Tweet
'DEMOCRACY IS NOT A GOOD TO EXPORT,' SAYS TOP EXPERT
Barcın Yinanc - [email protected]
Hurriyet
Sept 2 2011
Turkey
Turkey is a stategic medium size power which can punch above its weight
using the risks and opportunities provided by its geography, according
to Professor Baskın Oran, the editor of the book 'Turkish Foreign
Policy: 1919 - 2001'. The English edition of the book, including a
summary of the period 2001-2006, was published by Utah University Press
Washington's support for the opposition in Libya shows an improved
understanding of how democracy spreads, according to Professor
Baskın Oran.
"Democracy is not a commodity to export. If there are intellectuals to
import democracy in [a country], then this can happen. This is what
[Turkish Republic founder Mustafa Kemal] Ataturk did. He imported,
he cloned the system," he said.
The English edition of Oran's two-volume book "Turkish Foreign Policy,
1919-2001," which includes a summary of the period between 2001 and
2006, was published last year by Utah University Press. He is currently
working on the third volume, which will cover the 2001-2011 period,
with a focus on human rights.
"Turkey's foreign policy is linked to human rights," Oran told the
Hurriyet Daily News in a recent interview in the Aegean town of Bodrum.
Why are human rights so closely linked to Turkey's foreign policy?
As long as Turkey won't treat its own citizens humanely, it won't be
treated properly. This has been so ever since the Cold War ended. The
U.S. used to support dictators for its policies but this is no longer
possible. There is a need to respect human rights. Meanwhile it also
became apparent that occupations are very costly and detrimental. [Due
to the lessons learned in Iraq, the U.S.] did not attempt occupation
in Libya. They supported the opposition. Democracy is not a commodity
to be exported; it can only be imported if there are importers in
the country.
You were very anti-American during the Cold War era. When you look
back, what do you think of Turkish-U.S. relations during that time?
The U.S. strategy at that time was to make Turkey a key element of
the anti-communist shield. This was deflecting Turkey from its most
important foreign-policy objective.
Turkey is a medium-range power, a country that can influence the
international system only marginally but carries weight in its region.
But Turkey goes beyond this by being a strategic medium-range power,
which can punch above its weight using the opportunities and risks
provided by its geography. Such a country can do what a medium-range
country cannot as long as it stays regional. But for that the
precondition is to be relatively autonomous, which requires not having
anyone - neither the United States nor Russia - dominate the region.
By implementing its anti-communist policies during the Cold War,
the U.S. was taking away that characteristic from Turkey.
This idea seems to be converging with Foreign Minister Ahmet
Davutoglu's current rhetoric.
Davutoglu says something else. He says: "Everything that happens on
our frontier has an effect on us. So we need to act proactively and
prevent those events from taking place. And this can happen with the
'zero problems with neighbors' policy." This is a right policy in
its own rationale. But we saw in the Syrian case that this is not
something that depends only on Turkey.
But this policy did not start with Davutoglu. It started when the
end of the Cold War converged with globalization. The transfer of
certain industries to third countries enabled some semi-periphery
states to rise. Turkey is among these rising countries. Davutoglu
was successful because he caught this international wave.
The first two volumes of the book has eight chapters, which seem to
correspond to turning points in modern Turkish foreign policy.
The 1919-1923 era is the war of liberation. This is an extraordinary
period. 1923-1939 is the first period of relative autonomy. We call
it relative because strategic medium-range countries are relatively
autonomous when international relations enable them to be so. In
this period, Western Europe, which dominated the world, became so
entangled in problems that Turkey gained relative autonomy.
1939-1945 corresponds to the second relatively autonomous period.
1945-1960 is the period when Turkey starts entering into the Western
orbit. 1960-1980 is also a period of relative autonomy. From 1980
onwards Turkey goes back to the Westren orbit. Between 1990 and 2000
Turkey enters the globalization phase. It learns how to swim by jumping
into the ocean. [Late President Turgut] Ozal made Turkey pass from
being an import substitute country to [employing an] export strategy.
