Osman Şenkul
International news agencies and news websites based on them reported last week (29 July) on a report by Canalys, a research company established in Singapore by the London-based company ‘Informa Telecoms & Media Limited.’ Although it went unnoticed, this report revealed a very important development.
According to the report, India surpassed China in smartphone exports to the US with a 240% increase in smartphone production. In other words, smartphones assembled in India accounted for 44% of US smartphone imports in the second quarter. This represents a significant increase from 13% last year.
The data also showed that China’s share of smartphone exports to the US during the April-June period fell to 25% from 61% in the same period last year. According to the Canalys report, India surpassed China to become the top exporter of smartphones to the United States, overtaking Beijing in the production supply chain due to the uncertainty fueled by the tariffs imposed by US President Donald Trump.
Smartphones assembled in India accounted for 44% of US imports of these devices in the second quarter. This figure represents a significant increase from just 13% of imports in the same period last year. In contrast, according to data published by Canalys, China’s share of smartphone exports to the US fell from 61% in the same period last year to 25% in the quarter ending in June. Vietnam’s share of smartphone exports to the US also exceeded China’s share at 30%.
Sanyam Chaurasia, Canalys’s lead analyst, stated that the primary reason for the increase in exports from India is the acceleration of Apple’s focus on this country during a period of heightened trade uncertainty between the United States and China. As a result, India exported more smartphones than China for the first time.
According to the details of the report, Apple has accelerated its plans to manufacture approximately a quarter of all iPhones sold in the country over the next few years, which represents the majority of iPhones sold in the US, at its factories in India this year.
Meanwhile, US President Donald Trump has called on Apple CEO Tim Cook to manufacture iPhones domestically and threatened to impose additional tariffs on Apple products if he does not comply. Analysts, however, have stated that Trump’s threat is unlikely to materialise, as the additional tariffs would lead to higher iPhone prices. Many of Apple’s core products, including iPhones and Mac laptops, as well as other technology products, have been exempted from the ‘reciprocal tariffs’ proposed by Trump.
Although this news item, based on a research report, appears to focus on developments related to a company, a sector and a country, it is in fact based on a long preparation process and has a broad, global foundation covering many sectors and countries.
This global foundation can be recalled from the events that took place at the G20 Leaders’ Summit held in New Delhi, the capital of India, on 9-10 September 2023. At that time, the Financial Times (FT) reported under the headline ‘Turkey offers an alternative to the G20’s India-Middle East trade corridor plan,’ ‘While Turkey is striving to strengthen its historical role as a transportation route for goods from Asia to Europe, it is conducting “intensive negotiations” with regional partners as an alternative to the India-Middle East trade corridor plan adopted at the G20 summit.’
According to FT news, Ankara opposed the India-Middle East route proposal, which would transport goods from the subcontinent to European markets via the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Israel. This is because the corridor, supported by the US and the EU, which are making great efforts to weaken China’s growing influence, would also bypass Turkey.
Responding to journalists’ questions upon his return from the summit, Erdoğan stated that “There can be no corridor without Turkey’ regarding the new trade route defined as the ‘India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor.” According to Erdoğan, “The most suitable route for east-west traffic must pass through Turkey.” Emphasising that China has made progress on the Belt and Road Initiative, Erdoğan said, “As you know, we have also taken steps in response to China’s move. In other words, everything up to the Marmaray project is part of that plan… Countries are striving to develop their commercial routes, corridors, and spheres of influence.”
According to FT news, the plans announced by the Baghdad government showed that the route, with a potential value of $17 billion, would transport goods from the oil-rich Grand Faw port in southern Iraq to Turkey. According to these reports, the three-phase plan would be based on a 1,200-kilometre high-speed railway and a parallel road network. The first phase of the plan, which is expected to become operational on a specific route, is targeted for completion by 2028, with the final phase set for 2050.
