By Barçın Yinanç
Russian and Ukrainian envoys in Ankara were warned not to wage their war in Turkish territory. The warning came as tensions in the Black Sea in the first half of December escalated to fresh peaks in the four-year-old war.
The war crossed the shores of Turkey with a Turkish F-16 scrambling to down an uncontrolled drone in the skies near the capital Ankara Dec. 15.
Aside from diplomatic talks hosted in Istanbul and a handful of sea mines washing up along Turkey’s Black Sea coast, this is the first major incident to make an otherwise largely indifferent public realize that Turkey is, in fact, very close to an active war zone.
The past three weeks have seen Ukraine targeting the Russian shadow fleet in Turkish exclusive economic zones while Russia stepped up its attacks on Ukrainian ports, where Turkish vessels were also hit.
ESCALATION OF THE CONFLICT
The intensification of the war in the Black Sea is believed to be tied to the renewed efforts to bring both sides to the table.
In contrast to Washington’s messages implying that the Russians are stronger and have the upper hand, Ukrainians want to show that they can inflict serious damage on Russia.
While the Ukrainian army has difficulty in making advances on the land, experts believe it has, over time, built an important capacity to strike Russia’s maritime assets.
Most recently, Ukrainian forces have struck a tanker in the southern Russian port of Rostov on Don early on Dec. 18 and damaged the vessel, according to media reports. On Dec. 15, Ukraine said it struck a Russian submarine in Novorossiysk.
In an effort to interrupt Russia’s oil logistics, Ukraine also started targeting the Russian shadow fleet. Its drones have struck empty tankers in order to avoid environmental damage that could put Ukraine in a difficult position. In addition, Ukrainian Sea Baby drones took aim at the back of the tankers where the engines are in order to further limit the potential environmental hazard, according to experts.
CAREFUL CALIBRATION
As the Black Sea started to take center stage in the war, Turkey’s balancing act between the warring sides comes under scrutiny.
Ankara invoked Article 19 of the Montreux Convention in the early days of Russia’s attack and closed the Straits to the warships of belligerent states, which limited the Russians’ ability to reinforce its Black Sea Fleet. Ankara’s request from its non-littoral NATO allies not to send warships to the Black Sea has proved successful in keeping the waters relatively quiet.
Ankara has also resisted attempts by Russia to exploit loopholes through the use of commercially flagged vessels, according to retired ambassador Murat Ersavcı.
“Türkiye’s refusal to accept Russia’s re-flagging maneuvers under the Montreux framework reflects a commitment to legal consistency, “ wrote Ersavcı, who is currently the Director of the International Studies Center at TEPAV.
Ukrainians appear to believe otherwise. A parliamentary delegation was in Ankara this week for an official visit. The Turkish parliamentarians conveyed their worry about the tension in the Black Sea, while the Ukrainian delegation blamed the Russians for using the ghost fleet.
In response, the Ukrainian MPs appeared worried about Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s recent statements on peace efforts. Erdoğan no longer mentions Ukraine’s territorial integrity, according to the Ukrainian delegation.
Under the current U.S. peace plan, Ukraine is asked to leave part of its territory to Russia. The delegation expressed the view that accepting such a plan would mean Ukrainian President Zelenskyy being declared a traitor. It would also never be endorsed by the parliament.
ANKARA’S POSITION CONTRADICTS EUROPEAN POSITION
Just like the U.S., Turkey is eager to strike a peace deal as soon as possible. Yet, Ankara has a rather more pessimistic approach in terms of Ukrainian resistance capacity, fearing that the army might face a devastating retreat in front of advancing Russian forces.
Ankara’s position appears to be based on the conviction that “bad” peace under current circumstances is better than a “worse” peace accepted in the future under worse circumstances.
The Europeans appear to disagree about Ukrainian resistance and believe a bad peace now can lead to a new war in the future.