The U.S. looked almighty until it attacked Iraq in 2001. Its hegemony
then started to decline and BRIC countries and those like Turkey
started to rise.
What do you think of the parallels some draw between Ozal and current
Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan?
Ozal made the transition from a state based on the acquisition of
territories to a trading state. This is the basis of the current
proactive policies. The Anatolian bourgeoisie first emerged during
Ozal's time.
Turkey has been accused of drifting apart from the West during the
rule of Justice and Development Party, or AKP.
This period is extremely different from the rest. Turkey's relative
autonomy in this period has increased because it has been sailing
with the tide of the globalization rather than against it. Turkey
is rising not in spite of globalization but because it is adapting
to globalization.
The accusation that Turkey is shifting its axis is not being made for
the first time. Similar claims were made during Ataturk's, or former
prime minister Demirel's times as well.
Do you now hear any claims of shifting axis?
No. When [the West] realized Turkey is not doing anything different
than they are doing, they stopped [making such claims]. Turkey is
seeking space in the sun. And as [the West] realizes that it will
not overshadow them, they are making room [for Turkey].
Some are now claiming that the EU has lost its attraction for Turkey.
Turkey's orientation has always been to the West and it will remain
so, for many reasons, be it geographical or cultural, as I explain
in the book. Since Turkey is a country seeking to be a strategic
medium-range power, it should not jump into EU membership. But there
is no alternative to the West. Our Westward orientation will not be
disrupted. This can only happen if we migrate to another planet.
Turkey siding with a just cause
Turkey has declared itself the protector of the wronged and is taking
the side of justice, said Professor Baskın Oran, editor of the book
"Turkish Foreign Policy 1919-2006."
"Turkey is right to enter into this contention with Israel. But looking
from the point of Realpolitik, it would be better if Turkey pursued
its policy with the support of certain countries," he said Friday
after the Turkish government decided to sever its ties with Israel
after Tel Aviv declined to apologize for the killing of nine Turkish
citizens in 2010 when Israeli soldiers attacked a Gaza-bound flotilla.
"The United States might create some problems, as it supports Israel
unconditionally," he said, adding that pursuing an effective policy
vis-a-vis a country like Israel requires Turkey to have no shortcomings
of its own.
"I am referring to the Kurdish problem domestically and the Armenian
problem and Cyprus issue internationally," he said.
'Objective book with facts, documents and maps'
The 968-page English edition of "Turkish Foreign Policy, 1919-2006"
exhausted its editor, Professor Baskın Oran, more than the Turkish
edition, which was first published in 2001.
Finding a translator proved to be very difficult and at the end it was
entrusted to retired ambassador Mustafa AkÅ~_in, whose last post was
Turkey's U.N. representative. The book is objective, said Oran. "We
avoided using expressions like 'our country,' but preferred to use
'Turkey.' We made sure the other country's views were also reflected.
If we talked about the Aegean problems, we provided the arguments
of Greece next to Turkey's," he said. There are facts, documents and
comments, as well as maps, he added.
Another feature is that the book may be read vertically in
chronological order or horizontally, according to themes. "One can
read about Turkish-Greek relations uninterrupted from 1919 until the
present. Or one can read all about Turkey's relations in one specific
period," he said.
The 14 authors were selected according to the subject. "Instead of
having a particular author write about a certain period, each subject
has been entrusted to an expert," he said.
Who is Baskın Oran?
Baskın Oran graduated from Ankara University's Political Science
Department in 1968, later receiving his doctorate from the school
as well. He spent a year in Geneva for post-doctoral studies on
international minorities. Oran later joined Ankara University's
teaching staff but he was forced to leave the school in 1983 by the
military, which had taken charge of the country three years earlier.
Following judicial procedures, he was able to return to his position
at the school in 1990, becoming a professor in 1997. He ran as
independent leftist candidate in the 2007 elections, but did not win
a seat in Ankara.
Oran is also one of the originators of the apology campaign called
"We apologize to the Armenians," which has been signed by many
intellectuals. His articles appear in Turkish-Armenian weekly Agos
and daily Radikal.