According to the plan, goods departing from India would quickly reach southern Iraq, from where they would be transported by train to Marmaray, cross the Bosphorus Strait, and reach the European continent. However, as was the case at the time, the EU continues to focus on issues related to “human rights, press freedom, and an independent judiciary” following 19 March. In other words, at one end of this massive economic route are the US and its most natural ally, the EU.
Again, during those days, Erdoğan, who emphasised that he was determined to close the door to the EU together with his closest ally Bahçeli, stressed his determination regarding the ‘new route’:
‘We are saying that there can be no corridor without Turkey. Turkey is an important production and trade hub. The most suitable route for traffic from east to west is via Turkey. A step that we consider very important in this process is the step taken by the Gulf states together with us. We are talking about a route, a corridor, from Iraq, Qatar and Abu Dhabi to Europe via Turkey.’
Erdoğan’s statement, “despite the EU” inevitably brings to mind the “Great Alexander” route, which opened the same route in history and was decisive in regional trade for many years. Alexander the Great, son of Macedonian King Philip II, who gave his name to many settlements along this route, including Iskenderun in Turkey and Alexandria in Egypt, set out on his Asian campaign in 334 BC with an army of 35,000. Crossing the Dardanelles Strait into Anatolia, he defeated the Persians, conquered Anatolia, Syria, Egypt, and Mesopotamia, and advanced as far as India. According to the Greek historian, biographer, and essayist Plutarch of Pella (66–67 CE), Alexander established approximately 70 new cities along this route during his campaign and created a new trade route and economy along the entire route.
As can be understood from this, the alternative route taken by the government, which has moved to close the door to the EU in one fell swoop, has a rather miraculous history. To proceed along the path opened by Alexander the Great, it will suffice to draw Alexander’s miraculous sword and magically eliminate the questions of ‘human rights, press freedom, and judicial independence’ that are constantly raised. Thus, a Marmaray train departing from Halkalı could load its carriages with walnuts, apricots, and pistachios along the way, transport them all the way to the Persian Gulf, and then carry Indian-made mobile phones, tablets, and electric vehicle batteries through the Bosphorus Strait to Europe.
As the whole world knows very well, Israel and the United States’ goals of establishing hegemony in the Iraq-Syria-Turkey triangle are based on strategies of accessing energy resources, controlling energy routes, establishing a regional security architecture, and encircling geopolitical rivals. Because this region, due to its strategic location and energy resources, has long been a geography of interest to the West.
Although wind and solar energy sources are rapidly developing globally, oil and natural gas from the Persian Gulf remain highly important for US and Western companies. Looking back, we recall that the US sought to secure major contracts in Iraq’s energy sector with companies such as ExxonMobil and Chevron in the post-Saddam era. In eastern Syria, particularly around Deir ez-Zor, there are substantial oil and gas reserves, and their locations are well-known. Additionally, a natural gas pipeline project (Arab Gas Pipeline) extending from Qatar to Turkey would have reduced Europe’s dependence on Russia and provided energy control to the West; however, Syria under Assad resisted this project, leading to escalating conflicts. In short, by the time the meeting in September 2023 came to the forefront, the most influential countries at the global level, led by the EU and the US, had already been actively working to bring energy resources (Iraq-Syria) and their transportation routes (Turkey) under military, diplomatic, and economic control.
Israel, which seeks to encircle its enemies and create friendly/controllable buffer zones, claims that the threat in the north comes from Iran and Hezbollah. For this very reason, Israel is striving to create weak, fragmented or Western-dependent structures in these regions and, with Trump’s support, is seeking alternative routes to transport natural gas from the Eastern Mediterranean to Europe. This creates a need for a sea/land security zone through Syria.
From the US perspective, this region is of great importance, particularly in limiting the influence of Iran, Russia, and China in the Middle East. For this reason, it attaches great importance to the Syria-Iraq line to break the Shiite axis stretching from Tehran to Baghdad, Damascus and Beirut; because it also removes China’s ‘One Belt, One Road’ project, which has the potential to reach Europe by passing through the Iraq-Syria-Turkey line.
