Where is the Turkish foreign policy headed
Güncelleme Tarihi:
by Müge Yalçın
Oluşturulma Tarihi: Ocak 24, 2009 00:00
ISTANBUL - It is no secret Turkish foreign policy makers have been seeking international praise for the country’s recent diplomatic efforts to take on the role of peacemaker in regional conflicts.
The Gaza crisis was no exception. Turkey took action but the crisis was a difficult test. Turkey’s mediation efforts and its reputation as an impartial party, both cooperating with Israel and having close ties with Palestine, were strained by Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s salvo of criticism against Israel.
Besides straining long-standing relations with Tel-Aviv, Erdoğan’s comments had another outcome: a boost of popularity within the Arab world, enacted by people who carried his picture during protests against Israel.
The position of the Erdoğan government is perceived as a glimmer of hope in the face of an Arab League that has hit rock bottom, Tayyar Arı, an international relations professor at Bursa Uludağ University, told the Hürriyet Daily News & Economic Review. Arı visited Dubai, Bahrain and Qatar during the Gaza crisis and was able to measure the Arab public opinion first hand. "The fact that millions of people have been hitting the streets to protest against Israel has boosted sympathy toward Turkey. People also think Erdoğan achieved what their own leaders failed to do in the face of events," he said.
Mensur Akgün from the Istanbul Culture University, who recently met with representatives of Arab nongovernmental organizations in Rome, also said the common view was that Erdoğan had shown more sensitivity to the issue than all the Arab leaders.
However, Akgün said the rising prestige of Turkey within the Arab world owed more to the country itself than to Erdoğan personally. "People see this as something Turkey did, not Erdoğan. But of course it is obvious that now everybody knows who Erdoğan is," he said.
According to Professor Ömer Alparslan Aksu from Istanbul University, Turkey emerging as a regional leader is "an ideal that cannot be realized because of the ruling AKP’s (Justice and Development Party) wrong policies." Aksu said Erdoğan’s statements retracted from Turkey’s mediation efforts in the region, were miscalculated and stemmed from a lack of experience in diplomacy.
While Arı said Erdoğan’s verbal reaction against Israel was not extreme, Akgün said his words gave the impression as if he confused anti-Zionism with anti-Semitism.
"The criticism was not balanced ... A country wishing to play the role of mediator has to adopt balanced speech," he said, objecting to claims that Erdoğan’s new found credibility among the Arab masses could turn him into a regional leader. "Since we are not trying to create a new Ottoman Empire, Erdoğan can only lead his own country," Akgün said.
There is another side to the story. Most Israeli observers, as well as Turkish commentators, argue that Turkey lost its credibility as a peace broker or mediator in the region after Erdoğan’s statements.
Semih İdiz, a columnist for the Daily News, wrote that Erdoğan’s statement harmed Turkey’s political strength in foreign affairs. "The pro-Hamas posture he projected moved Turkey from the moderate camp including Jordan, Egypt and Saudi Arabia, to the radical camp in the region."
"Of course Erdoğan’s statements were welcomed by Arab nations. But he is not ruling Arab nations; he should be interested in his own country," said Dr. Alon Ben-Meir, a professor of international relations at New York University.
Professor Asher Susser, senior fellow at the Moshe Dayan Center for Middle Eastern Studies, said Israel was deeply offended by Erdoğan’s statements.
"Until now Turkey played a very constructive intermediate role between moderates and radicals in the region. It is not surprising that Erdoğan’s statements have endeared him to Arabs on the street. (Iranian President) Ahmadinejad has made similar inroads with Arab public opinion with such statements about Israel. Needless to say that does not go well with Israelis," he said, adding that Israelis find it very difficult to continue to regard Turkey as an honest mediator and that it was not surprising that Israeli officials had rejected such a role for Turkey at present.
Stressing that Israel has constantly defended Turkey’s record on issues like the Armenians’ claims of genocide, Susser warned that Turkish-Israeli relations might take a new direction. "This would certainly be unfortunate for Israel. But it also might negatively affect Turkey’s relations with Western powers if it appears closer to the radical camp of Iran and Hamas than to the more moderate players in the region," he said.
"The Israeli-Syria talks (brokered by Turkey) could resume soon. The United States is changing its position toward Syria. Turkey should not alienate Israel at such a sensitive time. (Erdoğan) should demonstrate a more balanced approach and not dwell on the war in Gaza. Moreover, he also needs to regain Israel’s confidence if he wants to bring Hamas to the peace table," Ben-Meir said.
