ConflictClarifier

ردیاب بحران ایران-خلیج فارس ۲۰۲۶
CC
Events Archive
strikeMar 14, 2026

AP Exclusive: Turkey's Foreign Minister talks diplomacy efforts as regional war rages

Summary

ANKARA, Turkey — Turkey’s powerful foreign minister said Saturday that there is no serious initiative to resume negotiations between the United States and Iran but that he believes Iran is open to back-channel talks. The comments by Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan to The Associated Press in an exclusive interview came as Ankara is striving to stay out of the widening war in the Middle East. Ankara, which has good relations with both Washington and Tehran, had attempted to mediate a solution between them before the U.S. and Israel attacked Iran two weeks ago, triggering the war. “The conditions are not very much conducive” to diplomacy now, Fidan said. The Iranians “feel betrayed” because for a second time they were attacked while in active negotiations with the U.S. over their nuclear program, he said, but added, “I think they are open to any sensible back-channel diplomacy.” Fidan, 57, served as Turkey’s intelligence chief for more than a decade before being appointed foreign minister in 2023. Key role in formulating Turkey’s Middle East policy In that role, he played a key part in shaping Turkey’s policy in the Middle East, particularly toward Syria, Iraq and Iran. He is considered to be one of President Recep Tayyip Erdogan ’s most trusted advisers and one of the potential candidates to succeed him. Turkey has maintained a neutral position in the war, criticizing both the U.S and Israeli strikes against Iran and Tehran’s retaliatory actions against Gulf states that host U.S. bases. Fidan said he has been attempting to persuade the Iranians to halt those attacks. Fidan said Turkey’s top priority is to remain outside of the conflict, even after three missiles believed to come from Iran were intercepted over Turkey by NATO defenses. Turkey is a NATO member and an air base in southern Turkey is used by NATO forces, including U.S. troops. Iranian officials have insisted that they did not fire at Turkey, although the available data shows that the missiles came from Iran, the Turkish foreign minister said. He ruled out a military response at this stage, saying that NATO’s defenses were effective and that Ankara’s “primary objective” is to stay out of the conflict. “I know that we are being provoked and we will be provoked, but this is our objective,” he said. “We want to stay out of this war.” Fidan, who has regular contact with Iranian officials, said he does not know the severity of the wounds suffered by Iran’s new Supreme Leader Ayatollah Mojtaba Khamenei in a strike earlier in the war, but that “what we know is that he is alive and functioning.” Khamenei was appointed to replace his father, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who was killed Feb. 28 during the war’s opening salvo. Fidan said “the process of electing a new leader and the medical conditions of the new leader, it created a gap” in Iran’s power structure and “I think that gap has been filled by the high command of the Revolutionary Guards,” referring to the paramilitary force reporting to the Supreme Leader. A failed peace initiative Before the conflict, Turkey tried to avert a war by offering to host talks in Istanbul that would have brought U.S., Iran and other regional countries together. Iran later opted for talks mediated by Oman, without the participation of regional actors and focusing solely on its nuclear program — talks that ultimately failed. Fidan said that Iran had refused to discuss its missile program and the proxy armed groups it backs in the region, including the Lebanese Hezbollah and a group of Iraqi militias — both of which have now waded into the regional war. Turkey had proposed that “the Americans and the Iranians can discuss fully the nuclear issue and we as regional countries can come together to discuss the other two with Iran” as part of an initiative to build trust within the region. Tensions with Israel Turkey and Israel have tense relations, with Erdogan becoming one of the most vocal critics of Israel’s actions in Gaza. Turkey has cut trade ties with Israel and frequently accuses Israel of committing genocide. Israel in turn accuses Turkey of supporting Hamas, the Palestinian militant group that launched the deadly Oct. 7, 2023 attack in southern Israel. Since Israel launched its strikes on Iran, some have gone as far as to suggest that Turkey could be the next target. Fidan dismissed that possibility, while acknowledging that the war in Iran gave Turkey an increased incentive to step up its own production of weapons and air defenses. “As long as Netanyahu is there, (Israel) will always identify somebody as an enemy,” he said. “Because they need it to advance their own agenda. If not Turkey, they would name some other country in the region.” He criticized Israel’s role elsewhere in the region, including in Syria, where both countries have strategic interests. Turkey has been a strong backer of the current government in Damascus led by interim President Ahmad al-Sharaa, the former leader of an Islamist rebel group. Israel regards al-Sharaa’s government with suspicion and, since it took power in December 2024, Israeli forces have seized control of a swathe of land in southern Syria and launched airstrikes on Syrian military facilities, wiping out much of the country’s arsenal. Israel has said its presence in Syria is meant to secure its border from another Oct. 7-style attack. “They are after not security, they are after more land,” Fidan said. “So as long as they don’t give up this idea, there will always be a war in the Middle East.” An ongoing role in Gaza Turkey has also sought to play an active role in postwar Gaza. It has joined U.S. President Donald Trump’s Board of Peace — boycotted by many other countries that see it as an attempt to supplant the United Nations and criticize the lack of a role for Palestinians — and has offered to supply troops for an international stabilization force in the battered enclave. Fidan said it was important for Turkey to join the Board of Peace, as an “opportunity” to stop the war, although “we are not under the illusion that the Board of Peace will address all the existing issues.” Fidan said Turkey has not received a request to contribute troops to the stabilization force, which he attributed to the Israeli opposition, but added, “I think the Americans are quietly trying to settle the issue with the Israelis to allow Turkey to participate.” Fidan said however, that Turkey’s priority was the establishment of an administration committee for Gaza, which is to be made up of 15 politically independent Palestinian administrators. “We expect them to go into Gaza and start their work,” he said. “This has not started yet, so we need to start from somewhere.”