When listing all of this, we must not forget the steps taken by energy companies (ExxonMobil, Total, Shell) to control reserves in Iraq and Syria, as well as the direct profits made by defence industry companies (Raytheon, Lockheed Martin, Boeing) from the conflicts in the region. This is because the infrastructure and reconstruction sectors provide Western companies with billions of dollars in contracts in post-war regions (such as northern Iraq and Syria). For this very reason, arms sales to both Israel and the Gulf countries are on the rise, and they also account for a significant portion of US foreign trade.
So, where does Turkey, a NATO member and a regional power allied with the West, fit into this picture? According to international foreign policy experts, ‘The US and Israel want to exert pressure on Turkey, particularly through the Kurdish card (via the PYD-YPG), and use it as a tool to influence the regional balance of power.’ The same experts note that ‘Turkey’s efforts to pursue an independent foreign policy occasionally clash with these hegemonic objectives (e.g., operations such as Euphrates Shield and Olive Branch in Syria).’ As efforts to achieve a ‘terror-free Turkey’ intensify, all these factors must be taken into account.
Faced with this situation, it is natural to consider several important factors, such as the US and EU evaluating the Iraq-Qatar pipeline as an alternative to Russian gas, viewing the Turkey-Syria pipeline as a buffer zone against waves of refugees to Europe, and of course, opposing intervention in the region and efforts to gain access to economic resources under the pretext of fighting terrorism. From this perspective, it is important not to forget that the United States and Israel have very serious economic interests underlying their goal of establishing hegemony in the Iraq-Syria-Turkey triangle. To summarise briefly, these include controlling and directing energy resources to Europe, controlling energy transit routes, limiting rival powers (Iran, Russia, China), opening new markets for defence and energy companies, and, of course, making the countries of the region dependent on Western capital and security networks.
Therefore, it is important not to forget that the region is not only a geopolitical but also a geo-economic conflict zone, and that the hegemony in question can be established not only with tanks but also with pipelines, dollars, construction contracts, and energy companies.
However, no matter how you look at it, as the West closes the doors of its ‘cheap labour paradise’ to others and seeks to make it a paradise only for itself, it has naturally accelerated its search for ‘new paradises.’ The first examples of this are rapidly emerging in India, Mexico, Vietnam, and Malaysia. Will they stop there? Of course not; Western capitalism will do everything in its power to monopolise the market for its customers, but it must ensure that ‘everywhere is paradise’ for itself—especially the labour market…
As I recount all this, one thing is clear: Turkey has been waiting in the wings from the very beginning. Labour is certainly cheap in Turkey, but is there no way to make it even cheaper? Of course there is, and we have already embarked on that path. For quite some time now, has the transportation of so much cheap (free) labour from Sudan, Oman, Jordan, Yemen, Tunisia, Palestine, Egypt, Iran, Iraq, Syria, Palestine, and Ethiopia been in vain? Of course not. Haven’t there been dozens of news reports about people coming from the countries we mentioned and being exploited as illegal workers? Of course, there have been. These are merely the cases that have come to light. Moreover, it is no secret that the EU is also pouring millions of euros in support to ensure that this cheap labour force is carefully maintained in these lands… In short, Turkey’s newly assigned role as a “cheap labour paradise” is now reaching the stage of realisation.
However, the most important and significant development in this regard is France’s announcement on 24 July that it will officially recognise the State of Palestine, thereby taking a leading role among the G7 countries on this issue, because the new line that started in India and is now moving towards the West needs to be used without any problems. Following the weakening of Iran through attacks by Israel and the United States, the only way to eliminate the conflict along this line was to achieve a lasting peace. French President Emmanuel Macron took the first step in this very important development. Following France, the United Kingdom, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, Finland, Luxembourg, Malta, Portugal and San Marino announced that they would recognise Palestine.
In short, the developments that gained momentum with the striking news published last week in India also show that this long road, which has been paved for a long time, has now reached a usable level.