The October 1st Talks are important because it is the first time since the beginning of the crisis that the US will officially be represented at the table. A State Department spokesman said that “the U.S. would participate in such a face-to-face meeting because ultimately, the only way that we feel we’re going to be able to resolve these issues is to have a meeting."[2] It seems that in any case the nuclear crisis will be the focal point of the meeting. After those developments EU Foreign Policy Chief Javier Solana declared that Turkey will likely be the country where the October 1st Talks will take place[3].

Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu’s recent visit to Tehran ran parallel to the time the U.S declared its readiness for nuclear talks with Iran. During the visit, where Davutoglu stressed upon the bilateral collaboration on both economic and security matters, he also reiterates Turkey’s support for Iran’s peaceful nuclear activities but underlines its opposition about nuclear armament in the region. Since Turkey’s position regarding the Iranian nuclear program has been quite clear from the beginning, the previous offer of Turkey to be a platform for the negotiations between Iran and the West has repeated once more. After underlining Turkey’s position once again, Davutoglu conveyed to Iranian nuclear crisis negotiator Saeed Jalili, Turkey’s readiness to host negotiations between Iran and the Western countries regarding Tehran’s latest proposal to resolve the dispute.
 

While the possible role of Turkey acting as a mediator in that is being questioned both in Turkey and other countries, Turkey seems eager to play this important role at least to some extent. When we look at the motives and reasons behind this goal we can list at least a few important issues that might trigger Turkey for such a risky and complicated volunteer mission.
 

First of all, Turkey favors engagement policy due to its concern over the possible impacts of a conflict between Iran and the Western countries. It has to be underlined that an isolated Iran does not serve to Turkey’s aim. That may be perceived as a threat for Turkey in the future. However, a completely engaged Iran is the picture that Turkey prefers to see for the sake of a stable region. Iran’s integration into the international system will for sure help Turkey’s efforts of creating a stable region by resolving the existing issues. Secondly, being a volunteer in such a dispute can be evaluated as an extension of Turkey’s revised integrated foreign policy. As a result of this policy Turkey pursues the aim of having zero problems with neighbors and strengthening its regional role by taking initiatives and roles in the regional conflicts. Thirdly, Western countries have begun to understand the influence of Turkey on the countries of the region due to its unique character and they have begun to attribute Turkey as having a different role. Finally, in case of success, this will be an important diplomatic gain for Turkey. Those are the most important motives behind Turkey’s problem solving aim and will.
 

Furthermore while volunteering to play the game of mediation or facilitation, Turkey also has some advantages in order to be successful. For example in the case of Iran, Turkey, who has good relations with both the west and Iran can be considered as the best country that could play such a role. Both sides know that Turkey is sincere and unbiased. Turkey has a long strategic partnership with the west and can understand the Western countries’ concern; on the other, hand Turkey is a country of the region and can smell the atmosphere and understand this side’s concern. Above all, as an unbiased party, Turkey can transmit those concerns in the best way to each side and can convince the parties about the other side’s concern and the steps need to be taken.
 

After drawing this framework we have to ask whether Turkey’s role could be identified as mediator or facilitator. At that point, it can be said that Turkey can be a good facilitator rather than a mediator for this case. The main goal of Turkey for such an initiative is facilitating and helping both sides to understand each other. It is obvious that dialogue and engagement policy regarding Iran is Turkey’s first choice. It seems that Turkey will do its best to at least prepare the appropriate ground for this possible dialogue. However, it is clear that such a chronic issue which has many different aspects could not be resolved just by Turkey’s mediation and efforts. It has to be reminded that the Iranian nuclear crisis looks like an iceberg and the largest part is not visible. Rather, this is a dispute between two enemies who are trying to draw one’s sword on that platform. The first step for a breakthrough is the direct dialogue between the US and Iran which seems to be established in the near future. On the other hand, if this were an easy issue to be solved just by one country’s mediation, it would be useful to remember the EU/3 initiative which proved to be ineffective during those years.