Tweet
ZERO NEIGHBORS WITHOUT PROBLEMS
by JOOST LAGENDIJK
Today's Zaman
Nov 1 2011
Turkey
Most analysts of Turkey's foreign policy during the last couple of
years will never say so aloud. They are either too polite or make the
calculation that making fun of Ankara's recent global activism will
not go down well with the Justice and Development Party (AK Party)
leadership, with whom they will have to work for the foreseeable
future. But in private or behind the scenes, they make jokes about
the so-called "zero problems with neighbors" policy and the person
who came up with the concept, Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu.
The phrase most often used ridicules the concept of "zero problems"
and states that, instead of having less problems with its neighbors,
Turkey is faced with a growing number of highly problematic situations
along its borders. Davutoglu's tireless efforts to practice his own
ideas have not created zero problems with neighbors but zero neighbors
without problems. The list of proof is discouragingly long.
Accession negotiations with the EU are stalled and relations with
Cyprus are still very bad. Efforts to improve the relations with
Armenia have failed and have led to suspicion and bad feelings
among the "brothers" in Baku. Until recently the theocrats in
Tehran were quite happy with Turkey's support in their dispute with
the international community on Iran's nuclear program. But after
Turkey agreed to host US radars as part of a new NATO missile defense
shield and turned against Iran's most important regional ally, Syria,
bitter accusations by senior Iranian officials have been leveled at
the Turkish government. Add to that inventory the harsh rhetoric
and broken diplomatic relations between Turkey and Israel and the
remarkable change of policy towards the regime in Damascus, turning
Syrian President Bashar al-Assad from friend to foe, and it is not
difficult to see why many cynical pundits come to the conclusion
that the net result of Davutoglu's numerous and energetic activities
is negative. Despite good intentions and an impressive intellectual
foundation, the former academic has not managed to create a ring of
friends around Turkey.
This week the German Marshall Fund (GMF) published an interesting
report on the implications of the Arab Spring for Turkish foreign
policy. One of the authors, Nathalie Tocci, Italy's most knowledgeable
Turkey expert, is careful in her criticism of Ankara's actions abroad
but nevertheless her analysis must be painful for many at the Foreign
Ministry. For good reason she makes a difference between the short-term
effects of the Arab Spring and the medium and long-term opportunities
that the changes in the Middle East may present to Turkey. According to
Tocci, the uprisings in Egypt, Libya and Syria have revealed a number
of inconsistencies in Turkish foreign policy and have brought to the
forefront the "inherent tension between the normative and realpolitik
dimensions" of Davutoglu's strategy. In Egypt, Turkey was on the side
of democracy from the start, largely because there has always been
an implicit rivalry between the two countries and, at the same time,
a lack of strong economic ties. In Libya, $15 billion in investment
and 25,000 Turkish citizens made Turkey much more cautious. In Syria,
Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan first had to experience
his close to zero influence on Syrian dictator Assad before Turkey
was willing to abandon its wait-and-see approach.
The good thing about the GMF report is that it does not only highlight
the contradictions and limits of Turkish foreign policy. Several
contributors make the point that Turkey has a huge potential to play
a dominant role in positively influencing the eventual outcome of the
Arab revolutions. In order to do that, the authors suggest structured
cooperation between Turkey and two other interested parties in the
region, the EU and the US. That will definitively not be easy, they
admit, but it should at least be tried seriously.
As for all global players, the big challenge for Turkish foreign
policy is to find the right balance between high principles and smart
concepts on the one hand and effective interventions and practical
proposals on the other. Davutoglu has to prove the cynics wrong who
think that his theories do not work in the real world. One way of
doing so is to admit that there are still plenty of problems with
neighbors and that Turkey is willing to work with every constructive
partner to solve them. Better forget about zero problems in this part
of the world. Be happy when you end up with less.
by JOOST LAGENDIJK
Today's Zaman
Nov 1 2011
Turkey
Most analysts of Turkey's foreign policy during the last couple of
years will never say so aloud. They are either too polite or make the
calculation that making fun of Ankara's recent global activism will
not go down well with the Justice and Development Party (AK Party)
leadership, with whom they will have to work for the foreseeable
future. But in private or behind the scenes, they make jokes about
the so-called "zero problems with neighbors" policy and the person
who came up with the concept, Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu.
The phrase most often used ridicules the concept of "zero problems"
and states that, instead of having less problems with its neighbors,
Turkey is faced with a growing number of highly problematic situations
along its borders. Davutoglu's tireless efforts to practice his own
ideas have not created zero problems with neighbors but zero neighbors
without problems. The list of proof is discouragingly long.
Accession negotiations with the EU are stalled and relations with
Cyprus are still very bad. Efforts to improve the relations with
Armenia have failed and have led to suspicion and bad feelings
among the "brothers" in Baku. Until recently the theocrats in
Tehran were quite happy with Turkey's support in their dispute with
the international community on Iran's nuclear program. But after
Turkey agreed to host US radars as part of a new NATO missile defense
shield and turned against Iran's most important regional ally, Syria,
bitter accusations by senior Iranian officials have been leveled at
the Turkish government. Add to that inventory the harsh rhetoric
and broken diplomatic relations between Turkey and Israel and the
remarkable change of policy towards the regime in Damascus, turning
Syrian President Bashar al-Assad from friend to foe, and it is not
difficult to see why many cynical pundits come to the conclusion
that the net result of Davutoglu's numerous and energetic activities
is negative. Despite good intentions and an impressive intellectual
foundation, the former academic has not managed to create a ring of
friends around Turkey.
This week the German Marshall Fund (GMF) published an interesting
report on the implications of the Arab Spring for Turkish foreign
policy. One of the authors, Nathalie Tocci, Italy's most knowledgeable
Turkey expert, is careful in her criticism of Ankara's actions abroad
but nevertheless her analysis must be painful for many at the Foreign
Ministry. For good reason she makes a difference between the short-term
effects of the Arab Spring and the medium and long-term opportunities
that the changes in the Middle East may present to Turkey. According to
Tocci, the uprisings in Egypt, Libya and Syria have revealed a number
of inconsistencies in Turkish foreign policy and have brought to the
forefront the "inherent tension between the normative and realpolitik
dimensions" of Davutoglu's strategy. In Egypt, Turkey was on the side
of democracy from the start, largely because there has always been
an implicit rivalry between the two countries and, at the same time,
a lack of strong economic ties. In Libya, $15 billion in investment
and 25,000 Turkish citizens made Turkey much more cautious. In Syria,
Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan first had to experience
his close to zero influence on Syrian dictator Assad before Turkey
was willing to abandon its wait-and-see approach.
The good thing about the GMF report is that it does not only highlight
the contradictions and limits of Turkish foreign policy. Several
contributors make the point that Turkey has a huge potential to play
a dominant role in positively influencing the eventual outcome of the
Arab revolutions. In order to do that, the authors suggest structured
cooperation between Turkey and two other interested parties in the
region, the EU and the US. That will definitively not be easy, they
admit, but it should at least be tried seriously.
As for all global players, the big challenge for Turkish foreign
policy is to find the right balance between high principles and smart
concepts on the one hand and effective interventions and practical
proposals on the other. Davutoglu has to prove the cynics wrong who
think that his theories do not work in the real world. One way of
doing so is to admit that there are still plenty of problems with
neighbors and that Turkey is willing to work with every constructive
partner to solve them. Better forget about zero problems in this part
of the world. Be happy when you end up with less.