Turkish Prime
Minister Binali Yıldırım recently announced that the US-backed Raqqa Operation started
on Friday night and the United States informed Turkey regarding the operation
before it was initiated. Yıldırım also criticized American policy of providing
weapons to Syrian Kurds’ Democratic Union Party (PYD), a policy that might be a threat
to Turkey in the near future due to this group’s close cooperation with PKK.[1]
Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan also frequently criticizes United States
for delivering weapons to PYD, a terrorist organization according to the
Turkish government which operates as the Syrian extension of Kurdish
secessionist PKK.[2] It
should be remembered that the US President Donald Trump approved direct weapons
shipments to Syrian Kurdish fighters (PYD) battling ISIS despite Turkish warnings
few weeks ago.[3] Considering
these developments, in this paper, I will try to find reasonable answers to
questions about the future of Turkish-American relations in the next few years by
analyzing American and Turkish perspectives in relation to regional policies.
The U.S. Perspective
Starting from the
last months of the Obama period, Turkish-American relations entered into a new
era of regression especially after the collapse of the Arab Spring’s
democratization wave with the bloody civil war emerged in Syria. US decision to
arm Syrian Kurds at the expense of losing Turkey might be considered as a
strange policy preference, but in fact the American administration have some
motives for acting in that way.
The first and foremost problem is related to Turkey’s increasing Islamist authoritarian policies both at domestic and international levels. Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan has not listened friendly critics until today in implementing Islamist policies. Turkey now has an authoritarian Presidential system, but unlike many other post-Soviet Turkic countries, Turkish state also rapidly distances itself from secularism. Pro-secular and moderate Islamists groups have been targeted in Turkey in recent years with unending trials, media censorship and repression on the opposition. Turkey has also established very close economic and cultural relations with Gulf countries in recent years, most notably with Qatar instead of its traditional Western-European allies. Turkey’s support for Sunni rebel groups in Syria also considered as an Islamist foreign policy preference although Turkey has never supported ISIS-affiliated groups during the civil war. Now that the US has a new President (Donald Trump) -very reasonably- completely against radical Islam and radical (terrorist) groups, Turkey’s Islamist foreign and domestic policy preferences as a secular country that has always been a Western ally are strongly criticized by Washington. So, the first reason of the disaccord is the Islamization of Turkey under Erdoğan’s leadership in Washington’s perspective.
The first and foremost problem is related to Turkey’s increasing Islamist authoritarian policies both at domestic and international levels. Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan has not listened friendly critics until today in implementing Islamist policies. Turkey now has an authoritarian Presidential system, but unlike many other post-Soviet Turkic countries, Turkish state also rapidly distances itself from secularism. Pro-secular and moderate Islamists groups have been targeted in Turkey in recent years with unending trials, media censorship and repression on the opposition. Turkey has also established very close economic and cultural relations with Gulf countries in recent years, most notably with Qatar instead of its traditional Western-European allies. Turkey’s support for Sunni rebel groups in Syria also considered as an Islamist foreign policy preference although Turkey has never supported ISIS-affiliated groups during the civil war. Now that the US has a new President (Donald Trump) -very reasonably- completely against radical Islam and radical (terrorist) groups, Turkey’s Islamist foreign and domestic policy preferences as a secular country that has always been a Western ally are strongly criticized by Washington. So, the first reason of the disaccord is the Islamization of Turkey under Erdoğan’s leadership in Washington’s perspective.
Secondly, as former
Turkish ambassador to Washington D.C. Şükrü Elekdağ points out, the US has
always had a macro plan about establishing an independent Kurdish (Kurdistan)
state in the region, a policy target that increases Turkey’s anger towards the
US.[4]
Encircled by mostly hostile Arab countries, Israel has also supported the
establishment of a new non-Arab and non-Persian state in the region.
Independent Kurdistan would mean a new ally for the US in one of the most
troubled regions of the world, a formidable ally which would probably more
submissive to Washington compared to Turkey, a strong medium-size state that
has been following policies according to its own national interests and
sometimes challenging American interests in the region. However, how this
Kurdish state will be designed is still an unanswerable question. There is
already an autonomous government in the Northern Iraq (Kurdish Regional
Government) under Masoud Barzani’s control with its own flag, Peshmerga army
and police force. This de-facto state is very close to U.S. and Turkey both and
awaits for the right timing in declaring independence with a referendum
(possibly in this August or September). There are also large territories
controlled by Kurdish rebels (PYD and YPG) now in Syria. These groups defend
Marxist-Leninist ideology and traditionally allied themselves with
anti-American groups and countries (such as Russia). However, in the new
conjuncture, the US is willingly to work with Syrian Kurds since they have been
very successful against ISIS until now and have a more modern stance compared
to radical Islamists. It is obvious that the US wants to keep and deepen its close relations with Kurds. However, how the borders of Kurdistan will be drawn is still unclear. A smaller Kurdish state in Northern Iraq might not be a real headache
for Ankara if Erbil will continue to have good relations with Turkey (For
ultra-nationalist groups, even this might be a reason of war). However, a
greater Kurdistan containing Kurdish populated areas both in Iraq and Syria
will be a real problem for Turkey and will spoil Turkish-American relations as
well. Turkey has some hesitations related to the status of Kurds in Iraq and
Syria since it hosts more Kurdish population than any other country in the
world. Ankara believes that high expectations and strong legal position for
Kurds in Syria and Iraq would be a motivation for Turkey’s Kurds in demanding
federalism or advanced ethnic rights. So, the second motive of the US is
related to Kurdish Question and a possible Kurdish state.
