Tweet
OBAMA'S RE-ELECTION AND TURKISH-US RELATIONS
by Ramazan Gözen*
Today's Zaman
Nov 15 2012
Turkey
Barrack Hussein Obama was re-elected to the US presidency in the Nov.
6 election. This can be translated into approval by Americans of
Obama's four-year performance and their demand for his continued
office.
The election result can be interpreted as Americans' support for
stability and peace. The majority of the electorate did not opt for
Mitt Romney, who championed the hard-line pro-war and anti-immigrant
policies of former President George W. Bush, but for the incumbent
President Obama, who played his cards for peace and dialogue. Former
President Bush caused not only his country but also the entire world
to pay a hefty cost for what he had done and it was most likely that
Romney was going to follow suit.
The US presidential election is an important determinant for both
America and the rest of the world, the Middle East in particular. We
know that the US has a traditional foreign policy, that world politics
is not comprised of the US alone and that the president cannot change
everything by himself. However, we should not lose sight of the
fact that the president of a mighty country such as the US has the
potential power to make an impact on the fate of the world. A look
at past terms shows this very easily. While US policy when Clinton
helmed the country (1993-2001) made contributions of relative peace and
stability to the world, the Bush administration (2001-2009) plunged
the world into violence, conflict, war and instability. President
Obama tried to change not only the directives but also the mindset of
the war policy he inherited from his predecessor Bush and made some
visible headway in his endeavor. The official end of US occupation
in Iraq with the withdrawal of troops, the start of the pull-out
process in Afghanistan, progress in the fight against terrorism with
the killing of Osama bin Laden, exercising restraint in the Libyan
war by not dispatching soldiers and the rejection of demands for a
military operation in Syria are proof of President Obama's desire
to resolve international problems through non-military ways. Besides
that, President Obama has done his best for international conflicts
to be resolved through diplomacy, negotiations and compromise.
Turkey was among the countries President Obama trusted and relied
on the most in that process. Obama demonstrated his trust in Turkey
by making his first foreign trip to Turkey after taking office
and addressing the Turkish Parliament. That started the Turkish-US
model partnership era. The two countries embarked on an advanced
and courageous cooperation for the peaceful settlement of problems
in the Middle East, the Balkans and the Caucasus, the most important
of which were the setting up of a new order in Iraq and Afghanistan,
rapprochement between Turkey and Armenia, peacemaking between Syria and
Israel, finding a settlement to Iran's nuclear program, the two-state
solution to the Israeli-Palestinian dispute and the development of
cooperation in the Balkans. However, all those initiatives fell short
of bringing about the expected or planned results. Nothing conclusive
has resulted from the joint efforts of the two countries. The model
partnership projects proved insufficient in ensuring regional peace
and stability. The US and Turkey made a lot of efforts to resolve
the problems; Obama and Recep Tayyip Erdogan maintained very close
cooperation in that process and even had more than one telephone
conversation a day at times, but to no avail.
Failure of regional actors
We believe that the lack of support from other countries, namely
Russia, Iran and Israel, is the primary reason why the two countries
failed in their efforts. Neither the regional countries nor the
concerned national and international actors gave the desired nod but,
on the contrary, contributed to an outbreak of new problems and crises
as we saw in the Mavi Marmara incident and the axis shift controversy.
It was also realized in that period that Turkish-US relations
were not periodical and not dependant on a certain issue but had a
structural continuum. The two countries maintained their cooperation
and coordination regarding the installment of the NATO missile defense
system and the Arab Spring transformations. They also entered into
a compromise agreement for a new order to be set up in the region.
President Obama gave wholehearted support for Turkey to play a role
in the Arab Spring and wanted peace and stability to be established in
the region with the joint efforts of the two countries. What is known
is that the two leaders were always in touch during that process,
speaking on the phone or physically meeting to consult on regional
matters. We can say that their model partnership has given way to
favorable results in Egypt and Tunisia and partly in Libya, making
contributions to the transformations in those countries.
Syria, though, should be considered separately. Although Turkey
and the US are in agreement for a transformation in Syria and the
replacement of the Bashar al-Assad regime, they have differing views
as to how that should be materialized. Turkey supports, as in the
case of Libya, military intervention, though Obama exercises caution
in that regard. Despite Assad's resistance and callous insistence on
murdering his own people and the outbreak of a wild civil war in the
country, Obama and the leaders of other NATO countries preferred to
give a military operation a wide berth, which shows the difference
between Turkey and the Obama administration.
In short, Turkey and the US enjoyed good relations and a good
level of cooperation in President Obama's first term. It is almost
apparent that it will continue in the forthcoming second term. The
major topics that will star in the upcoming term are the civil war
and the ensuing transformation in Syria, Iran's nuclear program,
the Israeli-Palestinian dispute, Iraq's territorial integrity and
the stance of the Nouri al-Maliki administration, northern Iraq,
and the Kurdish issue and the fight against Kurdistan Workers'
Party (PKK) terrorism. The major parameters of cooperation in all
these areas will be methods of peace and diplomacy. There will not
be cooperation based on the use of military force and the means of
war and other power policies. No one should expect a quest for a
solution to drag the US, Russia and China into a hot confrontation
because the US cannot afford to lose Russia and China for the sake
of Syria. We are of the conviction that Turkey's foreign policy will
also be shaped within that framework.
