The mediation between Ukraine and Russia, the evacuation of civilians from Mariupol, efforts to remove Moscow-blocked grain from Ukrainian ports, and also the veto of Sweden and Finland joining NATO. At the forefront of all these negotiations in which Turkey is involved is Ibrahim Kalin (Istanbul, 50 years old). Kalin, senior adviser to President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and current government spokesman, is one of the few people the Turkish leader listens to on security and foreign policy issues. A PhD in philosophy educated at universities in Turkey, Malaysia and the United States, those who know him well praise his ability for dialogue, pragmatism and global vision. He does not hide his criticism of Turkey’s western allies, but assures them that his country is firmly committed to NATO. Today he travels to Spain to discuss bilateral issues and the Atlantic Alliance Summit in Madrid later this month.
Questions. After the Bucha massacre, Turkey-brokered contacts between Ukraine and Russia. Is there a way to bring the parties back to the negotiating table?
Answer. We’re working on it. Last week, the President [Erdogan] had telephone conversations with the presidents [ruso, Vladímir] Putin and [ucranio, Volodímir] Zelenski, and repeated his suggestion that both should come here to try to find a peaceful solution to the conflict. Zelenskyi said he was ready, but Putin believes the conditions are not ripe enough. Unfortunately, because of the events in Bucha, the negotiations were broken off, which is unacceptable, and the war continues. In a conflict like this, in addition to finding a general solution, it is also important to reach local agreements, even if they are limited. For example, the evacuation of Mariupol or what we are now negotiating – the departure of agricultural products from Ukraine.
P Do you see a possible solution to the Russian blockade of Ukrainian grain, which threatens to trigger a food crisis?
R We are talking to the Russians, to the Ukrainians and also to the UN. It will likely be an operation under the umbrella of the UN, with Istanbul as the main center of the operation. There will be Russian and Ukrainian representatives who will lead and oversee the process. Ships must be inspected to ensure they are clear of weapons, but how this surveillance is carried out is discussed by our military experts. The foreign minister [ruso, Serguéi] Lavrov will visit us next week and this will be one of the topics we will discuss. Your delegation will include experts directly involved in this topic. I think Russians and Ukrainians understand that this is a key issue and I hope that within the next two weeks we will have a result.
P Demining Ukrainian ports is a delicate matter.
Subscribe to EL PAÍS to follow all the news and read without limits.
Subscribe to
R We have offered our assistance when needed, but so far we have not received any requests in this regard. The only condition the Ukrainians are making is that they are given guarantees that the Russians will not take the opportunity to attack Odessa during demining, which is a legitimate concern. We conveyed this message to Russia, and President Putin gave a positive response: he told us that he had no intention of attacking Odessa. We hope that this will remain Russia’s final position as we see this as a positive development.
More information
P If an agreement is reached, how would the Ukrainian grain be distributed?
R Just like before the war about international markets. We will facilitate and protect its transportation across the Black Sea, and the Ukrainians will sell it to whomever they want.
P Will there be any progress on the Turkish blockade of Sweden and Finland joining NATO before the Madrid summit?
R It depends on what Sweden and Finland do. Last week we had a very good meeting and all issues were discussed in a positive atmosphere. If we see progress on our requests, the process will continue. NATO is not a tourism or business alliance, it is a security alliance. This means that it must provide equal and fair security to all its members. We take the security of our allies seriously, with our army being the second largest in NATO. So we expect the same from our allies. We demand concrete measures against the terror networks of the [grupo armado kurdo] PKK [Partido de los Trabajadores del Kurdistán] or the [kurdo-sirio] PYD YPG [Partido de la Unión Democrática-Unidades de Protección Popular], which has the same structure as the PKK and takes orders from it. They raise money, recruit new members, run propaganda campaigns in those countries, and then use that support to attack Turkey. We can’t look away. In addition, in recent years we have requested the extradition of 38 people who have directly refused them without examining them.
P Other countries refused extraditions to Turkey because of the risk of torture.
R This has no basis. There is no torture in Turkey. That was in the 1970s or 1980s, now we have a zero tolerance policy for torture. The decision [de Finlandia y Suecia] Denying extradition is purely political.
P In recent years, debates have increased in Brussels and other European capitals about whether Turkey’s commitment to NATO is real or not.
R Turkey has been committed to NATO for 70 years and participates in its decisions and missions. In contrast, unfortunately, we do not see the same commitment from our allies when it comes to Turkey’s national security.
P President Erdogan has just announced a new operation in Syria. Is it hopeless?
R In 2019 we reached an agreement with the Russians and the Americans to keep the PYD-YPG terrorists away from our border. It was agreed with the Americans that they would move [las milicias kurdo-sirias] 30 kilometers south of the border [turco-siria]. And with the Russians it was [las YPG] from Tel Rifat and Manbij [en el norte de Siria]. None of these agreements have been fulfilled and we have received hundreds of terrorist attacks from these areas. Therefore, we will take whatever measures we deem appropriate to keep our territory and our citizens safe. Of course we will talk about it with our allies, but we will not ask anyone for permission.
P The United States has warned that attacks on YPG-controlled areas will weaken the fight against the Islamic State (ISIS).
R If the Americans had supported other Syrian opposition groups, they would also be most effective in fighting ISIS. The YPG has grown strong thanks to US training, money and weapons, and as a result it now controls large parts of territory in Syria, where it has cracked down on anti-PKK Kurdish and Sunni Arabs. This terrorist organization is using the threat of ISIS to further their own goals. When our American or European colleagues tell us, “Please don’t attack because there is a threat from ISIS,” we reply, “Where is that threat? We can go and fight them.”
P If NATO forms a united front against Russia’s invasion of a neighboring country, what does a NATO member’s invasion of a neighboring country look like?
R We’re not invading any country. They are anti-terrorist operations. We have no appetite for another country’s territory. We’re conducting these operations because they’re a threat. If the country in question were able to protect its border and prevent terrorist attacks on our territory and citizens, we wouldn’t be there. In addition, the areas of northern Syria under Turkish control have become safe areas for the Syrians themselves. The same Syrian civilians that Europe doesn’t want to take in. We give them security, shelter, education, health… in their own country and paid for out of pocket. Were it not for the Turkish presence in Syria, the PYD-YPG or Russia or the regime of [Bachar el] Asad would take those areas and another three or four million Syrians would flee and we would have another refugee crisis.
Follow all international information on Facebook and Twitteror in our weekly newsletter.
Exclusive content for subscribers
read limitless