Turkey Needs Unified Vision for Middle East
By: Tulin Daloglu for Al-Monitor Turkey Pulse Posted on July 23.
Speaking in Kastamonu on Friday, July 19, Turkish Prime Minister
Recep Tayyip Erdogan said, Strong Turkey is making its influence
felt more in this region every day. Our agenda was determined by
others in the past, but there is no longer a Turkey whose agenda is
determined by others. There is now a Turkey that determines the
agenda. That is to say, there are so many developments taking place
in Iraq and Syria. It will be all good at the end. Dont forget:
Whatever happens, happens for some good. Whats important is that
Turkey continues its path with its strong economy.
This was a quite interesting statement. First, there is nothing wrong with being optimistic and in believing that the world will be better tomorrow. But this general trend toward positivism is not free of downfalls, both sharp and soft, and the traditionally troubled Middle East region is without a doubt experiencing some changing and challenging times. It may be comforting to believe that the Iraqis who died since the 2003 US invasion and the Syrians who
have perished since the 2011 beginning of the civil war did not die for nothing. The question is, however, how Erdogan thinks Turkey has determined the agenda in this conflict zone, and why the prime minister claims that others mainly the Western powers had determined Turkeys agenda in the past.
While inaugurating the airport in Kastamonu, Erdogan was filled
with pride. The late Adnan Menderes, Turkeys prime minister
between 1950 and 1960, who was executed by hanging and an idol
for Islamist camp in the country, had also attempted to build an
airport in Kastamonu to no avail.
54 years ago in 1959, during the time of late Menderes, he
expressed a desire to build an airport in Kastamonu. But it was not
possible to make it functional then and therefore, it was forgotten.
In 1990, there was another attempt to open the airport here. After a
few test flights and no passengers, it was closed in 1994, Erdogan
said, asserting that this time this airport has become fully
functional, fulfilling Menderes dream.
Despite the irony in Erdogans speeches, though, Turkey became a
full member of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) in
1952, during Menderes time, and its still by far the most strategic
alliance that anchors Turkey in the Western world. Erdogan surely
has no desire to nullify the agreement with this alliance, but his
insisting on painting the West as a foe to the Turkish people raises
an obstacle to cementing Turkeys place as an agenda-setter in the
region or beyond. Or lets put like this: Is there any other way to
really determine any strategic agenda in our world without the
cooperation and the consent of the NATO member countries?
Turkey became a frontline state during the Cold War years due to its
geostrategic location. To claim that Turkey has become a country to
determine its own agenda as well as the regions could be an
exaggeration. After all, this country has become more polarized than
ever, and there is really nothing concrete that it had resolved in the
last decade, as the countrys two top strategic issues the Cyprus
issue and the Kurdish problem are still awaiting to be resolved.
As the latter is more of a priority for the Erdogan government,
though, there is much talk about the developments in neighboring
Syria and how the Democratic Union Party (PYD) or the Kurdistan
Workers Party (PKK)s Syria wing, have taken control of the
territory adjacent to Turkeys border, named "Western Kurdistan"
by the Kurdish people. Although the prime minister continues to
speak with full confidence that the resolution process with the PKK
is continuing smoothly, the Turkish government officials claim that
any PYD attempt to declare autonomy over that territory in Syria is
unacceptable. Check my story on it from last week, when Turkish
Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu said, Its not possible to accept
any de facto declaration of an autonomous entity in Syria, and that
could only lead to further crisis.
The fact of the matter is that the Erdogan government can never
resolve its issues like the Kurdish one without building better unity.