*Dr. Ramazan Gözen is an instructor at Yıldırım Beyazıt
University.
http://www.todayszaman.com/news-298326-obamas-re-election-and-turkish-us-relationsby-ramazan-gozen*.html
by Ramazan Gözen*
Today's Zaman
Nov 15 2012
Turkey
Barrack Hussein Obama was re-elected to the US presidency in the Nov.
6 election. This can be translated into approval by Americans of
Obama's four-year performance and their demand for his continued
office.
The election result can be interpreted as Americans' support for
stability and peace. The majority of the electorate did not opt for
Mitt Romney, who championed the hard-line pro-war and anti-immigrant
policies of former President George W. Bush, but for the incumbent
President Obama, who played his cards for peace and dialogue. Former
President Bush caused not only his country but also the entire world
to pay a hefty cost for what he had done and it was most likely that
Romney was going to follow suit.
The US presidential election is an important determinant for both
America and the rest of the world, the Middle East in particular. We
know that the US has a traditional foreign policy, that world politics
is not comprised of the US alone and that the president cannot change
everything by himself. However, we should not lose sight of the
fact that the president of a mighty country such as the US has the
potential power to make an impact on the fate of the world. A look
at past terms shows this very easily. While US policy when Clinton
helmed the country (1993-2001) made contributions of relative peace and
stability to the world, the Bush administration (2001-2009) plunged
the world into violence, conflict, war and instability. President
Obama tried to change not only the directives but also the mindset of
the war policy he inherited from his predecessor Bush and made some
visible headway in his endeavor. The official end of US occupation
in Iraq with the withdrawal of troops, the start of the pull-out
process in Afghanistan, progress in the fight against terrorism with
the killing of Osama bin Laden, exercising restraint in the Libyan
war by not dispatching soldiers and the rejection of demands for a
military operation in Syria are proof of President Obama's desire
to resolve international problems through non-military ways. Besides
that, President Obama has done his best for international conflicts
to be resolved through diplomacy, negotiations and compromise.
Turkey was among the countries President Obama trusted and relied
on the most in that process. Obama demonstrated his trust in Turkey
by making his first foreign trip to Turkey after taking office
and addressing the Turkish Parliament. That started the Turkish-US
model partnership era. The two countries embarked on an advanced
and courageous cooperation for the peaceful settlement of problems
in the Middle East, the Balkans and the Caucasus, the most important
of which were the setting up of a new order in Iraq and Afghanistan,
rapprochement between Turkey and Armenia, peacemaking between Syria and
Israel, finding a settlement to Iran's nuclear program, the two-state
solution to the Israeli-Palestinian dispute and the development of
cooperation in the Balkans. However, all those initiatives fell short
of bringing about the expected or planned results. Nothing conclusive
has resulted from the joint efforts of the two countries. The model
partnership projects proved insufficient in ensuring regional peace
and stability. The US and Turkey made a lot of efforts to resolve
the problems; Obama and Recep Tayyip Erdogan maintained very close
cooperation in that process and even had more than one telephone
conversation a day at times, but to no avail.
Failure of regional actors
We believe that the lack of support from other countries, namely
Russia, Iran and Israel, is the primary reason why the two countries
failed in their efforts. Neither the regional countries nor the
concerned national and international actors gave the desired nod but,
on the contrary, contributed to an outbreak of new problems and crises
as we saw in the Mavi Marmara incident and the axis shift controversy.
It was also realized in that period that Turkish-US relations
were not periodical and not dependant on a certain issue but had a
structural continuum. The two countries maintained their cooperation
and coordination regarding the installment of the NATO missile defense
system and the Arab Spring transformations. They also entered into
a compromise agreement for a new order to be set up in the region.
President Obama gave wholehearted support for Turkey to play a role
in the Arab Spring and wanted peace and stability to be established in
the region with the joint efforts of the two countries. What is known
is that the two leaders were always in touch during that process,
speaking on the phone or physically meeting to consult on regional
matters. We can say that their model partnership has given way to
favorable results in Egypt and Tunisia and partly in Libya, making
contributions to the transformations in those countries.
Syria, though, should be considered separately. Although Turkey
and the US are in agreement for a transformation in Syria and the
replacement of the Bashar al-Assad regime, they have differing views
as to how that should be materialized. Turkey supports, as in the
case of Libya, military intervention, though Obama exercises caution
in that regard. Despite Assad's resistance and callous insistence on
murdering his own people and the outbreak of a wild civil war in the
country, Obama and the leaders of other NATO countries preferred to
give a military operation a wide berth, which shows the difference
between Turkey and the Obama administration.
In short, Turkey and the US enjoyed good relations and a good
level of cooperation in President Obama's first term. It is almost
apparent that it will continue in the forthcoming second term. The
major topics that will star in the upcoming term are the civil war
and the ensuing transformation in Syria, Iran's nuclear program,
the Israeli-Palestinian dispute, Iraq's territorial integrity and
the stance of the Nouri al-Maliki administration, northern Iraq,
and the Kurdish issue and the fight against Kurdistan Workers'
Party (PKK) terrorism. The major parameters of cooperation in all
these areas will be methods of peace and diplomacy. There will not
be cooperation based on the use of military force and the means of
war and other power policies. No one should expect a quest for a
solution to drag the US, Russia and China into a hot confrontation
because the US cannot afford to lose Russia and China for the sake
of Syria. We are of the conviction that Turkey's foreign policy will
also be shaped within that framework.
*Dr. Ramazan Gözen is an instructor at Yıldırım Beyazıt
University.
http://www.todayszaman.com/news-298326-obamas-re-election-and-turkish-us-relationsby-ramazan-gozen*.html