|

Why does Washington oppose opening of Zangezur corridor?

SELÇUK TÜRKYILMAZ,  Saturday 09:53, 24 September 2022

U.S. House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s activities and statements within the scope of her Armenia visit were built entirely on anti-Türkiye and anti-Azerbaijan sentiment. As this visit came ahead of the November U.S. elections, some have interpreted the visit as a propaganda operation aimed at the Armenian diaspora. Such interpretations cannot be considered completely insignificant, yet considering the fact that Pelosi’s visit in early August to Taiwan peaked tensions between China and the U.S., it can be said the main objective is to strengthen geopolitical gains. There is no harm in accepting the messages Pelosi gave in Armenia as the U.S. opinion. Türkiye and Azerbaijan being placed on the target board in South Caucasus, so to speak, their demonization indicates a new policy beyond being the opinion of one person or a group. Hence, this new policy cannot be considered a maneuver that can be evaluated based on the developments in U.S. interior affairs. 


The U.S. has been besieging Türkiye from South Caucasus, from the north of Iraq and Syria, from Cyprus and the East Mediterranean, and Western Thrace. Türkiye’s last three-decade history can be considered a relentless struggle against the completion of this siege. The U.S. is striving to besiege Türkiye from almost every direction, while Türkiye is fighting with all its might to prevent this from happening. Türkiye was very strongly besieged from within as well. The connection between both the internal and external sieges needs to be considered in order to understand the events of the last three decades anyway. One cannot be understood without the other. Fetullahist Terrorist Organization (FETO) schools started to mushroom since the 1990s in areas where U.S. military presence or political influence was strong. The actual circumstances need to be analyzed well to ensure colonialism and imperialism are discussed on sound ground. Concepts such as the Great Middle East Project may gain meaning within the frame of colonialism and imperialism re-evaluated in accordance with the actual state. Otherwise, it won’t be possible to fully understand what Türkiye achieved through the Euphrates Shield and Olive Branch operations. In fact, their relationship with the victory achieved on July 15, 2016, cannot be established. In order to break the siege outside, the siege within had to be broken first.


The U.S. invasion of Iraq was the first step of the besiegement. Despite all its weaknesses, Türkiye did everything possible since the 1990s to prevent the siege. It wasn’t an easy decision to leave the state of defense. Thus, similar to the Entrenchment Attempt since 2015, grave consequences were faced. Yet, in terms of representing the defeat of all anti-national elements, repelling FETO members on July 15, 2016 is critical. It wasn’t only the U.S. elements in our midst that lost that night, the U.S. lost its central base in our region. All other defeats on their behalf following one after the other is extremely meaningful. Karabakh War II needs to be evaluated within this frame.


The U.S. wanted to besiege Türkiye in all corners for the last three decades. This siege would achieve success with the help of their inside elements. The besiegement within and outside were closely connected. But the opposite is also true. The almost sudden decision by the U.S. to leave Afghanistan can be considered a part of the same events. There was a direct relationship between U.S. regional policies and efforts to siege Türkiye internally and externally. As mentioned earlier, the number of FETO schools increased in accordance with U.S. military power and political influence. The steps taken by Türkiye since 2012 collapsed the U.S.’s most important foundations. Hence, Türkiye’s geopolitical steps need to be viewed from a broader angle. Our miraculous rising period, so to speak, at a time when the Turkic and Islamic region is on the verge of a new collapse, cannot be coincidental. The influence elements within accusing Türkiye since 2012 of being authoritarian, taking non-democratic and illegal steps cannot be coincidental either. As a matter of fact, Pelosi’s speech in Armenia was in the same direction.


It can be said that following Pelosi’s statements, Türkiye and Azerbaijan took a joint stance simultaneously. Interestingly, Iran joined the U.S. on anti-Türkiye and anti-Azerbaijan sentiment. This indicates that geopolitical balances will change again with the opening of the Zangezur Corridor. The U.S. is drowning in the system it established, and will not be able to respond to regional changes.

#Türkiye
#US
#Nancy Pelosi
#FETÖ
#Zangezur corridor
#Azerbaijan
#Armenia
default-profile-img
NavigationSee Other Columns