Turkey has been holding elections since the end of the 19th century; and the country has been enjoying democratic elections since 1950. With a well-established electoral system, both local and general elections in Turkey are held in peace and stability. While there is no debate about the freeness, fairness and transparency of the elections, there are always some discussions about the representation problem such as the real power of politicians, the national threshold for political parties to be able to send their representatives to the parliament and the lack of instruments to overcome political crises. Turkey’s search for a new system of government dates back to the 1970s. The parliamentary system’s shortcomings such as political turmoil caused by the coalition rule and political crises fueled by the president’s selection by the parliament have been the driving force behind the debate over the governmental system. Furthermore, the fractured nature of political parties and clashes between different ideological and ethnic groups caused political instability which resulted in the military and bureaucratic tutelague.
The date of July 15, 2016 is a watershed in the history of democracy as well as in the history of Turkey. On the night of July 15, the world witnessed an exceptional and historic event. The Turkish people heroically stood up against the brutal coup plotters; they became an example for other peoples on how to defend your nation and on what is the real meaning of national self-determination. At the same time, they gave a valuable lesson to the Western governments on how to support a democratically elected government. But more than anything, Turkish people proved to themselves that it is they who decide for themselves, for their future. After all, isn’t that what democracy is all about? The memory of what happened on July 15 will never be erased from the minds and hearts of the people who were in Turkey that night. We all lost someone on the night of July 15 –a mother, a father, a child, a friend or someone that we did not even know but we broke into tears when we saw them giving their life for this country.
Examining Benjamin Netanyahu’s more than a decade-long period as Israel’s Prime Minister, this important book evaluates the domestic politics and foreign policy of Israel from 2009-2019. This comprehensive study assesses Israel’s main political parties, highlights the special position in Israel of Israel’s Arab, Russian and religious communities, appraises Netanyahu’s stewardship of Israel’s economy, and analyzes Israel’s foreign relations. The scholars contributing to the volume are leading experts from both Israel and the United States and represent a broad spectrum of viewpoints on Israeli politics and foreign policy. The case studies cover the Likud party, the non-religious opposition parties such as Labor, Meretz, and Yesh Atid, the Arab parties, the religious parties and the Russian-based Yisrael B’Aliyah party, and present analyses of the ups and downs of Israel’s relations with the United States, the American Jewish Community, Iran, Europe, the Palestinians, the Arab World, Russia, China, India, and Turkey as well as Israel’s challenges in dealing with terrorism. Another highlight of the book is an assessment of Netanyahu’s leadership of the Likud party, which seeks to answer the question as to whether Netanyahu is a pragmatist interested in a peace deal with the Palestinians or an ideologue who wants Israel to hold on to the West Bank as well as all of Jerusalem. This volume will be of interest to readers who wish to understand the dynamics of Israel during Benjamin Netanyahu’s time as Prime Minister and are interested in the history and politics of Israel and the Middle East.
This issue of Insight Turkey comes with a different format and brings to its readers two different topics that require special attention when we consider the latest regional and global affairs. The planned topic was Central Asia; however, the early presidential and parliamentarian elections in Turkey led us to cover a second topic in the issue. First, the current issue focuses on a forgotten but very important region of Central Asia. The second section of the journal comprises commentaries and articles on the latest elections in Turkey, how to understand them and what could be the future of the presidential system. Central Asia is one of the most geostrategic and penetrated regions in the world. The founding father of geopolitics, the British geographer Sir Halford John Mackinder, considers Central Asia as a part of the “heartland.” The control of Central Asia, a region stretching from the Caspian Sea in the west to China in the east, is a precondition of the world hegemony. Throughout the 20th century, the Central Asian countries were under the rule of the Soviet Union. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, the republics of Central Asia re-emerged as independent actors of international politics. Later, they were declared as “near abroad” by Russia; that is, they were kept close to Russia through several multilateral platforms. Nowadays, Central Asian countries, namely Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan, face many challenges such as underdevelopment, poor governance and corruption, mutual mistrust between neighbors, fear of radicalism, and threats from neighboring global powers. The governments of the regional countries must work together in order to be able to overcome these challenges. They need to increase intra-regional trade and to de-securitize their relations with other countries. Central Asian countries are squeezed between two heavyweight powers, Russia and China. With the revitalization of the historical Silk Road by China, many observers began to discuss the increasing importance and role of the Central Asian countries. Central Asia will be the main ground for intra-East regional and global competition. The mostly Turkic