Tweet
FOREIGN POLICY REFLECTIONS IN THE AFTERMATH OF LOCAL ELECTIONS
SUAT KINIKLIOGLU
Today's Zaman
April 21 2009
Turkey
Turkey is sometimes a very strange country. Prior to the local
elections, there was an overwhelming consensus that the foreign
policy followed by the ruling Justice and Development Party (AK Party)
was successful.
Particularly, our neighborhood policy and new thinking that put Turkey
at the center of a number of intersecting regions was seen as a genuine
approach that not only advanced Turkish national interests, but also
complemented Turkey's Western vocation. Since the local election
results did not match the high expectations we set for ourselves,
there seems to be a tendency to paint everything this government
undertakes in a very negative light.
The transformation of perceptions about a number of foreign policy
issues is perplexing and even frightening. I find it understandable
that the opposition to the AK Party is jubilant over the election
results and feels that it is possible to make gains at the ballot
box. Frankly, this is a healthy development from our perspective. We
do prefer to compete at the ballot box rather than dealing with
shady networks that contemplate nondemocratic means to topple
governments. Yet, the direct reflection on the foreign policy agenda
is astounding. Instantly, everything this government is doing on
the foreign policy front has become very questionable. The strong
opposition to our genuine efforts of normalization with Armenia, the
elections in northern Cyprus, the Rasmussen affair and the visit of US
President Barack Obama are all taken out of proportion and exaggerated
negatively to strike at an area of policy that is commonly viewed as
very successful.
The efforts for Turkish-Armenian normalization have always been
undertaken in a manner that involved very intimate discussions with
Baku. There was nothing that was not shared with the leadership in
Azerbaijan. Both Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan and President
Abdullah Gul have informed President Ilham Aliyev at every step of the
process. It is regrettable to see how public opinion in Azerbaijan
has been turned against a historic process of normalization and a
simultaneous advancement in the Nagorno-Karabakh dispute. Turkey feels
that normalization between Ankara and Yerevan would also contribute
to the resolution of the Karabakh conflict.
The elections in the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (KKTC) are
another point worthy of examination. Suddenly, news in the Turkish
media indicated that the National Unity Party (UBP) was leading the
elections, which was portrayed as the comeback of a more nationalist
policy in northern Cyprus. It needs to be known that regardless of who
wins the election in northern Cyprus, this government remains committed
to a UN-sponsored solution to the dispute on the island. Nothing
will change from our perspective in relation to our approach to the
UN-sponsored talks. KKTC President Mehmet Ali Talat will remain as
the primary interlocutor leading the talks for the Turkish Cypriots.
Despite the drama the Rasmussen affair has attracted in the
international media, we feel that the concerns raised by Ankara were
primarily raised from a viewpoint that takes NATO very seriously. The
compromise that ensued was in fact an indication of Turkey's increasing
role in intra-European bargaining. The only bad taste left was due
to the comments of some European leaders who seemed to have confused
NATO with the EU. We believe President Gul has responded to them in
the most appropriate manner.
Finally, the Obama visit was very successful, from whichever angle one
looks at it. The opposition saw a victory in the fact that Obama did
not qualify Turkey in terms of "moderate Islam." That was fine with
us as well. We never described ourselves in those terms in the first
place. However, as the German Marshall Fund's Ian Lesser recently
alluded to in his analysis of Turkey, it is equally unrealistic that
"Turkey's cultural and religious background are irrelevant to the
country's international role." Ironically, the opposition in this
country managed to portray the visit as unsuccessful when a good part
of the world watched in envy.
The artificial atmosphere created in the aftermath of the local
elections is nothing more than a charade. Friends and foes should
operate on the basis that our foreign policy will continue to be
guided by the principles set out in 2002, which have transformed this
country from a second-rate actor to a regional hegemon.
SUAT KINIKLIOGLU
Today's Zaman
April 21 2009
Turkey
Turkey is sometimes a very strange country. Prior to the local
elections, there was an overwhelming consensus that the foreign
policy followed by the ruling Justice and Development Party (AK Party)
was successful.
Particularly, our neighborhood policy and new thinking that put Turkey
at the center of a number of intersecting regions was seen as a genuine
approach that not only advanced Turkish national interests, but also
complemented Turkey's Western vocation. Since the local election
results did not match the high expectations we set for ourselves,
there seems to be a tendency to paint everything this government
undertakes in a very negative light.
The transformation of perceptions about a number of foreign policy
issues is perplexing and even frightening. I find it understandable
that the opposition to the AK Party is jubilant over the election
results and feels that it is possible to make gains at the ballot
box. Frankly, this is a healthy development from our perspective. We
do prefer to compete at the ballot box rather than dealing with
shady networks that contemplate nondemocratic means to topple
governments. Yet, the direct reflection on the foreign policy agenda
is astounding. Instantly, everything this government is doing on
the foreign policy front has become very questionable. The strong
opposition to our genuine efforts of normalization with Armenia, the
elections in northern Cyprus, the Rasmussen affair and the visit of US
President Barack Obama are all taken out of proportion and exaggerated
negatively to strike at an area of policy that is commonly viewed as
very successful.
The efforts for Turkish-Armenian normalization have always been
undertaken in a manner that involved very intimate discussions with
Baku. There was nothing that was not shared with the leadership in
Azerbaijan. Both Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan and President
Abdullah Gul have informed President Ilham Aliyev at every step of the
process. It is regrettable to see how public opinion in Azerbaijan
has been turned against a historic process of normalization and a
simultaneous advancement in the Nagorno-Karabakh dispute. Turkey feels
that normalization between Ankara and Yerevan would also contribute
to the resolution of the Karabakh conflict.
The elections in the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (KKTC) are
another point worthy of examination. Suddenly, news in the Turkish
media indicated that the National Unity Party (UBP) was leading the
elections, which was portrayed as the comeback of a more nationalist
policy in northern Cyprus. It needs to be known that regardless of who
wins the election in northern Cyprus, this government remains committed
to a UN-sponsored solution to the dispute on the island. Nothing
will change from our perspective in relation to our approach to the
UN-sponsored talks. KKTC President Mehmet Ali Talat will remain as
the primary interlocutor leading the talks for the Turkish Cypriots.
Despite the drama the Rasmussen affair has attracted in the
international media, we feel that the concerns raised by Ankara were
primarily raised from a viewpoint that takes NATO very seriously. The
compromise that ensued was in fact an indication of Turkey's increasing
role in intra-European bargaining. The only bad taste left was due
to the comments of some European leaders who seemed to have confused
NATO with the EU. We believe President Gul has responded to them in
the most appropriate manner.
Finally, the Obama visit was very successful, from whichever angle one
looks at it. The opposition saw a victory in the fact that Obama did
not qualify Turkey in terms of "moderate Islam." That was fine with
us as well. We never described ourselves in those terms in the first
place. However, as the German Marshall Fund's Ian Lesser recently
alluded to in his analysis of Turkey, it is equally unrealistic that
"Turkey's cultural and religious background are irrelevant to the
country's international role." Ironically, the opposition in this
country managed to portray the visit as unsuccessful when a good part
of the world watched in envy.
The artificial atmosphere created in the aftermath of the local
elections is nothing more than a charade. Friends and foes should
operate on the basis that our foreign policy will continue to be
guided by the principles set out in 2002, which have transformed this
country from a second-rate actor to a regional hegemon.