Global Picture

In 2010 the global picture seems to have been dominated by economic instability in the Western world, the plight of the third world, challenges emanating from rising economies, lack of success or dragging feetin the fight against terror and continued inability of the United Nations to address chronic international disputes leaving the field to unauthorized actors/. One striking feature in the international scenery is the gradual decline in such concepts as human rights, fairness, equality, tolerance and xenophobia and the rise of nationalism, intolerance, and even low-intensity warfare.

Within this picture some countries have been lucky while several others particularly in Western Europe are going through a fatigue in their efforts to maintain their high standard of living that they have succeeded in maintaining without really earning such a luxury. The difficulties faced in the Euro zone coupled with the declining demographic indicator may be the harbinger of further difficulties for the unpleasant future ahead, even though through ingenious measure time can be bought and the speed of the decline may be reduced.

Ever since the 2001 economic crisis Turkey has in the overall enjoyed a developing economy, albeit within a fragile structure, like several other model developing countries. This year, coming immediately after the financial crises in the US and several European countries, Turkey seems to have continued once again with a fairly good economic performance.

 Probably, partly due to discouraging economic panorama and as a major war with its possible horizontal and vertical implication has become unthinkable, major powers of the world are even shying away from activity pursuing previously engaged anti-terror warfare; or putting their weights in solving chronic peace endangering conflicts. In other words, the world is taking timid steps towards a global liberal pattern in international relations without solving the problems and mentalities of the real politic era.

Turkey-Donning Mantel of a Regional Center

The break-down of the Soviet Union two decades ago had created a new environment for the conduct of Turkish foreign policy as that of a central power in a large neighborhood open to all types of transactions. This year has marked probably the highest point, in this policy from this central location. In fact, Turkey is now playing a specific leadership role in a wide area of increasing hinterland, spread over three continents. Currently, Turkey is the term Chairman of the Committee of Ministers and also holds the Presidency of the Council of Europe whose members contain about 800 million people. This picture contrasts with almost suspended negotiation process as it is consistently denied a role for Turkey in the European Union.

We see particular slackening in development our relations with the West. The more Turkey   becomes a European country in respect to its social, cultural and political institution, in day to day dealings Turkish foreign policy appears to have shifted. from Europe to Middle East and Africa.   However, to claim that the Turkish foreign policy has in reality shifted from West to East to South, North is not yet an absolutely correct argument. For two reasons: First because, Turkey’s ties with US and Europe are still strong and Turkish economic relations with Europe dominate its economic relations with world. But, there is a point why Turkey should include within its scope East and South and North alongside West.  

The hyper active policy Turkey is currently pursuing in this region and beyond,  creates mainly in Europe that has always looked down to Turkey as a poor miniscule inheritor of the Ottoman Empire, suspicions about Turkey’s new ambitions and their minds seem to be perplexed lest Turkey should follow irredentist  policies. Such a feeling is also shared by leaders in some of the countries in Turkey’s neighborhood that were part of the Ottoman State. There are serious analysts who consider such a policy feasible even though many others consider that it would be at least inadvisable as it would require Turkey to turn its back to the West. At this point where Turkey is stretching its economic and diplomatic interests and activities beyond its neighborhood to Africa, Latin America and whole of Asia, many Turks believe that time has come particularly for Western Europe to change their pride and prejudices and come to terms with Turkey in a realistic manner. Turkey cannot be ousted out of Europe as some of the European leaders dream like Disraeli and Russian Tsars; as its integrations and involvement in European affairs are becoming useful and necessary for the future of the continent. It is not possible, however, for the current leadership of EU also to discuss sanely the future of Europe as their leaders have to cope with ill calculated consequences of the their monetary union, the incongruity of their membership structure who, like declining empires,  do not hesitate to sacrifice the common interests of the Union to their selfish national interests. One should not expect current European leaders to have long term vision to consider where Europe’s interests lie.

On the other hand, I f we look at Turkey’s place at this juncture we must realistically assess    our vision and the price we have to pay to realize those visions. We need to upgrade the social, economic, political and educational standards of the country to a level of most civilized nations. If we attain substantial progress in this area the relations between Turkey and EU may also develop on the basis of mutual acceptance of each other’s peculiarities.