Actors involved

USIranIsraelProxy

Sources

See this event through different lenses

Compare how Western, Iranian, Israeli, Global South, and Pro-Peace perspectives frame this event.

Compare Perspectives

Community Notes

Community Notes

Loading notes...

Related events

strikeUnverifiedUSIsraelIranUN
1 source

The US and its allies Britain, France and Germany are pushing other countries on the UN nuclear watchdog's board to pass a resolution next week reporting Iran to the UN Security Council for the first time in 20 years, diplomats said on Friday. If passed, the resolution would follow up on one adopted on June 12 of last year declaring Iran in breach of its non-proliferation obligations for not fully cooperating with an investigation into uranium traces found at undeclared sites.

The US launched an air war against Tehran on February 28 in which, together with Israel, it destroyed or badly damaged Iran's uranium-enrichment facilities. Iran has not let International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inspectors return to the bombed sites since then or verify what remains of its stocks of enriched uranium, some of which was enriched to up to 60% purity, a short step from weapons grade.

Resolution would be culmination of standoff over IAEA's access to nuclear sites A resolution by the IAEA's 35-nation board reporting Iran to the Security Council would also be the culmination of a standoff over IAEA access to those sites, since the board has passed two resolutions in the past year demanding Iran declare its enriched uranium stocks and grant the IAEA full access to verify them.

A draft text for the resolution has yet to be formally submitted to the board and negotiations between countries over the exact wording are ongoing, diplomats said. A draft is usually formally submitted early in the week of a board meeting. As a party to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), Iran has the right to develop nuclear technology, including enrichment, for peaceful purposes.

Iran says it would never produce nuclear weapons. It is, however, the only country to enrich to 60% without making a bomb. The amount it has enriched to that level is "a matter of serious concern" to the IAEA. The IAEA believes well over 200 kg of that highly enriched uranium has survived the bombardments and is held in a tunnel complex at Isfahan and at the Natanz facility.

Location: Jerusalem
strikeUnverifiedUSIranChina
1 source

The U.S. Treasury imposed sanctions on the Turkish bank Golden Global Yatirim Bankasi Anonim Sirketi, alleging it facilitated the transfer of Iranian oil revenues into cash and gold. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent stated these measures are part of "Operation Economic Outcast," an initiative launched following more than six months of conflict to pressure Iran.

Location: Iran
strikeUnverifiedUSIsraelIranEURussiaChinaUkraineHamas
1 source

Rabobank reported that geopolitical developments, including Russian statements regarding potential peace talks in Ukraine and US-Iran hostilities, continue to dominate market sentiment, though analysts noted these claims remain unverified. The bank also cited unconfirmed reports that South Korea may deploy forces to the Strait of Hormuz and that Israel has stated regime change in Tehran is a primary objective, while noting that Ukrainian media reports of an impending northern Russian offensive lack independent verification.

Location: Tehran
strikeUnverifiedUSIsraelIranRussiaUkraine
1 source

The White House is now apparently using Russian tactics to convince the American public that the war in Iran is not, in fact, a war. When asked by reporters at the White House on Thursday whether the most intense sustained air campaign by American forces since the invasion of Iraq would be over by the midterms, Vice President JD Vance replied: “I wouldn’t call it a war.

” Vladimir Putin said much the same thing when he invaded Ukraine. Russia was not fighting a war either, the Kremlin insisted; it was merely conducting a “special military operation.” If that comparison strikes you as shocking, consider the contours of the two conflicts.

A vastly more powerful military launched a punishing offensive against a smaller, less well-equipped adversary, inflicted enormous damage without achieving a decisive resolution, and then found itself drawn into a longer, grinding conflict with no clear way out.

The motivations behind the wars may be different, and they’re playing out in different theaters, but the pattern is eerily similar. Now, so too is the attempt by those in power to control how the public understands, and even what it is allowed to call, the obvious war unfolding in front of them.

If This Isn’t a War, What Is? Let us take a moment to assess what exactly has happened since February 28, when the U.S. launched Operation Epic Fury. The opening U.S.-Israeli attack killed Iran’s supreme leader, Ali Khamenei, along with the commander of the Revolutionary Guard, the defense minister and various other senior officials.

According to the U.S. military’s own accounting, the first 38 days of major combat operations involved more than 10,200 sorties and 13,500 strikes. U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) says those attacks damaged or destroyed more than 85 percent of Iran’s ballistic missile, drone and naval defense industrial base, while knocking out 82 percent of its air-defense missile systems.