and Muslim countries can play the role of game changers at least, between the two global actors. Turkey, a country which shares the same language, history and culture with the Central Asian countries, is also one of the effective actors in the region. After an unprepared and unsuccessful attempt to forge links, in the wake of their independence in the 1990s, Turkey has improved its relations with the Turkic states and now has multi-dimensional relations (economic, cultural, political, and security) with these countries. The transformation of the Turkish political system into a presidential one, after the April 16, 2017 referendum, was finalized with the June 24, 2018 elections, when Recep Tayyip Erdoğan was elected as the first Turkish president in the context of the new presidential system. Naturally, many questions have risen in terms of the transformation of the new system and its impact on Turkey’s foreign policy. This issue of Insight Turkey aims to discuss this political transformation. Turkey has been governed by a multi-party parliamentarian system for decades. The country has experienced several chaotic periods due to political instabilities, mainly as a result of coalition or weak governments. Since Turkey could not end the bureaucratic (especially military and judiciary) tutelage, it could not consolidate its democracy under the parliamentarian system. Therefore, many politicians such as Necmettin Erbakan and Süleyman Demirel asked for the transformation of the system into a presidential one. At a time when the whole world has been experiencing a transformation, Turkey has also decided to consolidate its political authority; and therefore, it has decided to transform its political system into a unified and strong executive power in order to be able to struggle against emerging threats. Ultimately, as a regional power and global actor, Turkey now has a strong political leadership, who plays an effective role in international politics. In this issue, we bring four manuscripts which analyze in detail the June 2018 elections and the new presidential system in Turkey. On the verge of the reorganization process in Turkey, Zahid Sobacı, Özer Köseoğlu, and Nebi Miş in their article provide a legal and institutional analysis of how the public policy process and the roles and responsibilities of policy actors have changed with the new system. Understanding the actual elections of June 24 is also very important. In the light of this, the detailed election analyses of Ali Çarkoğlu and Kerem Yıldırım provide an exemplary source. Furthermore, Hüseyin Alptekin’s article deals specifically with the patterns of Kurdish votes in 24 eastern Turkish cities and contends that intra-Kurdish and intra-regional differences have prevailed in the June 24 elections. The last piece on the elections is the commentary written by Ali Yaşar Sarıbay which addresses the factors that led to the new system in Turkey through historical and sociological processes. Six other manuscripts bring a general perspective on the regional and global affairs in Central Asia. Experts in this area analyze the Russian-Chinese competition in the region, the responses of the Central Asian states and Turkey’s comeback in Central Asia. Morena Skalamera, focusing on the rivalry between global and regional powers in Central Asia, i.e. Russia, China, the U.S., Turkey, etc., intends to explain the Central Asian governments’ failure to capitalize on these developments. Mariya Omelicheva and Ruoxi Du, on the other hand, shed light on why Russia has abstained from a possible conflict with China when it comes to the Central Asian energy and transportation networks by arguing that Kazakhstan’s multi-vector foreign policy has played a crucial role in this regard. This issue places a special emphasis on Kazakhstan, considering that it is one of the most important regional states. In the light of this, the articles of Azhar Serikkaliyeva et al. and Aidar Kurmashev et al. focus on the China-Kazakhstan strategic partnership and Kazakhstan’s example of fighting terrorism respectively. Lastly, as the title of this issue suggests, Turkey is redirecting its attention to Central Asia as a part of its recent foreign policy strategies. In this regards, Bayram Balcı and Thomas Liles provide a brief analysis of Turkey’s relations with Central Asian states in the political, economic, and cultural areas. Furthermore, Eşref Yalınkılıçlı focuses especially on Turkey’s relationship and cooperation with Uzbekistan, which in the new era seems indispensable for the sake of the former’s interests and influences in the region. Three off-topic manuscripts conclude this issue of Insight Turkey. As Trump directs the U.S. towards isolation and continues Obama’s policy of retrenchment in the Middle East, other actors such as the UK will attempt to fill the void. Within this context, Gareth Stansfield, Doug Stokes, and Saul Kelly in their article analyze the UK’s return to the region and its implication for the balance of power in the region. Vladimir Bobrovnikov brings attention to the making of the intolerant discourse on Islam in Soviet and Imperial Russia and the attempts to integrate applied Oriental studies into the general debates on Orientalism. Written by Emrah Kekilli, the last commentary focuses on the ongoing Libya crisis and its forthcoming elections. Placing the main fault upon UAE’s intervention, Kekilli contends that the crisis in Libya reflects the regional interests. With one more year coming to an end, we are pleased to present to our readers another insightful issue which aims to bring attention to the largely ignored region of Central Asia. Furthermore, the latest transformations in Turkey deserve to be analyzed thoroughly and presented to those readers interested in Turkey’s politics. With the trust that you will find this issue illuminating and interesting, we look forward to meeting you in the next year’s issues.