Devlet Bahceli, the leader of the opposition Nationalist Movement
Party (MHP), therefore, becomes a key figure. In fact, the Erdogan
governments rhetoric on the recent developments concerning the
Kurds in Syria is no different than Bahcelis approach to the issue,
but it is still a fact that these two camps are not able to express any
agreement publicly to the people. So what exactly keeps them apart
remains a big question. The issue is not that Bahceli is right or
wrong in what he says, but he represents the mindset of nationalists,
whose support Erdogan needs to build a strong Turkey and place it
in full charge of its own agenda, let alone that of its immediate
neighborhood. The Kurdish issue cannot be resolved until the
Turkish nationalists are also convinced of the outcome. The gap,
however, between these two schools of thought represented by
Erdogan and Bahceli, as well as the others in the liberal camp, is a
testament to Turkey still not being able to write its own agenda
because there is no peaceful harmony yet established. Erdogans
polarizing politics is therefore defeating his own statements and the
portrait he likes to paint of the country.
When will this foreign minister speaking nonsense saying that
we will rebuild the Middle East, we will be the game makers in this
geography, we will lead the transformation understand that he
has trapped Turkey between a rock and a hard place? Bahceli said
on July 22. Our country, unfortunately, has been cornered in the
Middle East quagmire with this so-called vigorous, active, leading,
taboo-breaking and initiative-using foreign policy. For that reason,
Turkeys foreign policy has totally collapsed. None of [Davutoglus]
targets or projections have been realized.
The truth may be somewhere in between the AKPs over-confidence
and the MHPs and others' absolute pessimism about Turkeys
current place and role in the region. The fact, however, remains that
Turkey cannot really become strong enough to set the agenda in this
region without putting its house in order. The last decade,
unfortunately, is making it more evident that that kind of a peace is
slipping farther from this country's grasp. And there may be some
good in this polarization as well, just as Erdogan believes in the
goodness of all changes, but what it is, or who considers this kind of
polarization positive, is yet to be discovered in these changing
times.
Tulin Daloglu is a contributor to Al-Monitor's Turkey Pulse. She has
also written extensively for various Turkish and American
publications, including The New York Times, International Herald
Tribune, The Middle East Times, Foreign Policy, The Daily
Star (Lebanon) and the SAIS Turkey Analyst Report.
Turkey Needs Unified Vision for Middle East - Al-Monitor: the Pulse of the Middle East
By: Tulin Daloglu for Al-Monitor Turkey Pulse Posted on July 23.
Speaking in Kastamonu on Friday, July 19, Turkish Prime Minister
Recep Tayyip Erdogan said, Strong Turkey is making its influence
felt more in this region every day. Our agenda was determined by
others in the past, but there is no longer a Turkey whose agenda is
determined by others. There is now a Turkey that determines the
agenda. That is to say, there are so many developments taking place
in Iraq and Syria. It will be all good at the end. Dont forget:
Whatever happens, happens for some good. Whats important is that
Turkey continues its path with its strong economy.
This was a quite interesting statement. First, there is nothing wrong with being optimistic and in believing that the world will be better tomorrow. But this general trend toward positivism is not free of downfalls, both sharp and soft, and the traditionally troubled Middle East region is without a doubt experiencing some changing and challenging times. It may be comforting to believe that the Iraqis who died since the 2003 US invasion and the Syrians who
have perished since the 2011 beginning of the civil war did not die for nothing. The question is, however, how Erdogan thinks Turkey has determined the agenda in this conflict zone, and why the prime minister claims that others mainly the Western powers had determined Turkeys agenda in the past.
While inaugurating the airport in Kastamonu, Erdogan was filled
with pride. The late Adnan Menderes, Turkeys prime minister
between 1950 and 1960, who was executed by hanging and an idol
for Islamist camp in the country, had also attempted to build an
airport in Kastamonu to no avail.
54 years ago in 1959, during the time of late Menderes, he
expressed a desire to build an airport in Kastamonu. But it was not
possible to make it functional then and therefore, it was forgotten.
In 1990, there was another attempt to open the airport here. After a
few test flights and no passengers, it was closed in 1994, Erdogan
said, asserting that this time this airport has become fully
functional, fulfilling Menderes dream.
