EXCLUSIVE: THE METAMORPHOSIS OF TURKEY

Public Service
ry.asp?id=13745
March 29 2010
UK

Where is Turkey heading? Is the traditional friend of the EU, NATO
and US turning out to be a foe? Ziya Meral investigates

My dictionary defines metamorphosis as "the process of transformation
from an immature form to an adult form in two or more distinct
stages." Clearly, the process spoken here is a biological one and
using such a language to analyse a country is laden with problems.

However, the word metamorphosis is the best metaphor I could find
thus far to describe what Turkey is going through.

In some levels, it is clear that Turkey is still aspiring to be a EU
member and most Turks see themselves as Europeans. Yet, at the same
time Turkey has invited Sudan’s notorious Omal al-Bashir to the country
with red carpets, publicly backed Ahmedinejad’s election ‘victory’
and engaged with all the shunned countries and groups like Hamas and
Syria and alienated its traditional allies such as Israel with angry
outbursts. Where is Turkey heading? To the East or the West? Is the
traditional friend of the EU, NATO and US turning out to be a foe?

The domestic scene is equally confusing. Not a week passes before a new
scandal breaks out. Top generals are being arrested and questioned for
alleged attempts to take over the country. Meanwhile, Prime Minister
Erdogan publicly ostracises critical media outlets and forces hefty
tax punishments on unsupportive corporations. A brand new elite is
ruling Turkey, but where is Turkey heading? Is it turning out to
be an Islamist country on a fast-track course to instability and
civil unrest?

All of these are genuine worries and questions, some more valid than
others. It is true that Turkish foreign policy as well as domestic
politics and structures are undergoing substantial changes, but a
closer look reveals a more promising picture.

With the appointment of the foreign minister Davutoglu, the AKP
government has faced the reality that the world has changed and if
Turkey was to survive these turbulent days it had to adopt itself to
a new era. Davutoglu has promoted a ‘zero conflict’ in all of Turkey’s
borders and a diversification and deepening of Turkish relations with
other countries.

This was inevitable. Turkey has increasingly lost confidence in
the EU project because different EU states and bodies continued to
communicate mixed messages on the future of Turkey and EU talks.

Meanwhile, Russian-Georgian conflict throughout 2008/2009 and
Russian-EU tensions over energy convinced Turkey to leave aside its
traditional foreign policy stagnation.

Thus, Turkey took unprecedented attempts to emerge as a negotiator in
the Middle East, to solve never-ending problems with Armenia-Azerbaijan
and Cyprus, and to become a neutral energy route for the lucrative
petrol and gas resources in its neighbourhood. In other words, Turkey
is becoming less ‘ideological’ in its relations but more ‘rational’
with a multi-faceted calculation of its own interests.

The pragmatic shift is also true for domestic political and social
changes. The reason why AKP assumed a majority power in 2002 as
a brand new party was that Turks were fed up with the traditional
political elites of the country. AKP generated record-breaking votes
ever since, even from non-Muslims and liberals, because it has been
the most pro-EU, pro-reform, pro-human rights, pro-democracy and
pro-foreign investment government Turkey has had in this generation.

Yet, the results of the 2009 local elections and current estimates,
which forecast AKP’s votes to be around 33 per cent for the 2011
national elections, show that whenever AKP has stopped its democratic
reforms and EU commitment and lapsed into autocratic attitudes,
it has lost votes.

This reflects the reality of Turkey – a forward looking yet
traditionally conservative society that wants to be in the EU,
yet at the same time feels the need to diversify its relations and
investments; a friendly ally who wants to be close to the West, yet
at the same time wants to be an independent global actor on its own
merits and terms and does not want to be bullied.

Such a Turkey is far from being a foe but of further value for the
EU, US and NATO. In a chaotic region like the Middle East, a vibrant
democracy with a liberal economy and pragmatic foreign policy is only
good news. Turkish presence in Afghanistan and Iraq has played a quiet
but significant stabilising role. In the years to come, a Turkey that
speaks to all of her neighbours will be key for US and EU foreign
policy, with Turkish support on actions towards Iran and co-operation
on alternative energy routes with European countries sine qua non.

Although publicly Turkey was criticised for talking to Hamas,
re-engaging with Syria and seeking to develop economic relations with
Iran, it is now a common attitude that isolating Hamas does not work.

The US is currently upgrading its diplomatic presence in Syria,
and France is way more ahead than Turkey in having its slices of the
Iranian market.

Yet, one must not be naïve. The maturation process of Turkish
democracy is no guarantee that it will turn out to be constructive and
that Turkish interests will align themselves with those of Europe and
the US in each and every turn. Change is a precarious process. That
is why Turkey needs close support from the EU more than ever, if the
EU is still aspiring for stability in Europe and its neighbourhood
and productive engagement with the rest of the world.

Ziya Meral is a London-based Turkish analyst and a PhD candidate at
the University of Cambridge.