Turkey’s idea of forming a regional organization in the Middle East has been overshadowed by the flurry of events and news coming out of the troubled region. Now, however, Ankara is calling for the creation of such a pact to be accelerated.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu proposed the idea of creating an anti-Iranian «Abraham Bloc» in the Middle East, including the Jewish state and “several Arab countries. In response, Ankara has put forward an initiative to form a «Jerusalem Pact» aimed at restraining Israel. The proposal was made by Devlet Bahçeli, the leader of the Nationalist Movement Party and a close political ally of President Erdoğan: «Steps must be taken quickly to ensure peace and stability in the Middle East. For this purpose, a ‘Jerusalem Agreement’ should be created with the participation of Turkey, Syria, Iraq, Egypt and other regional countries».
Let’s look at the logic behind this initiative.
On the surface, the goal is to «stop Israel, which is destroying Gaza, desecrating the Al-Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem on a daily basis, and preventing Palestinians in the West Bank from seeing peace». This is the «minimum requirement» for the region, and this task cannot be accomplished without «strong regional solidarity».
Turkey’s approach to the Palestinian problem is broad: it is not enough to stop the bloodshed in Gaza first and then postpone the rest of the problems. The issue must be addressed comprehensively, without dividing it into parts or stages.
Moreover, the issue is framed in a purely regional context: «A closer and stronger regional agreement must be formulated, encompassing all regional dialogues and cooperation related to Palestine and Jerusalem».
This explicitly regional approach is a logical extension of Erdoğan’s stance: international mechanisms, led by the UN, have shown a complete inability to do anything to stop the Palestinian tragedy. Therefore, external, global powers must be removed and the problems of the Middle East must be solved solely by the states of the region: «Turkey can lead the creation of a ‘Jerusalem Agreement’ if all regional countries address regional problems in a spirit of solidarity and cooperation. This is essential for the future of the region. The chaotic structure of this region must be immediately overcome and transformed into a structure that exports prosperity and stability».
Accordingly, the central, key issue is not the full implementation of the decisions of global actors (UN Security Council resolutions on the creation of a Palestinian state or a return to the 1967 borders), but the issue of Jerusalem: «The issue of Jerusalem is not only a problem for Palestinians; it is a problem for all Muslims and all who care about justice. Jerusalem is the key to world peace and stability. If this key is not used properly, the resulting chaos will affect not only the Middle East, but the entire world».
This thesis is multifaceted.
Undoubtedly, it implies — and Bahçeli mentions it — the creation of a Palestinian state with East Jerusalem as its capital. This is an obligatory, almost ritual formula: «The only option for achieving lasting peace and a solution in the Middle East is the immediate creation of an independent state of Palestine with East Jerusalem as its capital».
But behind this lies Turkey’s deep-seated dream — to make Turkey the guarantor of Jerusalem’s special status. Finally, Israel is sliding towards the «Judaization» of this «City of the Three World Religions»: it’s no secret that the most aggressive and increasingly influential Orthodox segment of Israeli society insists on the exclusively Jewish character of Jerusalem. Turkey, as heir to the Ottoman Empire, seems determined to stop this trend. At the same time, it will also guarantee East Jerusalem’s status as the capital of a future independent Palestine.
In particular, this idea strikes at the heart of contemporary Israel, its most aggressive religious Zionist forces, which largely dictate Tel Aviv’s policies today and aspire to future dominance. These forces, represented by figures like Ministers Ben-Gvir and Smotrich, are opposed not only throughout the Middle East, but also in Europe and the United States. So far, however, no one has found a way to contain them and set limits. Israeli society and its political class are still impotent in the face of these zealots. However, it is obvious that the most important issue for them is the issue of Jerusalem. If they win there — a victory which, in their view, would be nothing less than the restoration of the Jerusalem Temple on the site of the Al-Aqsa Mosque and the eradication of all traces of Islam and Christianity in the city — the consequences are unimaginable…
Therefore, stopping them in Jerusalem, preventing the «Judaization» of this holy city, removing it from Israel’s monopolistic control, and creating real guarantees that its eastern part will become the capital of the state of Palestine is the most important religious and human task (the very «key» Bahçeli refers to). But it can also be put less grandiosely: the task is to «cleanse» Israeli politics of extremism and to normalize the Jewish state. In any case, it is assumed that this task should be solved by the countries of the region under the leadership of Turkey.
So which regional states are invited to participate in this Turkish project? Bahçeli names them explicitly: Egypt, Syria and Iraq. Not the Gulf Arab monarchies, weak Jordan, or Iran — just the «magnificent trio» of Cairo-Damascus-Baghdad. Three of the most influential historical centers of the Arab world, three of the most powerful armies, and three of the most important parts of the former Ottoman Empire.
In this context, Erdoğan’s efforts to restore relations with Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, the «Development Road» project in Iraq, and Ankara’s rapprochement with Cairo take on new significance. It is also noteworthy that Saudi Arabia is not mentioned among Turkey’s potential allies in the Jerusalem pact: after all, Riyadh holds Mecca and Medina, two holy relics of the Islamic world, while Ankara intends to become the guardian of Jerusalem, the first Qibla for Muslims (the direction Muslims face during prayer).
But the most significant absence in Bahçeli’s project is that of Iran. The Turkish nationalist leader is essentially talking about reviving the Middle Eastern part of the Ottoman Empire. Iran, however, is a different empire that must know its limits and renounce its dominance in Iraq and Syria by recognizing them as Turkey’s sphere of interest. In return, Ankara apparently will not deny its esteemed neighbor participation in large-scale economic projects in these countries and will not hinder Tehran’s influence in the Gulf and access to the Mediterranean (but only for peaceful purposes).
The logic of the «Jerusalem Pact» regarding Iran can be traced further. Turkey, together with its allies Iraq and Syria, stands between Iran and Israel and prevents the threat of a direct confrontation between them. Moreover, by proposing a mechanism for «normalizing» Israeli policy, Ankara is easing the Iranian-Israeli antagonism: after all, Tehran has long since abandoned the goal of destroying the Jewish state — the issue now is the «Zionist regime». If the character of the «regime» in Tel Aviv changes, there will be no reason for principled enmity between Iranians and Israelis. And this is beneficial for both of them and for the region as a whole.
Thus, Ankara’s project, as expressed by Devlet Bahçeli, boils down to Turkey becoming the guarantor of the balance of power between Iran and Israel, using the potential of the most powerful Arab countries of the Mashriq (Egypt, Syria, Iraq) and leaving the Gulf as a limited field of political rivalry between Tehran and Tel Aviv. At the same time, Ankara gains the status of guardian of Jerusalem, giving it an authority in the Islamic world equal to that of Riyadh. As a NATO member, Turkey assumes the mission of representing the interests of the collective West in the region, relieving it (primarily the US) of responsibility for the situation there and taking control of the influence of other non-regional players (primarily Russia and China).
In our view, this project seems more comprehensive than Netanyahu’s idea of an «Abraham Bloc», which is limited to an anti-Iranian alliance of Israel and some (undefined) Arab states with US support. In the end, however, both projects appear to be utopian. Israel relies on the omnipotence of American money and the power of American weapons. Turkey hopes to revive its experience of imperial rule. But neither project takes into account Iran’s real interests. Nor do they include mechanisms to address the deep contradictions between and within the states of the region.
But the Turks and the Israelis have made their proposals. The ball is now in the court of the Arabs and Iranians.