On May 14, 2023, Türkiye will hold both the presidential and the parliamentarian elections, in which the Turkish people will choose the president and all 600 members of the Turkish Parliament. This will be the second elections since the transition to the presidential system in 2017. After the first elections, held in June 2018, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan was elected as the first president of the new governmental system, and AK Party received more than 42 percent of the total votes, winning almost half of the seats in parliament. As in the first elections, two major political blocs will compete, namely, the People’s Alliance (Cumhur İttifakı) and the Nation Alliance (Millet İttifakı). The People’s Alliance bloc consists of the Justice and Development Party (Adalet ve Kalkınma Partisi, AK Party) led by Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, the Nationalist Movement Party (Milliyetçi Hareket Partisi, MHP) led by Devlet Bahçeli, the Great Unity Party (Büyük Birlik Partisi, BBP) led by Mustafa Destici, the New Welfare Party (Yeniden Refah Partisi, YRP) led by Fatih Erbakan and the Free Cause Party (Hür Dava Partisi, HÜDA-PAR) led by Zekeriya Yapıcıoğlu. The second political bloc, the Nation Alliance also known as the Table of Six (Altılı Masa), is made up of six-plus-one political parties. The alliance, which was initially formed in May 2018 by four political parties, now consists of six parties, while one party supports the bloc from outside. The Republican People’s Party (Cumhuriyet Halk Partisi, CHP) led by Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu and the Good Party (İyi Parti, İP) led by Meral Akşener are the two main allies. They were/are officially supported by four smaller political parties. The Democrat Party (Demokrat Parti, DP) led by Gültekin Uysal represents the center right, while the Felicity Party (Saadet Partisi, SP) led by Temel Karamollaoğlu is the continuation of Necmettin Erbakan’s Islamic political tradition. The two additional political parties, the Future Party (Gelecek Partisi, GP) led by Ahmet Davutoğlu and the Democracy and Progress Party (Demokrasi ve Atılım Partisi, DEVA Party) led by Ali Babacan are breakaway groups from the ruling AK Party. They have recently joined the Nation Alliance in an attempt to overthrow the ruling party, which has been in power for the last two decades. In addition to these six political parties, the Peoples’ Democratic Party (Halkların Demokratik Partisi, HDP) led by Pervin Buldan and Mithat Sancar, also supports the Nation Alliance. However, it did not become an official partner of the Nation Alliance, since some partners of the alliance, most notably the İP, generally representing the secular Turkish nationalists, oppose the alliance with HDP due to its close connections with PKK. Therefore, although HDP has declared its support for the candidacy of Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu, it has not joined the alliance. It has become obvious that two political alliances will dominate the election process, therefore there are effectively only two main presidential candidates. While the People’s Alliance has nominated Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, the Nation Alliance has nominated Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu for the presidential post. Concurrently, there are two additional candidates, Muharrem İnce and Sinan Oğan, supported by other small political parties that will no doubt influence the election results, however they are not expected to get more than a small percentage of the vote. The two opposing and conflicting political blocs represent an almost absolute mutual exclusive perspective about the future of Türkiye and the politics of the country, reflecting the increasing polarization of Turkish politics. These two alliances have two opposite and conflictual perspectives of Türkiye. The People’s Alliance emerged as a consequence of a domestic stance against the attacks Türkiye faced after the bloody coup attempt by FETÖ on July 15, 2016, which led to many major changes in the country. The alliance aims to maintain the current government, to consolidate the current presidential system, to continue the country’s transformation program, to protect the country against both internal and external threats, to increase its deterrent military power, to strengthen its economic development, and to globalize its diplomatic power. The Nation Alliance, on the other hand, was formed as a reaction to the People’s Alliance, since no one political party was/is able to challenge the power of AK Party and its leader Recep Tayyip Erdoğan. The alliance is determined to reverse the course of politics in the country and to reverse many of the changes made by the AK Party governments. It claims that if it wins the elections, it will initiate a process of restoration, revive the old political system, change the regime, revive the old, and turn to the status quo ante. However, the Nation Alliance is quite a vulnerable and fractured opposition bloc. It seems that while the Nation Alliance agrees on what it does not want, specifically the rule of the AK Party, the bloc does not know what it wants instead. There is no real consensus among the fragmented opposition parties about the future of the country. Not only do different political parties expect different developments, even different wings within certain political parties make different suggestions. For example, some officials