Without putting too fine a point on it, Turkey has in the last few months been acting like a petulant child that doesn't get its dessert before the meal. This is a direct result of the all-too-commonplace assumption of Turkish leaders and outside analysts of Turkey's heavy weight in the Middle East. Both have, since the end of the Cold War, called attention to Turkey's expanding economy, large population, ability to act as bridge between the Muslim and non-Muslim world, and unique position between Arabs and Israelis as factors making Turkey a very consequential actor in regional politics.
At the end of the Cold War and the sudden appearance of the Turkic republic in Central Asia, former President Turgut Özal might be forgiven -- given his flair for the dramatic -- for proclaiming in 1992 that the 21st century would be "the century of the Turks." And one might similarly shrug at the appearance of books at the time declaring, for example, Turkey as one of the world's new "pivotal states."
But the proclivity for exaggerating Turkey's centrality to regional politics seems to have remained firmly in place for subsequent Turkish foreign policy, and indeed has become enhanced under the government of the Justice and Development Party (AKP in the Turkish acronym). However, this penchant may have finally caught up with Ankara, and now exposed the chimera that was Turkey's regional influence.
Although he only became Foreign Minister in 2009, Ahmet Davutoğlu's conceptualization of Turkey's position in the region is representative of the AKP's perceptions of its importance and how other states will respond to this "given" fact. His "zero problems" framework is meant to prescribe a policy in which, so long as others "respect our values," it would be able to maintain good relations with everyone, including former enemies and antagonists. This, in turn, would form the basis for Turkish influence because it alone could use its ties to different, often feuding, countries to bring resolution to regional issues.
Take Turkey's policies toward Israel and Syria, two of the countries in the Middle East that Turkey worked hard to develop good relations with and with which it has had major problems since both have engaged in attacks against civilians. Yet in both cases, Turkey has failed to deliver on its ability to manage, let alone control, events. The public rhetoric of its leaders has raised expectations that neither country can possibly meet, thereby raising the stakes and putting Turkey in the position of being unable to explain why its demands are not met.
The problem stems from the AKP's perception of Turkey's position. As Davutoğlu's approach puts it, the AKP has defined Turkish values--in this case, the protection of civilian lives--as something non-Turks are expected to also conform to in the event. But the Middle East is not a place where one set of priorities, much less values, accrues.
With Israel, the Mavi Marmara incident is of course one of the more serious outstanding problems in the relationship. The AKP has consistently and publicly exhibited a sense of wounded pride that can be mended only by Israel--in the view of many of its own leaders--prostrating itself and agreeing to policies that would threaten it. Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan continues to insist that "As long as Israel does not apologize, as long as Israel does not compensate, and as long as it does not lift the blockade [of Gaza], it is not possible for Turkish-Israeli relations to improve." And with the leaking of the UN's Palmer Report, Davutoğlu has said that because Israel did not apologize, it is time it "pays a price." It has downgraded relations with Israel, suspended military agreements, and apparently is threatening broader international legal and diplomatic actions. There is no indication that Israel will apologize, and it will certainly not lift the siege--especially now that the Report has noted that the blockade is legal.
Turkey appears to have painted itself into a corner as well with its policy toward Syria. Davutoğlu's messages to the Syrian regime to stop the killings or face important (Turkish) consequences reminds one of the Soviet endeavor to prevent or mitigate the 1991 Gulf War: more like an effort to remain relevant than anything of concrete value. Moreover, it has repeated this warning a handful of times, yet no real penalties have been forthcoming.
When Turkey expects others to abide by its declared principles, announces that those who don't respect them will have problems with Turkey, and then other actors don't abide by these stated values, Turkey is placed in a bind. Either it acts on its pronouncements and takes action against those who clash with Turkey's values; or it does nothing. If it does the former--as with Israel--but still doesn't get results, its influence is weakened further.
It is time for Turkish policymakers to acknowledge this and work within these constraints.
A more effective effort might be to adopt a Norwegian-type role in the region. In the arena of the Arab-Israeli conflict, Norway took on a position few others were capable of or willing to: that of general facilitator of peace talks. Turkey has, in fact, done just that: recently Istanbul hosted a meeting of the Libya Contact Group, the grouping of states working with Libya's Transitional National Council as it takes power from the former regime. Turkey also channeled about $300 million in aid to the TNC to help jumpstart its ability to govern. And of course it hosted secret talks between Israel and Syria in the past.
It is these quieter, less public efforts that Turkey might focus on. They are more in line with the expectations of regional states--none of which have ever indicated a willingness to follow the Turkish lead on any issue of major regional importance. They would also move Turkey away from public pronouncements that build anticipation of policies that are unlikely to be delivered on.