As usual in democracy every one does not agree about the likelihood or even feasibility of such a development and suggest alternative policies regarding the future of Turkey. In face of such considerations it might be proper to ask if Turkey will be at ease and happy by becoming a solo regional power or by creating around it a kind of commonwealth. Admitedly, there is a  necessity for Turkey to open itself to other parts of the world and cannot be satisfied with the   its potentials of trade within the restrictions of the current specific customs union.with Europe    As a result Turkey must increase its exports to all part; of the world.   

The second question to be asked is the driving force of Turkey’s opening to Middle East and African countries is only economy? Here, I have certain doubts. Because from European perspectives, Turkey in many respects is a comparatively weaker country except for its population. But, by looking at the rest of the world, Turkey is a strong country. We can compete with the West and even Eastern Asia on many products that we can safely sell in Africa, in Middle East, in other parts of the world. This nascent state of affairs also brings together an opening to other parts of the world. One could say nevertheless that Europe is the permanent icon for Turkish foreign policy. Reasons are clear. Turkey, by its’ constitution, by its’ structure, by its’ cultural, social and economic links is a European country without forgetting that it is also a Eurasian country.

Let’s not forget that Turkey is part of the western alliance system, Turkey is part of the European institutional systems. So Turkey’s relative power enables it to keep Europe on one side and continue its opening to the world.

Turkey and EU

Now there is the question of Turkey’s integration in the European Union.   As already stated a de facto integration of Turkey and its people into Europe is in progress but not at the desired speed. This speed can be attained if and when Turkey becomes a full member of the EU.

We cannot be blind however to the impediments on both sides of the road. No progress has been achieved in 2010 to remove these impediments. On the European side these can be summarized as lack of consensus among leaders and public in EU countries to see Turkey as a members. Secondly, EU governments are not sure if they can withstand the unfavorable economic, social and political impact of Turkey’s membership. Now we have a stalemate in our relations with Western Europe. The surpassing of the stalemate depends on Europe giving up supporting Greek expansionist ambitions in Cyprus and in the Aegean. Can they do it? It’s very difficult because they have got themselves entangled with Greek vetoes in their actions and now they have added Cypriot vetoes. So if one wishes to be prophetic one can say in the political arena there will continue to be a stalemate in Turkish European Union relations but there will be greater development in economic, social and cultural areas in our relations with Western Europe.

US and Middle East

In respect to our relations with the United States, indeed we have gone through quite a number of shocks in our relations with the United States but we have survived those shocks. Let me just point out that in the conduct of the US foreign policy the impact of minorities in the United States is very great. For example, United States has to continue to be a champion for Israel. So any acrimony between Israel and Turkey reflects on United States attitudes. Secondly US still continue as if we are living in the Cold War era and Turkey should continue to be a subservient client state while US follows policies that may in certain cases be adverse to Turkey’s own interests. However, time has shown that Turkey too has begun to follow policies that would be in accord with its interests. Refusal of Turkey to grant passage to American troops during the war in Iraq, the tough attitude of the present Turkish government against Israel’s Gazza policies; the shock in the Security Council when Turkey voted against imposition of sanctions against Iran became major problems making it difficult for both governments to underline the solidity of their alliance. To undervalue the in pact of these divergences President Obama said there is elasticity in Turkish-US relations that can flex itself in fact in the case of shocks.  

Can we say in Turkish foreign policy, there is defiance in its relations with the west? I’m not a believer in this because Turkish diplomacy is not a policy of defiance. Maybe in the case of Israel while Turkey maintained traditionally good relations with Israel, there has been a case of persistent defiance because Turkey never supported Israel’s expansionism and it still does not.

Recent developments in relations between Turkey and Israel should not be misunderstood   by our Arab neighbors. I believe the current popularity of the Turkish leaders in the Arab public is double edged. While it increases love and affection by the peoples of the Middle East, at the same time it endangers its relations with the autocratic governments of Middle East countries. In fact it creates some sort of jealousy in such major Middle East powers and also from outside powers who used to play great roles in formulating and in developing policies of the Middle East countries such as Egypt, France, and Saudi Arabia etc. Yet the current popularity should be ephemeral and there should be a more permanent balance in Turkey’s relations with both the governments and people of the Middle East.