of the biggest partner of the Nation Alliance, the main opposition Republican People’s Party (CHP), has declared that they will apologize (helalleşmek) to certain mistreated groups such as the women who were excluded from education and work because they chose to wear Islamic clothing. On the other hand, some other representatives and supporters emphasize that they will take revenge (hesaplaşmak) against other groups close to AK Party. Another important event that reflects the division within and the brittleness of the Nation Alliance is related to the announcement of their presidential candidate. Not only did it take more than ten meetings and several months for them to decide, but at the end of the process, the leader of İP, Akşener, left the block as she (and her party) did not approve the candidacy of Kılıçdaroğlu. Nevertheless, she came back to the table just one day later accepting Kılıçdaroğlu’s candidacy but adding two new names, Ekrem İmamoğlu and Mansur Yavaş, CHP mayors of İstanbul and Ankara respectively, to the existing five vice-presidents. Indeed, for a long time, Akşener had been campaigning that one of these two men be selected for the presidential candidacy. The upcoming elections, which are held on the centennial anniversary of the Turkish Republic, put Türkiye at an important crossroads. It seems that two conflictual perspectives, the bloc that supports the consolidation of the presidential system and the bloc that supports a regime change, will collide. While the People’s Alliance emphasize autonomy in foreign policy and seeks to achieve regional leadership, the Nation Alliance promote an inward-looking political system and withdrawal from regional issues. Whatever the position of the bloc, one thing is for sure: The Turkish people want a strong leadership in foreign policy during this crucial global transition period. The turnout in Turkish elections is relatively high, generally over 80 percent, which is one of the highest in the world. Considering the politicization in the people’s daily lives, political polarization and the harsh political dialogue, it seems that the turnout in the upcoming elections will be even higher. Furthermore, the earthquake disaster of February 6 has further exacerbated and aroused the political fault lines. However, at the end of this high level of democratic competition and turnout in elections, Turkish democracy will be the winner, and it will be consolidated. Taking into consideration these developments and the importance of the elections -not only for Türkiye but for the regional and global affairs as well- this issue of Insight Turkey tackles some of the most important and determinative topics influencing the results. Disinformation has been one of the most noticeable ramifications we are experiencing of the digital revolution. At the same time, Türkiye, situated in a geopolitical hotspot, is one of the countries that is both a target and a hub of disinformation campaigns in the region. Within this context, Fahrettin Altun, the Presidency Communications Director has penned a commentary addressing misinformation and disinformation with a special focus on Türkiye and the initiatives undertaken by Communication Directorate. Within the same line of thought, Yenal Göksun provides an overview of Türkiye’s strategic communication policy and evolution of the Turkish communication model and the current strategic communication initiatives undertaken by the Directorate of Communications. According to Göksun, Türkiye’s evolving development and foreign policy agenda, which has developed rapidly in the last 20 years, has pushed it to undertake more ambitious efforts in the field of communication and public diplomacy, and as a result, innovations have been made in strategic communication policies. Turning to one of the most discussed issues in recent years in Türkiye’s politics, Cem Duran Uzun focuses on the country’s presidential system and the different government systems proposed by various parties before the 2023 elections. He specifically focuses on the differences between the U.S. presidential system and Türkiye’s administrative system, which overhauled its political system in 2017 and replaced the parliamentary system with a Turkish-style presidential system. Following up, Hamit Emrah Beriş evaluates the key issues in Turkish politics before the 2023 elections. Beriş argues that the 2023 elections are one of the most important in Türkiye’s history and four main topics determined the fate of the elections: refugees, the economy, rising nationalism, and the Kurdish question. The author focuses on serious differences of opinion between the ruling and opposition blocs on the solution to these problems. According to Beriş, the 2023 elections will show whether the approaches of the ruling or opposition wing are in line with the expectations of Turkish society. In our next research article, Ravza Altuntaş Çakır aims to investigate the relationship between ethnic Muslim minority identity and transnational Muslim solidarity, with emphasis on HÜDA-PAR, the most organized political Islamic organization and the second largest political party in Southeast Türkiye. In her paper, Çakır examines how the concept of ummah motivates the party’s domestic/ideological, national and transnational political discourses and initiatives, and also deals with the uncertainties that a mostly abstract and idealist ummahist approach to modern politics brings in the face of Kurdish nationalism, regional