WHERE ARE TURKISH AMERICAN RELATIONS HEADING TO?
By Mehmet SeyfettÝn Erol*

Today’s Zaman
Oct 31 2007

Turkish-American relations are at a critical turning point because
of terrorism and the so-called Armenian genocide.

The crisis that emerged through the Sept. 11 attacks following the
disappointments during the post-Cold War period took the relations to
a crucial point of development since the March 1 motion. The crisis
is so deep that the US and Turkey have no common interests in an
area stretching from the Black Sea to Basra, from Iran to Russia. The
conflict of interests between the parties forces Turkey to make choices
in its foreign policy. Meanwhile, the US seeks to keep Turkey as an
ally through a controlled strategy. However, it is not certain how long
this strategy will last and whether it will work out. This situation
is taken by both sides as a willingness to sustain the partnership
between the two countries. This also implies that it is difficult to
end a six-decade-old strategic partnership. For a better analysis
on the future of Turkish-American relations, the factors that have
brought relations to the current point need to be evaluated.

The first crisis in bilateral relations between Turkey and the US
was the decision to dismantle the Jupiter missiles based in Turkey
following the negotiations between the US and the USSR in relation to
the Cuban missile crisis. This was the starting point for the lack of
confidence in Turkish-American relations. Similarly, Turkey strongly
reacted to the US attitude when US President Lyndon B. Johnson implied
that they would block NATO’s involvement in a possible confrontation
between Turkey and the USSR if Turkey took action vis-a-vis the
Cyprus question.

This was the strongest reaction to the US administration following the
Menderes government. For the first time, the reaction revealed that
Turkey might change its alignment and take part in the opposition
camp. Later, the US attempted to punish Turkey through economic
embargos during the 1974 military operation in Cyprus. The intervention
made despite the US opposition had important consequences that still
affect current affairs. Turkey demonstrated that it had the necessary
determination and capability to make up for its past mistakes and
stand by the protection and preservation of its inherent rights
and interests. This attitude took Turkey to a different category
of alliance from Washington’s perspective. The details of this new
situation became clear with the arrival of the post-Cold War period.

Attempting to redefine the bilateral relations with accommodation
of its national interests during the new era, Washington received an
unexpected reaction from Turkey. This national reflex, which became
visible in Turkey during the reign of Turgut Ozal, remained alive
because of internal dynamics. For this reason, the US has been unable
to implement joint projects with the participation of Turkey since
Sept. 11. As a consequence of this, the US sought to punish Turkey.

To this end, it implemented a new strategy to create a de facto
Kurdish state in northern Iraq despite Turkey’s objections.

Meanwhile, it also initiated an indirect aggression against Turkey by
supporting the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK). Consequently, Turkey
was left with "a hidden war." The US administration — which reminded
Turkey of the Armenian genocide card when the latter expressed its
strong reaction once more — attempted to punish Turkey as a country
guilty of genocide. Of course, the frequent and strong references to
the Armenian genocide at this stage are not related to the Armenian
question alone. The US administration carries out psychological
operations through which it indirectly implies that Turkey will commit
genocide against the Kurds as it did with the Armenians. There is one
thing that should not be overlooked — the US attempts to eliminate
the interest in the Pax Ottomana by the people of the region.

But what are the reasons for the US eagerness to put pressure on Turkey
through use of the Armenian genocide card and the PKK terrorist
organization? Undoubtedly, the major reason is the developing
bilateral relations between Iran and Turkey. The initiation of
a bilateral process between the two countries which made a few
important deals in the field of energy and Turkey’s unwillingness to
take part in a possible US operation against Iran created an unnamed
crisis in Turkish-American relations. This stance of Turkey despite
US demands angered the latter. The anger was visible in the visit by
the US delegations and the visit paid by the Turkish prime minister
to Washington. The diplomatic attempts of Turkey despite the clear
American opposition and the strengthening Syrian-Turkish relations
also triggered outrage in Israel and the US.

The elevated troubles of Israel in its relations with Turkey and the
abortion of the Jewish lobby card in regards to the case of Armenian
genocide claims marks Israel’s inability and despair. Turkey’s
determination to stand firm against US demands in regards to the
Iraqi case and the regional opposition to formation of a Kurdish
state placed Turkey at a critical point in regards to the US.

Apparently, Turkey’s slow motion towards becoming the leader of
the Turkish-Islamic world in the post-Sept. 11 world bothers the
US. In other words, Turkey’s growing importance in the region and
its potential role to resolve the regional problems makes it a key
actor in the "New Game" staged by the US. Turkey’s new position and
potential support for the American project as crystallized in Iraq and
Afghanistan is of particular importance for the US. On the other hand,
Turkey’s emphasis on a "Strategic Depth Project" in response to the
Greater Middle East Project forced the US to employ very different
tools vis-a-vis Turkey’s new direction.

Meanwhile, the particular importance and attention paid by Turkey to
the US in the current stage seems to be Turkey’s biggest mistake.

Unless it abandons its concerns about probable reactions of the US
to its actions, Turkey may not become comfortable in its domestic and
foreign policies. Turkey should immediately abandon this approach and
rely on strong language in speaking to the US authorities. Turkey
should follow such a resolute strategy that the US will develop
concerns over Turkey’s probable responses to its actions. Turkey has
the necessary strength and historical experience to do this. What
is missing is confidence. The latest statements by the Turkish Armed
Forces (TSK) are noteworthy. The remarks by Commander of Turkish Land
Forces Gen. Ýlker Baþbuð noting that Turkey increased the US costs
in the region are exemplary. What could be the price for a firm
stand against the US for Turkey? Under the current circumstances,
the price will be dramatically low in comparison to the US losses.

Dr. Mehmet Seyfettin Erol is a lecturer at Gazi University’s department
of international relations 31.10.2007

–Boundary_(ID_Oo2Q5EUthq5NDI7Dfwr97w) —