The U.S. sent carrier strike groups and warships into the region, later imposing a military blockade on Iranian ports. Meanwhile, American and allied air defenses intercepted more than 6,000 Iranian attack drones and 1,500 ballistic missiles fired at U.

S. forces, Israel and American partners across the Middle East. More than 50,000 U.S. service members remain deployed across the region. The fighting has killed 18 U.S. service members and at least 8,000 people across Iran, Lebanon, Israel and the Gulf states.

More than 750 U.S. service members have been wounded. Last month, during a lull in the fighting, the U.S. Treasury unveiled a sanctions package likened to an “economic D-day” that is designed to make Iran an “economic outcast” and cut the adversary off from all available forms of economic support.

In the announcement, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent openly declared that Iran had been “at war against America” for 47 years. This week, the shooting resumed; the U.S. hit targets in and around the Strait of Hormuz, and Iran blasted missiles at targets in Kuwait, Bahrain, Jordan and Iraq.

All this from an administration that almost exactly a year ago launched a rapid rebrand of the Defense Department into the “Department of War”. No boots on the ground, though, so it’s not a war, right? Tell It Kind of Like It Is Even the very best snake-oil salesman would have a hard time convincing people that the war in Iran isn’t a war.

So why is JD Vance even trying? Well, if there’s one thing politicians understand better than anyone, it’s the importance of language and rhetoric. Words have immense power; a well-written speech can unite millions of people, and a catchy slogan like Make America Great Again can come to represent an entire political philosophy.

But war is a pesky word. For one, it implies there will eventually be a winner and a loser. It also brings with it certain expectations—and some very difficult questions. What is the objective? How many people will die? When will it end? And, perhaps most dangerously of all: was it worth it?

Those are not questions the White House wants Americans to be asking. Trump built a substantial part of his political identity around ending, rather than beginning, America’s “endless wars.” When Washington and Tehran signed a memorandum of understanding in June, the White House presented it as proof that Trump’s America First approach could deliver peace without another prolonged Middle Eastern conflict.

Then the hostilities started again. Earlier this week, Trump shared a Truth Social graphic declaring that “Hormuz Oil Volumes are BACK!”, saying 18 million barrels a day were once again leaving the Strait, compared with 20 million before the war. No independent commodity tracking company or energy analyst appeared to verify Trump’s claims.

But most Americans won’t be checking tanker-tracking dashboards. What they’ll care about is the cold, hard fact that diesel hit a new record price this morning, soaring to an average of $5.85 a gallon for the first time ever. Gasoline is $4.15 a gallon on average, compared with $3.

20 at this time last year, according to AAA. The numbers on the sign at the gas station and the price on the grocery receipt aren’t affected by Trump’s tall tales, but they’ll surely affect how Americans vote at the midterms. When viewed in this light, Vance’s attempt to discourage reporters from “call[ing] it a war” begins to make sense.

A war is something that we want to end. It tends to result in a winner and a loser. And its worth is up for debate at all times. A different kind of engagement that doesn’t quite meet the threshold of war—say, a special military operation—is not exposed to the same kind of scrutiny.

Vance effectively made that case himself. “When you ask, ‘When will this end?’ You’re asking me a question like, ‘When will the Iranians stop shooting at ships?’” he said. By that logic, there is no American war—only recurring Iranian provocations that require American military responses.

That’s exactly the logic applied by Putin to Ukraine and supposed expansion of NATO. Putting the Toothpaste Back in the Tube U.S. lawmakers have repeatedly invoked the War Powers Resolution to challenge Trump’s authority to keep fighting Iran without specific congressional authorization.

The law generally gives a president 60 days after U.S. forces enter “hostilities” to secure congressional approval or bring those hostilities to an end. That makes the pauses in fighting hugely important. When the original 60-day deadline arrived in May, Trump told Congress that the temporary ceasefire reached in April meant the hostilities that began on February 28 had ended.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth argued that the War Powers clock could “pause, or stop” when the shooting did. That position is disputed by legal experts, but its political utility is obvious. If every new outbreak of fighting can be treated as a separate skirmish, rather than part of one continuous war, the administration can argue that a fresh 60-day clock starts each time.

Vance’s insistence that there is no continuing “war” fits neatly for an administration that has already tried to divide six months of conflict into separate periods of hostilities, interrupted by ceasefires and pauses. This brings us back to Moscow.

The Kremlin’s own linguistic trick was also about making one sprawling war sound smaller, more limited and more manageable than it really was. From the very beginning of the invasion, Putin described the war as a special military operation. Only after two years of grinding warfare did Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov openly declare Russia to be in a “state of war”—and even then, he said the transformation had occurred because the “collective West” had joined the fight against Russia.

Vance is playing a similar game, but in reverse. Only now—with soaring fuel prices, mounting casualties, concerns over the military’s munitions stockpiles, and midterm elections on the horizon—is the conflict no longer a war. You can’t put the genie back in the bottle, though, and the American people aren’t stupid.

Vance and the White House may discover in November that voters are perfectly capable of recognizing a war, even when the vice president doesn’t want to call it one.

Location: Iran