SAYARI: OBAMA REALIZES US CANNOT SIT ON FENCE OVER PKK
Today’s Zaman
Dec 15 2008
Turkey
Sabri Sayarı, professor of political science at Sabancı University,
has said US President-elect Barack Obama realizes that to maintain
good relations with Ankara, the US needs to support Turkey’s fight
against the outlawed Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK).
"He is likely to place more emphasis on relations with Turkey because
of the critical nature of American policies in the region regarding,
for example, Iran. And, in the context of the Georgian crisis and
Russia’s growing assertiveness, Turkey is an important neighboring
country," he said.
Toward the end of his presidential campaign, Obama accused the
administration of President George W. Bush of straining the country’s
ties with Turkey.
He also pledged to lead efforts to bring Turkey and the Iraqi Kurds
to find a solution to the terror threat posed by the separatist PKK.
In a foreign policy document published on his election campaign Web
site, Obama said, "The result is that this strategically important
NATO ally, the most advanced democracy in the Muslim world, is turning
against the West," recalling recent opinion polls indicating that
the number of Turks with a favorable opinion of the United States
had fallen to 12 percent.
For Monday Talk, Sayarı elaborated on the repercussions Turkey should
expect from Obama’s election as the next US president.
Should Turkey be relieved or concerned with the election of Barack
Obama as the next US president?
The Turkish press focused only on the Armenian genocide issue, but
there is a broader context. Considering the fact that Obama represents
the end of the Bush era, this is a welcome result.
Why were you concerned about the focus on the Armenian issue?
The Armenian genocide issue has been largely seen in Turkey as the
most important thing that came out of the American election. We should
be more broad minded and think about larger issues.
Like what?
Iraq is very important for Turkey. That’s how the two candidates
started out their campaigns; Obama was supporting the withdrawal
of troops, McCain favored America’s presence there. This issue had
priority in the campaign, although later the economic crisis dominated
the scene.
Do you think Obama will attempt a total pullout of American troops,
or will he maintain a significant force there?
He says he is going to withdraw, but he is likely to maintain a
significant presence there in the form of military bases. The northern
Iraqi Kurdish leadership has already stated that they welcome American
bases in their part of Iraqi territory. You cannot simply take out
150,000 troops overnight. This would leave America exposed. It’s
going to be a gradual process. Given the unhappiness in American
public opinion about the American presence in Iraq and given the
fact that Obama benefited from that unhappiness, he is going to do
something about it. In his mind, Afghanistan is more important and,
given the size of the US military, you can’t fight on two fronts,
so he will move some of the American troops to Afghanistan.
>From a Turkish viewpoint, is an American troop withdrawal from Iraq
a good move?
Initially, there was much opposition in Turkey to the American presence
there. In time, officials in Ankara started to think that a withdrawal
would be a potential danger for Turkey. So Turkey’s position has
shifted. Turkey would not be happy with an immediate withdrawal,
but with something of a gradual nature.
Why?
The expectation is that an American withdrawal form Iraq will be
accompanied by some sort of formation of a democratic government
in Iraq. It is to Turkey’s advantage if that becomes a reality. The
nightmare scenario is that with the American withdrawal you will have
a civil war situation.
‘If the United States is going to withdraw troops, it will do so with
the help of Turkey’
Toward the end of his election campaign Obama released a document
arguing that US-Turkey relations had been deeply strained by the Bush
administration’s mismanaged intervention in Iraq, which helped revive
the terrorist threat posed to Turkey by the separatist PKK. Why do
you think he published this document?
With recommendations from his foreign policy team, he emphasized
that you cannot sit on the fence when it comes to this issue. If
you want to maintain good relations with Turkey, you need to support
Turkey’s fight against the PKK. He is likely to place more emphasis
on relations with Turkey because of the critical nature of American
policies in the region regarding, for example, Iran. And, in the
context of the Georgian crisis and Russia’s growing assertiveness,
Turkey is an important neighboring country. If the United States is
going to withdraw troops, it will do so with the help of Turkey —
and probably through Turkey.
Observers had said that a John McCain presidency would lead to a
more interventionist course for America than an Obama presidency. Now
that Obama has been elected, should the world forget about American
interventionism?
If something happens that will adversely affect American interests,
he is going to support intervention. It is not that he is an idealist
who will support solving every issue through diplomacy. His approach
will be more multilateral than unilateral. That means working with
the allies, with the United Nations, and using diplomacy. Even
George W. Bush did not act unilaterally in the last two years, and
he consulted with allies in Europe.
Why did Obama target Pakistan while explaining his foreign policy
priorities prior to the election?
There is a growing belief in the United States that the problem in
Afghanistan is Pakistan and that Pakistan needs to cooperate with the
United States. Since Obama places the most emphasis on Afghanistan
and capturing Osama bin Laden, who is probably hiding on the border
area between Pakistan and Afghanistan, he also places emphasis on
Pakistan. Can he intervene in Pakistan? It seems like a distant
possibility. But Obama wanted to send a forceful message to Pakistan
that they need to cooperate.
How do you think Turkey’s "zero conflict" foreign policy will be
affected by Obama’s presidency?
Turkish foreign policy stresses a "zero conflict" policy, but that
could be a source of problems with Turkey’s Western allies, for
example, with the United States on Iran and to some extent with the
EU. The French are not at all on the same wavelength with Turkey on
Syria because they think Syria is still involved in Lebanon. So to
maintain a "zero conflict" policy and at the same time maintain good
relations with the West is a delicate balancing act for Turkey. It
needs to be done very carefully; otherwise, you could loose on
both ends.