Thirdly, we might
talk about a loss confidence towards Ankara in recent years in Washington. This
is caused by Turkey’s close economic relations (especially in the field of
energy) with Russian Federation, a traditional American rival that has started
to challenge and spoil Washington’s policies again especially in its “near
abroad” geography during Vladimir Putin’s presidency. It is a fact that Turkey,
as a country severely lacks energy to develop its industries, has to cooperate
with its energy-rich neighbors including Russia, Iran, Iraq and Azerbaijan. Thus,
it is very plausible that Turkey’s main aim in its foreign policy is to become an
energy hub in the region. This is also in conformity with European Union
policies due to many European countries’ energy dependency on Russia. However,
Turkey’s close cooperation with Russia in the field of energy (Russia is also
establish a nuclear plant in Turkey - Mersin Akkuyu Nuclear Plant) disturbs
some groups that are more concerned about Russia’s authoritarian ruling style
which has become more and more popular in recent years in Caucasia and Central
Asia. In fact, Turkish transformation from a European (Westminster) model of
multi-party democracy into strong executive Presidentialism within a dominant-party
system might be also interpreted as the direct consequence of increasing Russian
presence and effect in this country. So, third motivation for US in angering
Turkey might be close Russian-Turkish relations in the last two decades and
Turkey’s independent foreign policy initiatives which might harm American
interests in the region.
Turkish Perspective
Turkey, on the other
hand, had its own motives in establishing a new foreign policy that is beyond
classical US-Turkish partnership of the Cold War period. First of all, due to
terrible memories of the Cold War (three military coups etc.), Turkey’s
preference following the fall of Berlin Wall was to establish a
multi-dimensional foreign policy which would allow the country not to be
completely dependent on US and NATO. Turkish political elite thought that the
military coups and instabilities in the country during the Cold War were caused
by the American effect and they need to be more independent in this new era.
Problems with the US and NATO due to Cyprus Dispute was also not forgotten by
Ankara and decreased Turkey’s confidence in the West. Especially close
relations with Europe and Russia has been seen as inevitable by Ankara in this
new period. Since Europe (EU) was considered as the ultimate station of modernization
and Russia was perceived as the most important (potential) military threat to
Turkey (also an energy rich country), these two countries (blocs) were given
more important place in Turkish Foreign Policy although the US has always kept
its very first place. Moreover, it should be added that until now Turkey has never
really questioned leaving the Western bloc or NATO and to join a new
organization (Eurasian Union etc.) at the expense of losing USA.
Secondly, Turkish
state has always considered Kurdish Question as a vital problem for its own safety.
Turkish state elite thought that once the Kurdish identity was given freedom in
neighboring countries, it would automatically affect Turkey’s Kurds and the
country’s unitary and national state structure would be harmed. However, Turkey,
as a medium-size country that could not compete with superpowers, was unable to
prevent developments around itself. At first, American President George Bush saved
Kurds from Saddam Hussein dictatorship by initiating the Gulf War. His son,
George W. Bush, established a federal Iraqi state and provided autonomy for Iraqi
Kurds a decade later. Now, Donald Trump might be the American President that
will help Iraqi Kurds to establish an independent state. An independent Kurdish
state is not a taboo in Turkey anymore, but a greater Kurdistan in Iraq and
Syria reaching the Mediterranean is still a geopolitical nightmare for Turkish
state elite. It is a fact that Turkey could not compete with the US in many
ways, but losing Turkey will also be very harmful to the US and Western bloc in
general. So, two countries has to work together and arrange a joint plan for
solving the Kurdish Question and design a roadmap for Kurdistan region.
Thirdly, Turkey is
hurt by the American decision to arm Syrian Kurds. Turkey as a strong state and
a traditional American ally, has never seriously thought that Washington might
choose Kurdish rebels instead of itself. Turkish President Erdoğan said that
the Raqqa Operation could be done by US and Turkish armies together and the US
does not need to arm Kurdish rebels. However, Washington thought that arming
Kurds would be more efficient in its fight against ISIS. This decision might be
the turning point in Turkish-American relations. These
weapons given by Washington to PYD rebels might be used in the near future in the
terrorist attacks made by PKK towards Turkish Army and civilians. This would
probably create a very strong anti-American atmosphere in Turkey. Turkey might
even begin to consider its place in the Western bloc for the first time if these weapons
given to Syrian Kurds would be used against its own soldiers and citizens in
the future. It is a fact that PYD and PKK are twins and they are against
Turkish state’s authority. Autonomy for Syrian Kurds or a greater Kurdistan
would also mean a very problematic period for Turkish-American relations.
What Has To Be Done?
Turkey and the US
should work together and prepare a roadmap immediately for preventing possible
troubles ahead. Here are some policy proposals to both sides:
Ø
The United States and Turkey should prepare a
detailed plan for the future of Syria and Iraq as two allies.
Ø
The US should provide guarantees to Turkey for the
prevention of PYD’s attacks towards the Turkish state with its own supplied
arms. Otherwise, the US will become a country that has been arming a terrorist
organization against its own ally. What kind of weapons will be delivered to
PYD is also critical here. For instance, manpads and anti-tank weapons will be
really problematic for Turkey.
Ø
Turkey should better show that the US has still a
privileged position in Turkish foreign policy, but the country’s energy and
security concerns force it to develop close relations with other countries as
well including Russia and Iran.
Ø
Turkey should reassure Washington that it is
still committed democratic principles and secular state structure and Turkish
Islam cannot be compared radical interpretations of Islam.
Ø
Turkey and the US should cooperate in
eliminating ISIS and other terrorist groups in the region by establishing
various channels.
Assist. Prof. Dr.
Ozan ÖRMECİ
Hiç yorum yok:
Yorum Gönder