’d like the Syrian opposition to be better organized, with more assurance that military aid wouldn’t fall into the hands of radical Islamists. They’d like Turkey to establish safe havens for the opposition along its border with Syria.

Eventually, though, the question of military intervention will change from if to when. The United States is already a little bit pregnant — already committed to helping Assad fall. It’s merely looking for the least violent, lowest cost way to get there.  (photo: Getty)

From the AP:  Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton outlined the goals of the upcoming NATO Summit during a speech in Virginia on Tuesday, saying the alliance would focus on defining the next phase of transition in Afghanistan.

Clinton also spoke about NATO’s future in an era of fiscal challenges among its member countries and expanding NATO partnerships.

More than 50 heads of state will meet in Chicago on May 20-21 to discuss progress on ending the war in Afghanistan and future strategy. The United States hopes to have an agreement with Afghanistan in place outlining its future role in the country before the summit occurs. While in Chicago, Clinton said NATO would work to develop a milestone in 2013 when NATO forces would move from a predominantly combat role to a supportive role, only participating in combat when necessary.

Clinton said NATO also wants to make it clear to the Afghanistan government, its citizens and insurgents that NATO will not be abandoning the country.

“By the end of 2014, Afghans will be fully responsible. In Chicago, we will discuss the form that NATO’s enduring relationship with Afghanistan will then take,” Clinton told hundreds of people at a dinner at a Norfolk hotel.  (photo: Jewel Samad/AFP/Getty)

From the Department of State:  Excerpts from remarks by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to the World Affairs Council 2012 NATO Conference

This alliance is no stranger to change. Fifty years ago, it was created to lay that foundation for the reemergence of Western Europe and to stand as a bulwark against Soviet aggression.

After the Cold War, NATO’s mission evolved to reforming and integrating Central and Eastern Europe as they rose from decades of Communism. Then two years ago in Lisbon, the leaders of NATO set another new course for our alliance by adopting a strategic concept that takes on the security threats of the 21^st century from terrorism to cyber attacks to nuclear proliferation. Next month, we will take another step in this evolution when President Obama hosts the NATO Summit in Chicago. Now, we are both eager to show off Chicago – I was born there, and he of course calls it home, and we’re looking forward to making concrete progress on a number of important issues.

First, is the ongoing transition in Afghanistan… .

In Lisbon, we set a goal of transitioning full responsibility for security to Afghan security forces by 2014, and they’re making real progress toward that goal. Al-Qaida senior leadership has been decimated and its relationship with the Taliban is fraying.

Meanwhile, the Afghan National Security Forces are becoming stronger and more capable. Today, roughly 50 percent of the Afghan population lives in an area where they are taking responsibility for security. And this spring, the number will go up to 75 percent.

Now, I’m well-aware we’ve had a very difficult period in that relationship. And there is certainly a lot to be learned from the incidents that we have watched unfold. But it should not (inaudible) the fact that we have made progress and are continuing to do so. In Chicago, we will work to define the next phase in this transition, in particular, we will look to set a milestone for 2013, when ISAF will move from a predominantly combat role to a supporting role, training, advising and assisting the Afghan National Security Forces while participating in combat operations when necessary.

This milestone is consistent with the commitments we made in Lisbon because it will ensure that ISAF maintain a robust troop presence and combat capability to support the Afghan people as the transition completes. By the end of 2014, Afghans will be fully responsible. In Chicago we will discuss the form that NATO’s enduring relationship with Afghanistan will then take. We also hope that, by the time we meet in Chicago, the United States will have concluded our negotiations with Afghanistan on a long-term strategic partnership between our two nations. We anticipate that a small number of forces will remain, at the invitation of the Afghan Government, for the sole purpose of training, advising, and assisting Afghan forces and continuing to pursue counterterrorism operations. But we do not seek permanent American military bases in Afghanistan or a presence that is considered a threat to the neighbors, which leads to instability that threatens the gains that have been made in Afghanistan… .

Our second goal in Chicago touches on a subject that is at the center of ACT’s work, our shared effort to update NATO’s defense capabilities for the 21^st century… .  So in Chicago, we will outline a clear vision of how NATO will maintain the capabilities we need in line with the resources we have. This approach works hand-in-hand with Secretary General Rasmussen’s concept of smart defense, which is designed to make sure our alliance remains agile and efficient as well as strong. And I appreciate the work that has been done from ACT in building political support throughout NATO for this innovative approach.