‘We may see people familiar with Turkey in the Obama administration’
What do you think of Obama’s quick call to economic experts to discuss
the first steps toward healing the damaged US economy?
Obviously he wants to emphasize how critical the problem facing the
American economy is. The economic experts he has consulted are mostly
members of Bill Clinton’s economic team. I think he also wanted to
emphasize that this team was responsible for the achievements of the
economy under President Clinton.
What would you say about familiar names such as Richard Holbrooke
and Anthony Lake, as they are being discussed as potentials for the
position of secretary of state?
When there is a Republican administration in charge, the democratic
thinkers on foreign and domestic policy move out to think tanks and
universities. When there is a Democratic administration, the reverse
happens. Now that Obama is the president-elect, various people in
the think tanks and universities are trying to get a position in the
new administration. As far as personalities, Richard Holbrooke’s name
has been mentioned, but he was so heavily involved with the Hillary
Clinton campaign that I doubt that he will be chosen as secretary of
state. Anthony Lake, who moved to Georgetown University as a professor
after Clinton left, could be chosen as national security advisor.
Looking from a Turkish perspective — considering that the Israeli
father of Rahm Emanuel, who has been selected as Obama’s chief of
staff, said his son would naturally influence the president to be
pro-Israel — how would you evaluate Obama’s choice of Emanuel?
Obviously Emanuel is a friend of Israel. But I doubt that Obama’s
approach to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict will be shaped by
Emanuel’s background and views. As you know, Henry Kissinger is
also Jewish, but the Nixon presidency (where he served as a top
foreign policy official) did not witness a major pro-Israel tilt. More
importantly for Turkey, let’s not forget that Emanuel has been a strong
opponent of the Armenian "genocide" resolution and he has been vilified
and criticized by the Armenian lobby for his position on this issue.
And your views on such names as James Steinberg, Gregory Craig and
Susan Rice for the position of the White House national security
adviser?
Steinberg served as deputy national security advisor to President
Clinton. He is a veteran foreign policy expert who worked at the State
Department, the Brookings Institution and the US Congress. Currently he
is a dean at the Johnson School of Public Affairs at the University
of Texas. Craig is a well-known Washington lawyer who defended
Clinton against impeachment. He has been a foreign policy advisor
to Senator Edward Kennedy, Madeleine Albright and, most recently,
Barack Obama. Rice is a respected and well-known foreign affairs
expert. An African-American, she served at the National Security
Council and was also assistant secretary of state for African
affairs during the Clinton presidency. She was John Kerry’s top
foreign policy advisor during the 2004 election campaign. I think
all three will occupy important positions in foreign policy in the
Obama administration. Among them, Jim Steinberg has the best chance
of becoming the next national security advisor.
What would you say about names like Henri Barkey and Philip Gordon,
who are involved in the Obama campaign?
Philip Gordon from the Brookings Institution could be in Obama’s policy
planning bureau, perhaps. On the Obama team, you may see some other
people familiar with Turkey, such as Barkey of Lehigh University,
former US Ambassador to Turkey Morton Abramowitz and Alan Makovsky,
a specialist on Middle Eastern and Turkish affairs.
How about the Joe Biden factor?
The foreign policy of this administration will be partly in the
portfolio of Joe Biden because he is an experienced person who served
on the Senate Committee for Foreign Relations for a long time. He
will probably bring some of the people from his own network.
And what would you say about Biden and Obama’s commitment to the
Armenian "genocide" issue pushed by the Armenian diaspora?
Obama was elected from Illinois and Chicago, the state capital,
has a large Greek and Armenian population. For electoral reasons,
Obama has been pushing for this for years now. Joe Biden was elected
from Delaware, which also has a small but influential Greek-American
population. Greek and Armenian Americans work together on this
issue. When you have both the president and the vice president
strongly pushing for this, the resolution will pass in Congress this
time in April. Both Biden and Obama have been tremendously committed
to the issue.
If Turkey and Armenia open their mutual border as the next step of the
recent rapprochement between them, could the American administration
take a different stance on the genocide resolution?
It could change the equilibrium in Turkey’s relations with Armenia,
but it would not affect the diaspora. We have seen what happened in the
Greek-Turkish situation. Turkey reached a rapprochement with Greece
in 1999 and the relations are quite warm, but the Greek-American
diaspora is still critical of Turkey. Just two weeks ago, the
founding of the Turkish Republic was being celebrated in Los Angeles
by Turkish-Americans and 200 young Armenians demonstrated there. What
happens between Turkey and Armenia does not seem to be affecting the
diaspora community.
Sabri Sayarı A professor of political science at Sabancı University,
he also serves on the executive board of the Ä°stanbul Policy Center
at Sabancı. Prior to his current position, he was the director
of the Institute of Turkish Studies at Georgetown University’s
School of Foreign Service in Washington, D.C., (1994-2005) and a
senior staff member at the National Academy of Sciences’ National
Research Council (1991-1993). From 1974 to 1984, he served on the
faculty of Bogazici University in Ä°stanbul. He has also been a
visiting professor of political science at Columbia University,
Aarhus University (Denmark), the University of California at Irvine
and George Washington University.
Professor Sayarı has published numerous works on Turkish politics and
foreign policy. His publications include four co-edited books published
in the United States: "Turkey’s New World: Changing Dynamics in
Turkish Foreign Policy"; "Politics, Parties and Elections in Turkey";
"Political Leaders and Democracy in Turkey"; and "Turkish Studies in
the United States."
–Boundary_(ID_bSfWNERxJxYcfTa4hSvJ UQ)–