From: Baghdasarian
Barcın Yinanc - [email protected]
Hurriyet
Sept 2 2011
Turkey
Turkey is a stategic medium size power which can punch above its weight
using the risks and opportunities provided by its geography, according
to Professor Baskın Oran, the editor of the book 'Turkish Foreign
Policy: 1919 - 2001'. The English edition of the book, including a
summary of the period 2001-2006, was published by Utah University Press
Washington's support for the opposition in Libya shows an improved
understanding of how democracy spreads, according to Professor
Baskın Oran.
"Democracy is not a commodity to export. If there are intellectuals to
import democracy in [a country], then this can happen. This is what
[Turkish Republic founder Mustafa Kemal] Ataturk did. He imported,
he cloned the system," he said.
The English edition of Oran's two-volume book "Turkish Foreign Policy,
1919-2001," which includes a summary of the period between 2001 and
2006, was published last year by Utah University Press. He is currently
working on the third volume, which will cover the 2001-2011 period,
with a focus on human rights.
"Turkey's foreign policy is linked to human rights," Oran told the
Hurriyet Daily News in a recent interview in the Aegean town of Bodrum.
Why are human rights so closely linked to Turkey's foreign policy?
As long as Turkey won't treat its own citizens humanely, it won't be
treated properly. This has been so ever since the Cold War ended. The
U.S. used to support dictators for its policies but this is no longer
possible. There is a need to respect human rights. Meanwhile it also
became apparent that occupations are very costly and detrimental. [Due
to the lessons learned in Iraq, the U.S.] did not attempt occupation
in Libya. They supported the opposition. Democracy is not a commodity
to be exported; it can only be imported if there are importers in
the country.
You were very anti-American during the Cold War era. When you look
back, what do you think of Turkish-U.S. relations during that time?
The U.S. strategy at that time was to make Turkey a key element of
the anti-communist shield. This was deflecting Turkey from its most
important foreign-policy objective.
Turkey is a medium-range power, a country that can influence the
international system only marginally but carries weight in its region.
But Turkey goes beyond this by being a strategic medium-range power,
which can punch above its weight using the opportunities and risks
provided by its geography. Such a country can do what a medium-range
country cannot as long as it stays regional. But for that the
precondition is to be relatively autonomous, which requires not having
anyone - neither the United States nor Russia - dominate the region.
By implementing its anti-communist policies during the Cold War,
the U.S. was taking away that characteristic from Turkey.
This idea seems to be converging with Foreign Minister Ahmet
Davutoglu's current rhetoric.
Davutoglu says something else. He says: "Everything that happens on
our frontier has an effect on us. So we need to act proactively and
prevent those events from taking place. And this can happen with the
'zero problems with neighbors' policy." This is a right policy in
its own rationale. But we saw in the Syrian case that this is not
something that depends only on Turkey.
But this policy did not start with Davutoglu. It started when the
end of the Cold War converged with globalization. The transfer of
certain industries to third countries enabled some semi-periphery
states to rise. Turkey is among these rising countries. Davutoglu
was successful because he caught this international wave.
The first two volumes of the book has eight chapters, which seem to
correspond to turning points in modern Turkish foreign policy.
The 1919-1923 era is the war of liberation. This is an extraordinary
period. 1923-1939 is the first period of relative autonomy. We call
it relative because strategic medium-range countries are relatively
autonomous when international relations enable them to be so. In
this period, Western Europe, which dominated the world, became so
entangled in problems that Turkey gained relative autonomy.
1939-1945 corresponds to the second relatively autonomous period.
1945-1960 is the period when Turkey starts entering into the Western
orbit. 1960-1980 is also a period of relative autonomy. From 1980
onwards Turkey goes back to the Westren orbit. Between 1990 and 2000
Turkey enters the globalization phase. It learns how to swim by jumping
into the ocean. [Late President Turgut] Ozal made Turkey pass from
being an import substitute country to [employing an] export strategy.