Arı, on the other hand, said Turkey should be looking at the bigger picture. "Turkey needs to make strategic decisions. What seems a loss right now might become gains in the long-term," he said, adding that Turkey’s policy toward Israel would not have permanent effects on bilateral ties. "Neither Israel nor the United States could find a better partner in the region than Turkey," he said.
Besides straining long-standing relations with Tel-Aviv, Erdoğan’s comments had another outcome: a boost of popularity within the Arab world, enacted by people who carried his picture during protests against Israel.
The position of the Erdoğan government is perceived as a glimmer of hope in the face of an Arab League that has hit rock bottom, Tayyar Arı, an international relations professor at Bursa Uludağ University, told the Hürriyet Daily News & Economic Review. Arı visited Dubai, Bahrain and Qatar during the Gaza crisis and was able to measure the Arab public opinion first hand. "The fact that millions of people have been hitting the streets to protest against Israel has boosted sympathy toward Turkey. People also think Erdoğan achieved what their own leaders failed to do in the face of events," he said.
Mensur Akgün from the Istanbul Culture University, who recently met with representatives of Arab nongovernmental organizations in Rome, also said the common view was that Erdoğan had shown more sensitivity to the issue than all the Arab leaders.
However, Akgün said the rising prestige of Turkey within the Arab world owed more to the country itself than to Erdoğan personally. "People see this as something Turkey did, not Erdoğan. But of course it is obvious that now everybody knows who Erdoğan is," he said.
According to Professor Ömer Alparslan Aksu from Istanbul University, Turkey emerging as a regional leader is "an ideal that cannot be realized because of the ruling AKP’s (Justice and Development Party) wrong policies." Aksu said Erdoğan’s statements retracted from Turkey’s mediation efforts in the region, were miscalculated and stemmed from a lack of experience in diplomacy.
While Arı said Erdoğan’s verbal reaction against Israel was not extreme, Akgün said his words gave the impression as if he confused anti-Zionism with anti-Semitism.
"The criticism was not balanced ... A country wishing to play the role of mediator has to adopt balanced speech," he said, objecting to claims that Erdoğan’s new found credibility among the Arab masses could turn him into a regional leader. "Since we are not trying to create a new Ottoman Empire, Erdoğan can only lead his own country," Akgün said.
There is another side to the story. Most Israeli observers, as well as Turkish commentators, argue that Turkey lost its credibility as a peace broker or mediator in the region after Erdoğan’s statements.
Semih İdiz, a columnist for the Daily News, wrote that Erdoğan’s statement harmed Turkey’s political strength in foreign affairs. "The pro-Hamas posture he projected moved Turkey from the moderate camp including Jordan, Egypt and Saudi Arabia, to the radical camp in the region."
"Of course Erdoğan’s statements were welcomed by Arab nations. But he is not ruling Arab nations; he should be interested in his own country," said Dr. Alon Ben-Meir, a professor of international relations at New York University.
Professor Asher Susser, senior fellow at the Moshe Dayan Center for Middle Eastern Studies, said Israel was deeply offended by Erdoğan’s statements.
"Until now Turkey played a very constructive intermediate role between moderates and radicals in the region. It is not surprising that Erdoğan’s statements have endeared him to Arabs on the street. (Iranian President) Ahmadinejad has made similar inroads with Arab public opinion with such statements about Israel. Needless to say that does not go well with Israelis," he said, adding that Israelis find it very difficult to continue to regard Turkey as an honest mediator and that it was not surprising that Israeli officials had rejected such a role for Turkey at present.
Stressing that Israel has constantly defended Turkey’s record on issues like the Armenians’ claims of genocide, Susser warned that Turkish-Israeli relations might take a new direction. "This would certainly be unfortunate for Israel. But it also might negatively affect Turkey’s relations with Western powers if it appears closer to the radical camp of Iran and Hamas than to the more moderate players in the region," he said.
"The Israeli-Syria talks (brokered by Turkey) could resume soon. The United States is changing its position toward Syria. Turkey should not alienate Israel at such a sensitive time. (Erdoğan) should demonstrate a more balanced approach and not dwell on the war in Gaza. Moreover, he also needs to regain Israel’s confidence if he wants to bring Hamas to the peace table," Ben-Meir said.
Arı, on the other hand, said Turkey should be looking at the bigger picture. "Turkey needs to make strategic decisions. What seems a loss right now might become gains in the long-term," he said, adding that Turkey’s policy toward Israel would not have permanent effects on bilateral ties. "Neither Israel nor the United States could find a better partner in the region than Turkey," he said.