realpolitik, and democratic pluralism. As mentioned previously, refugees are another important issue for the forthcoming elections. In that respect, the article by Hatice Karahan and Öznur Gülen Ertosun examines the various dynamics that Syrian women under temporary protection face in the labor market in Türkiye. Technology has become a driving force in the global affairs and Türkiye has been taking all the necessary steps to take advantage of new developments. Within this line of thought, Serdal Temel in his commentary argues that Türkiye, an emerging economy, has been attempting to improve its socioeconomic strength through the promotion of research and development (R&D), innovation, and technological development activities. The author underlines that since the 2000s, the government has implemented support programs focused on developing the innovation capacity of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and universities, and emphasizes that these programs are diversified as support for ecosystem improvements as well as support for patenting, commercialization and entrepreneurship. In another article, Nurettin Akçay and Guo Changgang, discuss China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) and Türkiye’s Middle Corridor (MC) projects, which have a common goal of connecting Europe and Asia, as well as facilitating commercial, economic, political and socio-cultural interactions between the two continents. In this commentary, which aims to examine the history, objectives and stages of Türkiye’s MC, Akçay and Changgang harmonizes the BRI with the MC and examines the inherent risks and challenges of integration as well as opportunities for the region. Our final commentary by Şafak Oğuz, analyzes the possible consequences of the F-35 fighter crisis between the U.S. and Türkiye, particularly in terms of its effect on the tactical nuclear weapons (TNWs) deployed in Türkiye as part of NATO’s nuclear sharing program. Three off-topic research articles enrich the scope of our special issue. Eldar Hasanoğlu and Oğuzhan Çağlıyan investigate, with the onset of the COVID-19 crisis, how the Israeli diplomacy initiative took on greater importance in maintaining its presence and reputation internationally. In their article, the authors analyze Israel’s approach to COVID-19 diplomacy, which involved providing medical teams, PPE, and surplus vaccines to approximately 20 countries, and examine the political and strategic calculations behind Israel’s decision to extend assistance to specific countries. Focusing on the religious conflicts in Kashmir, Resul Yalçın and Umair Gul seek to try to contextualize the search for the “secular” while examining the construction of Muslim identity, the institution of martyrdom, and its social basis in Kashmir. They define Kashmir as a festering political problem receiving little global attention. Lastly, Bashkim Rrahmani and Majlinda Belegu focus on the Serbia-Kosovo dialogue. They discuss the important issues linked with the dialogue that is being facilitated and negotiated by the EU, including essential activities, challenges, obstacles, antagonisms, the approach the EU facilitators/mediators undertake, as well as the reaction and the expected results that the parties involved in the process have regarding reaching a final solution to the dispute. As Türkiye is on the eve on one of the most important elections in its history, this issue of Insight Turkey addresses some of the issues that have been dominating the political agenda lately. Through this issue, we hope to provide our readers with a thorough analysis and the necessary foundations for a better understanding of some of the main issues that will influence the outcome of the May 14 elections.
“Reclaiming the Region: Russia, the West and the Middle East” – The Latest Issue of Insight Turkey Is Published In its last issue of 2017, Insight Turkey discusses Russia who has a strong say in many fields and how it steers international politics. This special issue of Insight Turkey aims to discuss the continuities and changes in Russia’s foreign policy priorities and strategies since the end of the Cold War. Richard Sakwa, Igor Torbakov, Emre Erşen and Nikolay Kozhanov analyze some of the most current events. More specifically they address Russia’s relations with the Trump administration, Europe, Turkey and Iran respectively. Additionally, Yury Barmin and Muhammet Koçak on their papers deal with some crucial topics such as Russia’s oil policies and the security narratives on Islam in Russia. Three off-topic commentaries and one off-topic article finish off the dossier for this issue. Tun Khin in his commentary assesses the genocide taking place in Burma. The commentary of Othman Ali focuses on another important topic: the conflict in Kirkuk, which is under the rule of the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG). Arguing on the importance that Kirkuk maintains for Turkey, Ali gives suggestions on the options Turkey has and how this matter could be resolved. Venezuela crisis, another important crisis of the last month, is brought to the readers through the commentary of Oliver Stuenkel. Lastly, Beril Dedeoğlu and Tolga Bilener portray the integration process between India and ASEAN. “Reclaiming the Region: Russia, the West and the Middle East,” is the last issue for 2017, which has been a very successful year for Insight Turkey. As with the previous issues, we trust that our readers will find this issue informative and constructive!