Despite the irony in Erdogans speeches, though, Turkey became a
full member of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) in
1952, during Menderes time, and its still by far the most strategic
alliance that anchors Turkey in the Western world. Erdogan surely
has no desire to nullify the agreement with this alliance, but his
insisting on painting the West as a foe to the Turkish people raises
an obstacle to cementing Turkeys place as an agenda-setter in the
region or beyond. Or lets put like this: Is there any other way to
really determine any strategic agenda in our world without the
cooperation and the consent of the NATO member countries?
Turkey became a frontline state during the Cold War years due to its
geostrategic location. To claim that Turkey has become a country to
determine its own agenda as well as the regions could be an
exaggeration. After all, this country has become more polarized than
ever, and there is really nothing concrete that it had resolved in the
last decade, as the countrys two top strategic issues the Cyprus
issue and the Kurdish problem are still awaiting to be resolved.
As the latter is more of a priority for the Erdogan government,
though, there is much talk about the developments in neighboring
Syria and how the Democratic Union Party (PYD) or the Kurdistan
Workers Party (PKK)s Syria wing, have taken control of the
territory adjacent to Turkeys border, named "Western Kurdistan"
by the Kurdish people. Although the prime minister continues to
speak with full confidence that the resolution process with the PKK
is continuing smoothly, the Turkish government officials claim that
any PYD attempt to declare autonomy over that territory in Syria is
unacceptable. Check my story on it from last week, when Turkish
Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu said, Its not possible to accept
any de facto declaration of an autonomous entity in Syria, and that
could only lead to further crisis.
The fact of the matter is that the Erdogan government can never
resolve its issues like the Kurdish one without building better unity.
Devlet Bahceli, the leader of the opposition Nationalist Movement
Party (MHP), therefore, becomes a key figure. In fact, the Erdogan
governments rhetoric on the recent developments concerning the
Kurds in Syria is no different than Bahcelis approach to the issue,
but it is still a fact that these two camps are not able to express any
agreement publicly to the people. So what exactly keeps them apart
remains a big question. The issue is not that Bahceli is right or
wrong in what he says, but he represents the mindset of nationalists,
whose support Erdogan needs to build a strong Turkey and place it
in full charge of its own agenda, let alone that of its immediate
neighborhood. The Kurdish issue cannot be resolved until the
Turkish nationalists are also convinced of the outcome. The gap,
however, between these two schools of thought represented by
Erdogan and Bahceli, as well as the others in the liberal camp, is a
testament to Turkey still not being able to write its own agenda
because there is no peaceful harmony yet established. Erdogans
polarizing politics is therefore defeating his own statements and the
portrait he likes to paint of the country.
When will this foreign minister speaking nonsense saying that
we will rebuild the Middle East, we will be the game makers in this
geography, we will lead the transformation understand that he
has trapped Turkey between a rock and a hard place? Bahceli said
on July 22. Our country, unfortunately, has been cornered in the
Middle East quagmire with this so-called vigorous, active, leading,
taboo-breaking and initiative-using foreign policy. For that reason,
Turkeys foreign policy has totally collapsed. None of [Davutoglus]
targets or projections have been realized.
The truth may be somewhere in between the AKPs over-confidence
and the MHPs and others' absolute pessimism about Turkeys
current place and role in the region. The fact, however, remains that
Turkey cannot really become strong enough to set the agenda in this
region without putting its house in order. The last decade,
unfortunately, is making it more evident that that kind of a peace is
slipping farther from this country's grasp. And there may be some
good in this polarization as well, just as Erdogan believes in the
goodness of all changes, but what it is, or who considers this kind of
polarization positive, is yet to be discovered in these changing
times.
Tulin Daloglu is a contributor to Al-Monitor's Turkey Pulse. She has
also written extensively for various Turkish and American
publications, including The New York Times, International Herald
Tribune, The Middle East Times, Foreign Policy, The Daily
Star (Lebanon) and the SAIS Turkey Analyst Report.
Turkey Needs Unified Vision for Middle East - Al-Monitor: the Pulse of the Middle East
