2008_10_SRP_CornellKaraveli_Turkey

Recommendations

Info

62 Svante E. Cornell and Halil Magnus Karaveli closer relationship to Europe, but will still not have attained membership. An equally plausible scenario is a much cooler and acrimonious relationship, where the option of membership has been effectively excluded, but where both parties continue to maintain an overtly civil relationship. A third scenario – the complete breakdown of relations and a re-orientation of Turkey away from Europe – is possible but highly unlikely. Over the last decades, Turkey has experienced severe tensions in its relations with Greece. A Greco-Turkish war, when Turkey intervened on Cyprus in 1974, was only averted by the last-minute intervention of the U.S. In 1996, an incident in the Aegean Sea came close to igniting an armed conflict. Since the end of the 1990s, however, the relations have improved considerably, although the unresolved Cyprus issue remains a complication. With the accession of the Greek-Cypriot administered part of Cyprus to EU membership in 2004, the traditional Turkish position has come to be challenged. A majority of the Turkish Cypriot population expressed its desire to join the Greek Cypriots in a federation that would make them citizens of the EU. Strong forces in Turkey, not least the Turkish military, oppose “surrendering” Cyprus, for purportedly strategic reasons, but equally out of nationalist and emotional attachment. The symbolic importance of the issue for the military should not be underestimated; as has been noted, highranking generals reportedly plotted to overthrow the AKP government in 2004 when it went along with the UN plan to unite the island. Yet Turkey is ultimately likely to acquiesce in the unification of Cyprus, provided that it is permitted to retain some sort of military presence on the island. Turning towards the East? The end of the cold war catapulted Turkey into a much less predictable neighborhood. As Turkish diplomats liked to say in the early 1990s, their most predictable and stable borders in the late 1980s had been those with Iraq and the Soviet Union – both of which became major headaches in the following decades. During the Cold war, Turkish foreign policy was exclusively dictated by the imperative of containment of communism. Turkey did not isolate itself from the Middle East and Asia. As early as 1938, seeking friendly relations with the East, Turkey had been among the
Prospects for a ‘Torn’ Turkey 63 signatories (together with Iran, Iraq and Afghanistan) of the non-aggression treaty of Saadabad. In 1954, it signed a pact of mutual cooperation with Pakistan. In 1955, it signed the Baghdad pact (later renamed CENTO) together with Iraq, Iran, Pakistan and the United Kingdom. Yet, CENTO typically had the goal to contain communism. With the end of the Cold war Turkey was compelled to devise more active and differentiated policies toward the East – the Middle Eastern states, Central Asia and the Caucasus, and Russia. These vectors are by no means likely to challenge the predominant western orientation of Turkish foreign policy; however, as in the past decade, their relative importance is likely to grow. The Return of the Middle East For decades, the Turkish foreign policy and national security establishment assumed that Turkish interests would be best served by a defensive posture in Middle Eastern affairs. The experience of empire, which had ended with the very independent existence of a Turkish nation being put into question, had made republican Turkey wary of foreign policy adventurism, particularly toward that region. This cautious posture was possible to maintain during most of the cold war, when Turkey’s border with Syria functioned as an extension of the Iron Curtain through Europe. Yet even then, Turkey was a key element in the network of alliances that worked for the containment of communism in the Middle East. But the main cultural and political orientation of the republic toward the West reduced the Middle East to a security concern rather than anything else. By the 1980s, events in the Middle East by the 1980s made a more assertive policy necessary. The Iranian revolution affected Turkey strongly, both in symbolic terms and given Iranian subversive activities in Turkey. More importantly, Syria’s support for the PKK and its own efforts to undermine Turkey could not be ignored. The Gulf war implied a fundamentally new challenge, to which president Turgut Özal responded actively, supporting the U.S. intervention against the more traditionally cautious advice of his top brass. This brought Turkey back as a key regional actor for the West, a role many Turks had feared it would lose with the end of the cold war. Özal’s more activist foreign policy was disliked at the time by the military; yet only a few years later, the military leadership itself embarked on a project
Page 1:
Prospects for a ‘Torn’ Turkey:
Page 4 and 5:
“Prospects for a Torn Turkey: A S
Page 7 and 8:
Summary In October 2008, The Turkis
Page 9 and 10:
Prospects for a ‘Torn’ Turkey v
Page 11:
Prospects for a ‘Torn’ Turkey i
Page 14 and 15: 12 Svante E. Cornell and Halil Magn
Page 58 and 59: Foreign Relations and Geopolitics A
Page 72 and 73: Turkey in 2023: the Republic at 100
Page 78 and 79: Conclusions Turkey’s internal and
Page 80: Authors’ Bio Svante E. Cornell is
show all

2008_10_SRP_CornellKaraveli_Turkey

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?