The Syrian Crisis, the bloodiest front of the Arab uprisings and one of the main determinants of policies of regional and global powers, has been dominating international politics for the last five years. Having caused the death of more than 300 thousand civilians and forced relocation of more than 7 million Syrians, it is one of the direst international problems that the global powers must deal with. It began as a local issue, but after a very short period of time it morphed into a proxy war between regional and global powers. “Redlines” drawn by regional and global actors were crossed, yet there has been no tangible reaction to these violations. Among others, chemical weapons were used, crimes against humanity were committed, fundamental human rights were repeatedly violated. Over time, the crisis has revealed limitations and maladies of the actors involved.
After the dismemberment of the Ottoman State, even though it lost a huge territory, Turkey chose not to pursue an irredentist foreign policy, and although it was a continuation of the Ottoman State, it did not want to maintain the Ottoman heritage. Instead the Republic of Turkey preferred to follow a pro status quo and a comprehensive Westernist foreign policy orientation. When the Soviet Union threatened Turkey in the wake of the Second World War, Turkey needed to officially be part of the Western world. Therefore, it had to accept the subordination to the liberal Western world and a dependent relationship with the United States due to the requirements of the bipolar world system. In spite of the vertical nature of this relationship, both sides benefitted from this strong and sustainable alliance relationship. On the one hand, the Western alliance provided security against the Soviet threat, military and economic support, and political advantages to Turkey. On the other hand, the Western countries gained a great deal from Turkey, who served as the most important NATO ally in the southeastern European front and hosted military air bases against threats coming from the east. Even after the collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War, Turkey continued to be a strategic ally of the West. However, after the changes in the global balance of power, the weakening of the American leadership, and the more assertive and competitive foreign policies of other global powers such as Russia and China, Turkey has decided to search for greater autonomy in its region. Furthermore, the Western states’ policies, especially those of the U.S., have forced Turkey to follow a more independent foreign policy in order to be able to counter the increasing political instability in its regions. More specifically, the Western countries have preferred to collaborate with some anti-Turkish regional actors that threaten Turkey’s national security. Especially after the Western support for the Fetullah Terrorist Organization (FETÖ) and the Syrian branch of PKK (YPG/PYD), both of which are considered as terrorist organizations by Turkey, the credibility of the Western countries has decreased dramatically in Turkey, leaving no other possible choice than questing for a more autonomous foreign policy. Thus, Turkey has begun to take necessary measures to search for a new and high-level status in the international system. Among others, Turkey has diversified its foreign economic relations and increased its material capacity. To this end, Turkey has begun to develop an Ankara-centered foreign policy and to oppose any developments that are detrimental to its national security. Turkey is still determined to maintain its alliance with the Western countries, but demands to revise the relationship, which became anachronic in the light of developments at a regional and global level. In its search for alternative partners and an independent foreign policy, Turkey has improved its relations with Russia, the main alternative challenger and balancer against the Western/American hegemony. For instance, when the Turkish offer to buy Patriots was rejected by the U.S government, Ankara reached a deal with Russia to buy S-400 missile defense systems. For many years now, Turkey has been asking for a comprehensive reformation in the international system and for a more inclusive approach in which multilateral international platforms such as the United Nations play a bigger role. Furthermore, since the July 15, 2016 coup attempt, the power of the Turkish Armed Forces (TSK) was consolidated. Three successful operations (Operation Euphrates Shield, Operation Olive Branch, and Operation Peace Spring) were undertaken in northern and northeastern Syria and as a result Turkey has strengthened its position in the Syrian conflict and prevented the projections of other actors involved in the crisis, thus indicating that it is a game changer in the region. Moreover, Turkey has recently initiated the Operation Claw in Northern Iraq against the PKK and has sent two drilling ships (Fatih and Yavuz) and one seismic ship (Barbaros) to the Eastern Mediterranean. In short, when forced, Turkey will be able to take unilateral measures to find solutions for the crises it may face in the future. Notwithstanding these developments, in principle, Turkey never questioned its longtime relations with the West. However, despite its membership of Western regional organizations like NATO, relationship with the Council of Europe and its EU membership process, the Western perception of Turkey has been extremely negative, and Western countries continue to take measures against Ankara. Fearing a loss control over Turkey, the Western powers have been trying to prevent Turkey’s quest for autonomy and punish any step taken in this regard. Furthermore, they have attempted to create an anti-Turkish regional bloc to contain Turkey’s regional effectiveness, i.e. the most recent rapprochement between