Turkey’s success in the coming era much depends on its economic performance. This economic performance is the most important tool for Turkey to expand its interest to the third world countries as well. Of course in developing its policy, Turkey is trying to solve also    many chronic problems such as the Aegean,   Cyprus, Armenia,   Iraq and Israel along side Afghanistan and Iran. The year 2010 did not witness any significant change in these chronic problem areas; but there is no doubt that Turkey will continue its best efforts in the coming year in search of equitable solutions to these problems. I should say on this subject that you can always try to solve chronic problems but one must begin his efforts with the knowledge that one can never find a solution based on equal concessions. Look at our problems, how can we solve the Armenian problem with equal concessions, how can we solve the Cyprus problems with equal concessions and other chronic problems. So we need to see how we can improve the conditions for solution that is bringing disputing countries closer together. But again some of the sentiments of these disputes, even if they are solved, remain in the background haunting our countries.

REŞAT ARIM

Cyprus: can Turkey be sidelined?

The UN Secretary General submitted to the Security Council his last report on his mission of good offices.He relates the developments in the negotiations between the two communities, especially those that took place in 2010. He says that “ the guiding principle of these negotiations is that they are both “ Cypriot-led” and “Cypriot-owned”.The Secretary General in the introduction to his report also says that “the Cyprus problem has been on the agenda of the Security Council for close to 47 years”. These statements obviously reflect an anomalous situation as far as the Cyprus problem is concerned.The abnormality rests on the fact that Turkey and Greece are ignored in those negotiations.

Let us remember the facts: this island has ben under the domination of the Ottoman Empire for many centuries.Later,in 1878 its administration- not the sovereignty was left to the British Empire. During the First World War they annexed it. Again, in the 20th century when the British were going to relinquish the sovereignty of the island Turkey and Greece wanted to have it.Then they came to a compromise  to have it as an independent state.The British agreed and several strong Treaties were made to safeguard that independence.There was The Basic Structure of the Republic of Cyprus; there was the Treaty of Guarantee confirming the rights and duties of Turkey,Greece and Britain on the fate of Cyprus; the Treaty of Alliance concluded between Cyprus,Turkey and Greece was for cooperation for  the common defence.

In the new state  The President of Cyprus would be a Greek Cypriot, the Vice-President a Turkish Cypriot, in the Cabinet there would be seven Greek Cypriots and three Turkish Cypriot, the Parliament would be composed likewise.At the time Turkey and Greece and Britain were close allies.The Treaties were strong enough, but it was the Cold War years and there was  a Non –Aligned Group of countries, and the Greek Cypriot President Makarios had big ambitions: he joined the Group,his dream was to annex the island to Greece and become the King of Greece.He attacked the Turkish Cpriots, he broke the State. The Secretary General of the United Nations was U Thant,coming from Burma, a non-aligned country. TheSecurity Council determined that this situation threatened the peace and security and decided to send a Peace Keeping Force to the island.There would be also a Mediator, Galo Plaza of Equator,another non-aligned country.But the worst thing was that the Resolution adopted at the Securrity Council would speak of “the Government of Cprus”.To this day the Greek Cypriots have posed as the legitimate government of Cyprus, the Turkish Cypriots were left in the cold. By a strange turn of events the European Union in the  first half of the 21th century acted in the same way as the Non-Aligned Group  would  have acted in the second half of the 20th century favouring the Greek Cypriots over the Turkish Cypriots and accepted them as a member in complete violation of the treaties made in 1960.

In 1964  The Peace-keeping force came to Cyprus; but the attacks against the Turkish Cypriots continued. The Mediator started his duties, bu to no avail. The UN brokered talks between the two communities started in 1968 and went on until 1974  when the Grek junta in Greece followed on the footsteps of Makarios and engineeried a coup in Cyprus and declared the annexation of the İsland to Greece. Turkey naturally used its rights in the Treaty of Guarantee and first consulted the UK and then took military action.The Turkish Cypriots assembled in the North of Cyprus.Also a Population exchange agreement was made.The Turkish Cypriots  needed to have their own administration: The Turkish Federated State of Cyprus was declared in 1975. Later, when the intercommunal talks were interrupted by the Greek Cypriot side The Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus was declared.

Presently, the UN is involved, the Council of Europe is involved, the EU unfortunately is involved. The UN comes in because of peace and security, the Council of Europe because of the Commission on Human Rights, EU because Cyprus was made a member following the blackmail of Grece.

It looks as if Turkey has been sidelined.I think it is time to go to basics: Turkey and Greece should be involved in the talşks so that a comprehensive solution can be found to the problem.