The U.S. looked almighty until it attacked Iraq in 2001. Its hegemony
then started to decline and BRIC countries and those like Turkey
started to rise.
What do you think of the parallels some draw between Ozal and current
Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan?
Ozal made the transition from a state based on the acquisition of
territories to a trading state. This is the basis of the current
proactive policies. The Anatolian bourgeoisie first emerged during
Ozal's time.
Turkey has been accused of drifting apart from the West during the
rule of Justice and Development Party, or AKP.
This period is extremely different from the rest. Turkey's relative
autonomy in this period has increased because it has been sailing
with the tide of the globalization rather than against it. Turkey
is rising not in spite of globalization but because it is adapting
to globalization.
The accusation that Turkey is shifting its axis is not being made for
the first time. Similar claims were made during Ataturk's, or former
prime minister Demirel's times as well.
Do you now hear any claims of shifting axis?
No. When [the West] realized Turkey is not doing anything different
than they are doing, they stopped [making such claims]. Turkey is
seeking space in the sun. And as [the West] realizes that it will
not overshadow them, they are making room [for Turkey].
Some are now claiming that the EU has lost its attraction for Turkey.
Turkey's orientation has always been to the West and it will remain
so, for many reasons, be it geographical or cultural, as I explain
in the book. Since Turkey is a country seeking to be a strategic
medium-range power, it should not jump into EU membership. But there
is no alternative to the West. Our Westward orientation will not be
disrupted. This can only happen if we migrate to another planet.
Turkey siding with a just cause
Turkey has declared itself the protector of the wronged and is taking
the side of justice, said Professor Baskın Oran, editor of the book
"Turkish Foreign Policy 1919-2006."
"Turkey is right to enter into this contention with Israel. But looking
from the point of Realpolitik, it would be better if Turkey pursued
its policy with the support of certain countries," he said Friday
after the Turkish government decided to sever its ties with Israel
after Tel Aviv declined to apologize for the killing of nine Turkish
citizens in 2010 when Israeli soldiers attacked a Gaza-bound flotilla.
"The United States might create some problems, as it supports Israel
unconditionally," he said, adding that pursuing an effective policy
vis-a-vis a country like Israel requires Turkey to have no shortcomings
of its own.
"I am referring to the Kurdish problem domestically and the Armenian
problem and Cyprus issue internationally," he said.
'Objective book with facts, documents and maps'
The 968-page English edition of "Turkish Foreign Policy, 1919-2006"
exhausted its editor, Professor Baskın Oran, more than the Turkish
edition, which was first published in 2001.
Finding a translator proved to be very difficult and at the end it was
entrusted to retired ambassador Mustafa AkÅ~_in, whose last post was
Turkey's U.N. representative. The book is objective, said Oran. "We
avoided using expressions like 'our country,' but preferred to use
'Turkey.' We made sure the other country's views were also reflected.
If we talked about the Aegean problems, we provided the arguments
of Greece next to Turkey's," he said. There are facts, documents and
comments, as well as maps, he added.
Another feature is that the book may be read vertically in
chronological order or horizontally, according to themes. "One can
read about Turkish-Greek relations uninterrupted from 1919 until the
present. Or one can read all about Turkey's relations in one specific
period," he said.
The 14 authors were selected according to the subject. "Instead of
having a particular author write about a certain period, each subject
has been entrusted to an expert," he said.
Who is Baskın Oran?
Baskın Oran graduated from Ankara University's Political Science
Department in 1968, later receiving his doctorate from the school
as well. He spent a year in Geneva for post-doctoral studies on
international minorities. Oran later joined Ankara University's
teaching staff but he was forced to leave the school in 1983 by the
military, which had taken charge of the country three years earlier.
Following judicial procedures, he was able to return to his position
at the school in 1990, becoming a professor in 1997. He ran as
independent leftist candidate in the 2007 elections, but did not win
a seat in Ankara.
Oran is also one of the originators of the apology campaign called
"We apologize to the Armenians," which has been signed by many
intellectuals. His articles appear in Turkish-Armenian weekly Agos
and daily Radikal.
From: Baghdasarian