Israel, Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Egypt. Lastly, Western countries consistently support anti-Turkish forces in the region, including terrorist groups. It should also be noted that, at a time of multi-dimensional and multi-layered global threats and challenges, there is a high level of interdependency between Turkey and its NATO allies. European defense still starts from Turkey, especially when it comes to international terrorism and international migration. Therefore, it is very difficult to initiate a paradigm shift in Turkish-West relations. The only way for both sides to overcome the conflictual issues is to accept the new realities and to redefine the alliance relations. On the one hand, the Western countries should accept the new role that Turkey is determined to play in its regions and take the Turkish security concerns into attention. On the other hand, Turkey needs to continue its contributions to the NATO operations and to challenge the threats emanating from the Middle East, since Ankara cannot confront the regional threats by itself. This new issue of Insight Turkey showcases the emergence of Turkey as a regional power in the changing international system and aims to guide readers through the assortment of obstacles within Turkey’s foreign policy and how Turkey’s new diplomacy has navigated the nation to a whole new international arena. Turkey, in a volatile region, has plumbed the depths of autonomy in its foreign policy for the last decade and this has resulted in trouble with Turkey’s strategic and NATO ally, the United States. Ali Balcı’s commentary elucidates the quest of Turkey’s autonomy in the Middle East, where the collaboration with Russia and Iran consolidates its quest. Considering Turkey’s partnership with different actors for more autonomy, Balcı elaborates that the interests of Turkey and the U.S. are clashing in a region, where Turkey is a subordinate actor. The Syrian civil war has been a cardinal phenomenon having defined Turkey’s relationships with its NATO ally, the U.S., and its neighbor and successor of the Soviet Union, Russia. William Hale canonically expounds how the U.S. has condoned Turkey’s security concerns, thereby allowing Turkey to work with Russia in order to ward off the eminent threats emerging from Syria such as ISIS and YPG/PKK. Furthermore, this commentary suggests the tense relationship between Turkey and the U.S. not be taken at face value. As mentioned early, Turkey has been asking for a comprehensive reformation in the international system. The famous motto: “The world is bigger than five,” made famous by Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan highlights the increasing need to reform the international system in favor of justice and fair representation for all members of the UN. The lack of social, economic, or humanitarian elements practiced within global governance continues to divide nations between the ‘center’ and ‘periphery.’ Berdal Aral delves deeper into the meaning of this motto and how domestically this idea emerged with the AK Party’s use of morality in governance and connecting more international ties to poorer countries in Asia and Africa. President Erdoğan envisages a more just multipolar world against the damage being done from the privileged few on the Security Council, by reintroducing necessary reforms advocating for peace over power. The relationship between Russia and Turkey has been steadily improving since the fall of the Soviet Union. As cooperation continues to increase, a few hard internal and external challenges have tested whether the relationship between these two great powers can persevere over differing interests. The military-strategic threats these countries face is the main driving force maneuvering these two nations’ relationships. The greatest of these came in 2015 with the downing of the Russian SU-24 bomber aircraft over its violations of Turkish airspace, this example alone caused geopolitical escalations that were crucial to resolve diplomatically. Resolution has been found with partnership in Syria and over arms trade as Turkey sees Russia as a path of diversification away from the West. In this regard, Şener Aktürk explores the various challenges endured and the reaction Russia had to the various threats Turkey has faced in recent years. The Eastern Mediterranean has remained one of the main focus areas of international attention due to the abundant amount of gas reserves around the Levant and island of Cyprus. Lately, Turkey has made sure to show its presence in the region at a time when energy security here has been an increasing issue as global actors compete over resources in the area. Mehmet Efe Biresselioglu discusses Turkey’s position in the contested energy-rich region as it continues to secure its interests in North Cyprus and diversify its own energy. As Turkey maximizes its energy potential, the reactions from surrounding states and the EU has hindered any sense of fair resolution to all regional parties. The unresolved dispute over Cyprus and respect for territorial sovereignty continues to be an ongoing dilemma that can see constructive progress made if Turkey is seen as a strategic partner, and not a part of the problem. The Turkish Lira suffered one of its most severe economic shocks in 2018, sending waves of uncertainty of Turkey’s economic potential worldwide. Among speculation as to what factors inhibit economic shocks on the Turkish market, Nurullah Gür, Mevlüt Tatlıyer, and Şerif Dilek address the view that geopolitical issues and slowed down reform measures are the main culprits to the depreciation. With the decline of the currency against the dollar, the Turkish government swiftly set to decrease the inflation rate and instill real sector reforms with a developmentalist approach to remedy the situation. Turkey continues