Gazi

/ Ali KÜLEBİ - TUSAM - ACTING PRESIDENT

Our country is located in the center of the world’s three continents, where Europe, Asia and Africa meet. Throughout centuries, this location has rendered us a country of vital importance in respect of the historical development of the old world’s geography, the formation of states and the foundation of countries in this geography as well as the political and social occurrences in our neighbourhood.

Very few countries in the world are at once continental and coastal –continental on account of neighbouring with 8 countries and coastal for being surrounded by seas. This fact and the reason that Anatolia stands as a passing bridge between three continents would permit the nation in control of this geography to rule over new territories and countries. This also could result in menacing neighbours or alliances.

The geographical position of Turkey and the historical fact that our neighbours remained under the Turkish rule for long intensify the threats and ill-meant plans, which still seek for pay-back. Almost all of them, both before and after 1990, have encouraged the eruption of domestic disturbances with their ill intentions and territorial demands. Within this framework, divisive groups such as extreme leftists, extreme rightists, fundamental Islamists and PKK have been supported by these countries.

The national movement launched by M. Kemal Atatürk and the triumph over the imperialist forces subsequent to the losses of territory that came with the decline of the Ottoman empire, later the demise of this empire and the attempt at confining Turks into a small piece of land through the Treaty of Sevres had endowed the Turkish nation with a sense of protectionism which would prevent any repetition of such a disaster. This instinct for protectionism could be understood as the decisive factor in the domestic and foreign policies of the Republican era. The unitary structure, national borders and the preservation of independence conjoin with this instinct under the Kemalist ideology.
THE REALITY OF KEMALIST IDEOLOGY
It has been argued that Kemalizm, on account of not being universal, should not be treated as an ideology. However, the facts that the dynamism achieved by the Turkish nation in their epical fight against the world’s strongest armies in the Turkish Independence War set an example for the other suffering nations and that the subsequent initiation of an anti-imperialist foreign policy by the Republic of Turkey spilled over a considerable number of Muslim countries, which were then still colonies, all underpin the argument that Kemalizm is an ideology. Additionally, if our beloved country, which is in world’s most perilious and problematic region and hence is the target of unfriendly glances of its neighbours, has till now succeeded in implementing systematic state policies against the internal and external enemies -and the domestic disturbances caused by them- we owe this to Kemalizm.The problems created by the minorities have been each time surmounted in the light of our past experiences. We have established the foriegn policy pattern involving sensible approach to the events around. We have separated state from religion so that discrimination amongst our citizens based on religious creeds or sects is outruled and the unitary feature of the state is enhanced. All these would not have been possible if not for Kemalizm. At times, the failures of political governments have been undone by the help of Kemalist ideology alone. These facts point to the undeniable existence of a Kemalist ideology and its influence on our foreign policy.

TURKEY INSIDE THE SO CALLED BERMUDA TRIANGLE

While we decisively watch the borders determined by the National Pact (Misak-ı Millî) with a strong commitment to Kemalizm ideology, the imperative that the Turkish Army as the eminent pursuer and guard of this ideology should remain formidable against those with hostile plans involving the division of our country becomes more evident. In essence, given the jeopolitical conditions, any weakening in the army could result in the aggressive actions of two or three of our enemies at once. In this respect, the state of our army is of ultimate interest to our so-called allies and particularly to the European Union. Recently, the high-ranking bureucrats of the EU have conveyed messages explicitly suggesting to put Kemalizm and, its prime follower, the Turkish Army into question. They have proposed, on one hand, to make army answerable to the Ministry of National Defence, in other words to the fluctuating priorities of politicians. On the other, they have even put the pictures of Atatürk hang on the walls of state offices into question. These are noteworthy to demonstrate the extent of the harm aimed at our national conciousness and solidarity by the external powers. Our strong and solid army with immense experience is prepared to stand against all attacks and bad faith intentions originated from the Balkans, Aegean sea, Southern borders and Caucasia.

THE GEOPOLITICAL DIMENSION AND ITS IMPACT ON FOREİGN POLICY

Turkey, especially in the eyes of the EU, is a junction point of vital strategical importance in terms of land, air and naval transportation as well as military affairs. Turkey has considerable water resources and its neigbours’ production of energy meets a very important amount of Europe’s requirements. From the perspective of economy and population, Turkey is an indispensable actor on the international scene. It has the world’s 20th largest economy. With its smooth democracy and secular character, Turkey as a country of largely Muslim population represents a key factor for its region’s stability.

All these points and Turkey’s geopolitical position remain influential in shaping the Turkish foreign policy. Relations with the neighbours, Turkey’s membership to international organisations and external provocations with certain effects on domestic policies should be conceived within this framework.