Here’s an example of how it works in practice. We are collaborating on a new Alliance Ground Surveillance system, which uses drones to provide crucial intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance information to our forces. If each country in NATO had to buy this system separately, it would be prohibitively expensive. But by pooling our resources and sharing the burden, we can provide better security for every ally at a lower cost. And in Chicago, we’ll decide how to use this system as a hub for joint operations.

There are other ways we will look to strengthen our work together. In Lisbon, for example, we agreed to deploy a missile defense system to provide full coverage and protection for NATO European territory, population, and forces against the growing ballistic missile threat. In Chicago, we will look to advance that goal by developing our plans for NATO to exercise command and control of missile defense assets. We will also seek a commitment to joint exercises and training programs that deepen the habits of cooperation we have developed through our work together in Afghanistan. And we will highlight NATO’s decision to extend the Baltic Air Policing Program, which reassures our Baltic allies and frees up resources they can contribute to other NATO efforts, including Afghanistan.

Finally, our third goal in Chicago will be to cement and expand our global partnerships. Now of course, NATO is and always will be a transatlantic organization, but the problems we face today are not limited to one ocean, and neither can our work be. More than 20 non-NATO countries are providing troops and resources in Afghanistan. Elsewhere, we work with non-NATO partners to fight piracy, counter violent extremism, keep peace in Kosovo. And when NATO moved to enforce U.N. Security Council resolutions on the protection of civilians in Libya, it did so in lockstep with non-NATO partners from Europe and the Middle East.

And let me pause here for a moment to celebrate the role so many of you at ACT played in that effort. Operation Unified Protector was a massive and complex undertaking. It succeeded because our allies and partners collaborated smoothly, and that cooperation was made possible by the training and interoperability planning that you do here. It’s no exaggeration to say that thousands of Libyans are alive today because of your work… .

Now, the three areas I’ve outlined today – defining the next phase of the transition in Afghanistan, outlining a vision for addressing 21st century challenges in a period of austerity, and expanding our partnerships – shows just how much NATO has evolved over the past six decades. But they should also remind us that we must continue to evolve. Transforming any institution isn’t easy, and it doesn’t happen overnight. In fact, it is a project that never really ends. But we have strong leaders and the right strategies in place. And everything we have accomplished so far points toward how much we can achieve in the days and years to come. If we stay nimble and work together, we can continue to make the world more peaceful and secure.  (photo: AP)

From the Department of State: Excerpts from remarks by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to NATO Allied Commander Transformation staff members

Whether you are an American service member or civilian or you are here from one of our allied countries, you are supporting and strengthening our transatlantic alliance. As the only NATO command in the United States, ACT is an important symbol of the importance that we place on our commitment to this indispensible alliance.

The work you are doing here is making NATO more resilient and more innovative. ACT is at the center of that innovation, and what you are forging here will allow NATO to adapt to changing times and changing missions and continue to bolster our collective security. The strategies and partnerships being developed by all of you are shaping NATO operations all over the world from Afghanistan to Kosovo to the Horn of Africa. And I do believe that when NATO leaders meet in Chicago next month, the work of ACT will play an important role when we discuss how best to be prepared against new and unpredictable threats… .

I also am aware of how this command has really set the pace for strategic thinking, capability, development, and new, innovative ways of training. We’ve been busy in NATO for the last 10 years. The lessons learned that you helped prepare are absolutely instrumental in shaping the path forward… .

For all of you who are guests in the United States and for your families, I know what a commitment it is to move everyone to serve abroad, but I’m grateful that you have done so because your families also add immeasurably to this community.

So thank you again for your service, for all you are doing to make NATO stronger. I will have more to say about that later this evening at a speech that I will deliver as part of the Norfolk NATO Festival kickoff. But it is for me a great honor to be back here to thank you, General, to thank your leadership from across NATO and member-countries, and to thank the entire team for your many contributions. NATO has stood the test of time, and I hope it always will. And with people like you, I am very confident that that will be the outcome.  (photo: AP)