Norway has been referred to as a "middle power" country, meaning it has the ability to get things done on issues that larger, more powerful countries can't. If Turkey moved into this type of position--and outside observers stopped raising other expectations--it could play a very successful role in the Middle East that it currently cannot.
Follow Brent E. Sasley on Twitter: www.twitter.com/besasley
http://articles.cnn.com/2011-09-05/world/turkey.violence_1_kurdistan-workers-party-tunceli-kurdish-peace?_s=PM:WORLD”
This problem isn't going away, and Erdoğan's attempt to recapture Ottoman glory by bullying Israel will continue to fail.
being a "petulant child". Of course when US citizens are killed by Israelis
the "special relationship" glosses it all over.
In reality they use the term "Special" in the special USA-Israel relationship
to mean that it is "irrational" , or better yet "dropped on its head" special.
Go back a few years and the Turks were glorified 'cause they were playing
kissy-face with Israel. Now that they stand up for what is right and suddenly
they are a nascent boogie man. In reality Obama should be stripped of
his Nobel prize and it should be given to Erdogan--- Not only for
what he is doing here but what he attempted to do with Brazil to defuse
the Iranian enrichment brouhaha--- The solution ,of course, was rejected by the USA
(and its little Middle eastern bully/problem child) 'cause it was too non-confrontational.
Of course then we could look forward to an article about "Sweden is the new Norway"
This "zero problems policy" includes:
- Blockading Armenia, a sovereign state which never commited an act of agression against Turkey.
- Military occupation of half of the sovereign state of Cyprus; changing its demographic make-up through ethnic cleansing and the transfer of circa 250,000 Turkish settlers; the original Greek Cypriot inhabitants of Northern Cyprus have been removed and are prevented from returning.
- The occupation and annexation of a large proportion of Kurdistan; attempts to change its demographic character through forced Turkization, oppression of Kurdish language and culture and supression of Kurdish political representation and expression.
- Numerous acts of violence commited against the Kurds, both in Turkey itself and across the border in Iraq. These acts of violence have so far resulted in tens of thousands of victims, including numerous civilians.
- Intervention in unrelated foreign conflicts (Israel/Arab) outside legal international frameworks. Intervention which included hostile acts and the threat of force.
- A protracted and unresolved conflict with Greece over sovereignty of islands situated between the two countries.
Just a few of Turkey's ... "zero problems"!
It's certainly something to aim for.
Contrary to trade with other Middle Eastern countries, Turkish exports to Israel are highly diversified and include a wide range of semi-processed goods.In a world first, the northwestern province of Bursa has started manufacturing the Fluence Z.E., an electric car from Renault and Nissan, thanks to a deal signed with the Israeli company Better Place.
From computer software to water irrigation systems and information technology to medical equipment, Israel provides access to technology for the Turkish economy, as most of the software Turks use in everything from cell phones to medical equipment is made in Israel. Israeli companies, especially in the agricultural and water technology industry, provide equipment to local Turkish governments. Meanwhile, Israel’s kibbutz exports to Turkey during the first quarter of 2011 grew by 12 percent.
With the decoupling of economics from politics, business pragmatism is trumping political tensions because the well-integrated web of private interests constitutes the strongest bond between the two countries and societies. There is a pressing need to go beyond the sterile polemic about “who needs whom the most,” as these intense economic interactions verging toward interdependence point at the ever-increasing costs of a disruption in these ties.hurriyetdailynews
Blunders by Turkey’s government helped legitimize Israel’s blockade of the Gaza Strip via a recent U.N. report, the main opposition said Wednesday, calling the affair “one of the most crushing defeats” in Turkish foreign policy history.hurriyetdaily
“Whatever the cost, be it $15 million, or $150 million… What matters is to not let anyone trample on our honor. It is priceless,” Erdoğan said. Turkey’s conflict with Israel has resulted in “one of the most crushing defeats” in its foreign policy history, Erdogan's main opposition chief said.hurriyetdaily
What's more interesting is that Turkey and Israel are continuing massive commercial trade without any cutbacks while their international relations seems to have become as bad as any other muslim country in the region.
"Take Turkey's policies toward Israel and Syria, two of the countries in the Middle East that Turkey worked hard to develop good relations with and with which it has had major problems"
Using your own standards, the U.S., China, Russia, and really no other nation on earth should be considered terribly powerful because none of them have gotten Assad to stop killing civilians or the Israelis to give up the occupation.