In foreign policy, Turkey’s interests rest with the neighbouring regions rather than the global foreign affairs in which Turkey lays no claim to any major role. In the following lines, our brief country-based statements related to this region would exhibit the domineering approach in our foreign policy. When the Mediterrenean and Middle East are taken into consideration in the first place, our relations with the Arab world appear as the most important. It is true that our conduct of foreign policy in compliance with NATO and the US as well as our relation with Israel have some cooling impact on our relations with the Arab countries. Turkey, which has maintained over long years good relations and trading partnerships with its Arabic neighbours, is now seeking to facilitate cooperation within the Organisation of Islamic Conferance. Because of its relations with NATO, US and Israel, it is questionable whether Turkey is getting any benefits from its Arab neighbours in using its geopolitical advantages.
Turkey’s problems with Greece and Cyprus are the outcomes of a geopolitical reality. In this context, the contemporary gains of Greece awarded by the EU and NATO are the recurrences of the times when Greece, despite having lost all fights against Turkey in the battlefield, had some of its interests fulfilled on the table by the curicial suport of its European friends. Greece, which we, hugely mistakenly, let rejoin NATO in 20th September 1980 by the pressure of the US, has clearly attempted many times to be influential in this geography and menacing towards us with the help of its godfathers. In our conduct of foreign policy, handling the bilateral relations according to this attitude of Greece thus comes to the fore as a priority. However, unfortunately with the manipulation of third parties such as other states and international organisations, we inexplicably stand benign and interminably offer concessions. Particularly the issues of Cyprus and Aegean Sea, and followingly, the pressure concerning Ecumeny and Heybeliada Ceminary, which will soon be augmented by the EU, have turned Greece into a source of constant threat to the region’s stability. One should also bear in mind that on every possible occasion Greece has offered its support to the illegal groups such as Armenian and PKK terrorists aiming at the destrcution of Turkey. Because of its accelerating arming, we have sufficient reason to believe that in the future Greece will keep engaging in similar activities and pursuing unfriendly intentions towards Turkey.

In the recent past, Turkey, in relation to the concerns over the fight against terrorism and ethnic conflicts as well as the commotion in the region, has enforced diplomatic efforts together with the countries neighbouring Iraq and thus acted constructively. The preservation of Iraq’s territorial integrity is of crucial interest to Turkey. Another pressing question on our geopolitical agenda is the existence of the Kurdish terrorist group PKK/Kongragel, which is also in the EU’s terror list, in Northern Iraq. At this point, as a matter of fact, a re-evaluation of our so-called allies’ attitude and reconsideration of our relations with them are required. Turkey, as a traditional and considerable commercial partner, plays an important role in stabilizing and restructuring Iraq. Having thus engaged in cooperation with the Iraqi people, Turkey should now stand committed to the preservation of its red lines previously declared in its Iraqi policy and prevent the spread of the Kurdish movement emerging in northern Iraq.

As to Syria, given our traditionally problematic relations tensed by the isues such as Hatay and crossborder waters, it will be impossible to avoid future conflicts altogether. Still, since 1998 when Syria, as a response to the pressing demands of Turkey, stopped supporting the PKK and exiled its leader, who had been dwelling on the Syrian land for long, the bilateral relations have been improved. Also the developments in Iraq and their common interest in Iraq’s territorial integrity have drawn these countries closer.

Tehran, on the other hand, retains its negative stance on Turkey’s membership to NATO and military cooperation with the US. Iran’s nuclear program, in return, is a remaining source of concern for Turkey as much as for the US and EU. Evidently, Turkey and Iran have contesting views on the state-religion relations. Their common interest in keeping the Kurdish separatists under control and maintaining the political stability in Iraq, nonetheless, prevent this countries from antagonizing each other completely. Yet, the emergence of new issues concerning energy flow, southern Caucasia and conflict of interest in Central Asia are in prospect.

In the post-Soviet era, the course of Turco-Russian relations points to novel issues of competition originated from Turkey’s quest for being influential in the areas which have been historically a part of Moscovite field of action. The recent overlapping of interests concerns Caucasia and Central Asia. Nevertheless, the dependance of Russia and Turkey on each other for maintaining balance in the region enhances the collaboration potential in Eurasia and the Black Sea policies

Our relations with Bulgaria have been warmed up following its emancipation from being a Soviet disciple in 1990. Bulgaria is one of the countries that we have established good neighbour relations at highest level. The recent succes of the Movement for Rights and Freedoms, the political party established by Turks in Bulgaria, in the latest elections have included the Bulgarian Turks into the government.