to develop financial alternatives with reducing reliance on imports and growing in the export market, learning to safeguard against economic shocks has been a testing ground for the Turkish economy in recent years. Murat Ülgül introduces the importance of personal diplomacy, and how it is an effective tool in the modern world, thus making it no surprise that it has increased in practice within Turkey. Ülgül contends that personal diplomacy explains Turkey’s foreign policy better as it is most effective in crisis periods, when there is dominant leadership, and when the political leader is confident about his/her ability to shape policies, all of which are applicable in Turkey. Turkish judiciary faced its biggest crisis on the night of July 15, 2016 during the coup attempt organized by FETÖ members who wanted to bring down the democratically elected government. They, however, did not succeed owing to the sturdy resistance of prosecutors and judges who were determined to uphold the rule of law against the coup-plotters. A prominent lawyer, Hüseyin Aydın, clarifies how the Turkish judiciary has even-handedly conducted the prosecution process since the night of July 15. Convulsed by unrest, Iran has returned to the center of the world’s attention. Farhad Rezaei explores Iran’s aim towards increasing their militarization, as a means of survival even at the cost of destabilizing its regional neighbors, and international discomfort. Dividing Iran’s military doctrine between ideological-political and military-technological, Iran propagates its own notion as an Islamic protectorate and compensates for its military shortcomings, like its relatively weak air force, by bolstering its ballistic sector. To measure Iran’s military-technology by taking inventory of Iran’s military weaponry shows that they are at a disadvantage in the international realm. Therefore, they frequently resort to asymmetrical warfare with the use of proxy groups and cyberwarfare, where they have found limited success. While Iran is likely to continue to develop its weaponry, it is disadvantaged by richer neighbors partnered with America, economic sanctions, and the fact that its intentions on growth are seen more as a threat than domestic development. The last piece of this issue brings attention to the Kashmir Crisis –a simmering conflict– which has long been glossed over by many countries and international organizations yet, it has to be addressed due to the human rights violations in the region. The Public Safety Act, which is a preventive detention law and required to comply with the international law, is used as a political tool to realize the objectives of authorities rather than its advocated primary aim of detaining people. Mohmad Aabit Bhat sheds a light on the covert intentions of the law, which has been “enforced” in the disputed territory of Jammu and Kashmir, with a discursive approach. These past years have been a challenging test for Turkish diplomacy, as fluctuating relationships and conflicting interests have been at the foreground, whether it’s in the warzone of Syria or on the international stage at the UN. Insight Turkey’s last issue for 2019 “Turkey’s New Foreign Policy: A Quest for Autonomy” analyses how Turkey with great stamina has proven that it is a strong cooperative player and balancer between the polarities of the world, as a voice for the oppressed and a pillar of strength among the dominant forces in the world.
Germany, who challenged the British and its allies twice in the first half of the 20th century, began to reemerge as a global political power and to play the “big game” in the wake of the Cold War. As the strongest economy and the most crowded country in the European Union (EU), Germany has decided to lead the EU institutions and the old continent in global platforms. Especially after the reunification of the country, Germany started to dominate European politics. With the collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of Cold War politics, Germany prompted the European countries to pursue a more independent foreign policy. Getting rid of the Soviet threat, Germany no longer needs NATO and the U.S. protection. As a result we see a Germany which has initiated a multidimensional and multilateral foreign policy orientation in order to improve its worldwide national interests.
It's time for new policies based on changing U.S. interests U.S. policy in the Middle East has had very few successes in recent years, so maybe it's time for a different approach. But is the new approach of the Trump administration—military disengagement coupled with unquestioning support for key allies--Israel, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia—the way forward? In this edited volume, noted experts on the region lay out a better long-term strategy for protecting U.S. interests in the Middle East. The authors articulate a vision that is both self-interested and carefully tailored to the unique dynamics of the increasingly divergent sub-regions in the Middle East, including North Africa, the Sunni Arab bloc of Egypt and Persian Gulf states, and the increasingly chaotic Levant. The book argues that the most effective way to pursue and protect U.S. interests is unlikely to involve the same alliance-centric approach that has been the basis of Washington's policy since the 1990s. Instead, the United States should adopt a nimbler and less military-dominant strategy that relies on a diversified set of partners and a determination to establish priorities for American interests and the use of resources, both financial and military. In essence, the book calls for a new post-Obama and post-Trump approach to the region that reflects the fact that U.S. interests are changing and likely will continue to change. The book offers a fresh perspective in advance of the 2020 presidential election.