Turkey has strong and rooted economic, political and military relations with the US, which has in effect now become a southern neighbour to us. Consequent to the occupation of Iraq, the Turco-American relations, as well as the EU-US axis, have suffered certain setbacks. From the perspective of the US, the role expected from Turkey to play has been altered over the past 15 years. Previously, the US cared much about the military qualities and geostrategical position of Turkey, whereas now its capacity of providing stability to a potentially unstable region is emphasised by the Americans. However, the US, which has settled in the region under the pretext of terrorism, is alienating Turkey with its insincere dealings with the PKK and Kurdish movement. Saving the solution to these issues as leverage for later, the US thus puts at stake the well-being of Turkey, which was the ally to offer the most support during the Cold War.

Incessently feeling the weight of the multiplicty of neighbours and the threat of their ill-meant plans, Turkey will continue pursuing a foreign policy which is under not only the immense influence of these afore-mentioned points but also domestic occurrences. The Turkish state’s position in topics such as economic reform, secular-religious policies and nationalistic-internationalistic viewpoints could determine the Turkish foreign policy to a certain degree. The EU as another aspect in our international relations is progressively becoming a burden to Turkey and turning into a menace aiming at our sovereign rights, national integrity and unitary structure. The changeful policies of the EU, which convince us about its insincerity, lead to the necessity of reconsidering our relations with this union.

RELATIONS WITH INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS

Turkey, as a consequence of its geopolitical situation, is member of many international organisations such as the United Nations, Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), European Council, NATO, OECD, Stability Pact for South Eastern Europe, Economic Cooperation Organisation and Organisation of Islamic Conferance. Turkey is at the same time granted an observant status in the Arab League. In the UN votings, Turkey displays tendency to vote in the same direction as the US. Still, there is difference of opinions on the issues of human rights and Middle East. Within the European organisations such as OSCE and the European Council, on the other hand, Turkey aligns its position with the EU.

THE GENERAL IMPACT OF OUR GEOPOLITICS ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS

It is a fact that the Turkish foreign policy will continue following a certain path drawn in the light of the international agreements and organisations which Turkey is a part of. Our current relations with the US and EU seem to entrap us to the degree of compromising the Kemalist ideology whose cruciality to Turkey has been stressed at the outset of this article.

Given its political, economic, military and social attributes, Turkey’s impact on regional and global dynamics through its foreign policy is inevitable. The war that erupted in Iraq after September 11, 2001 remains in the center of the geopolitical shake-up at the global level and its consecutive shocks. Turkey, which is in the most chaotic and fragile geopolitical region, has been considerably affected by this war nearby. Especially, the Turcomans, who are one of the three cardianl components of Iraqi population greatly concern the Turkish foreign policy, which is committed to guarantee their rights, fufil their intersts as well as to secure their life and property. However, in reality our foreign policy has failed on this matter and the Red Lines frequently mentioned as non-negotiable have faded away. Within this framework, it is obvious that we could not adjust ourselves to the sudden shifts in the neighbourhood the way our geopolitical position required and that we could not act on the outcomes even long after they became visible.

One should evaluate the Turco-American relations, which have developed over the past fifty years on the line of security and defense, from the perspective of the American foreign policy which suggests further American existence and intereference in the region, particularly within the so called Extended Middle East Project. In the issue of Iraq, the American attitude towards PKK would be decisive in the future of our relations with the US and in the course of our foreign policy. Additionally, the adhesion process to the EU, which is currently our primary goal, will not go smoothly because of the reluctancy of the EU and the impossibility of adopting its acquis communitaire. This could lead to a shift in priorities. Especially, the possibility of the EU’s unjust interference with Cyprus to obstruct the arrival at a fair and permanent solution could negatively affect the Turkey-EU relations. It should here be underlined that any initiative compromising the Turkish existence on the island will not be accepted.

Despite all the problematic issues mentioned above, our geopolitical position also offers us different choices that will in fact be more viable in the future. Our geopolitical position would ease up the process of further integration with the Turkish World in Eurasia. All Turkic compatriots in the Turkish world are stil warmly attached to Turkey. A foreign policy approach benefiting from this would facilitate permanent peace in the Middle East, Balkans, Caucasia and Central Asia through unifying strategies derived from our geopolitical advantages. Once achieved, a union encompassing all Turkish Republics would result in the happiness and welfare of the entire Turkish world. Given its experience with market economy, Turkey certainly possesses the potential to govern the economic gain in the most fair and capable manner. The Turkish nation has marked the course of history and aimed to spread peace and justice to the entire humanity by the unique civilisation that it has established. Nevertheless, without a stable and decisive foreign policy making the most of our geopolitical advantages, it would not be possible to live up to this legacy. It has long been time for us to awaken into the reality of the Turkish world in conducting our foreign policy, which is caught up with the US and EU.

http://www.tusam.net/makaleler.asp?id=355&sayfa=0

__________________
http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y47...18dj7gn2qi.gif