Tweet
Jamestown Foundation
May 8 2009
Davutoglu Promoting "Strategic Depth" in Turkish Foreign Policy
Eurasia Daily Monitor Volume: 6 Issue: 89
May 8, 2009 04:39 PM
By: Lale Sariibrahimoglu
On May 2 Professor Ahmet Davutoglu (50) was appointed as Turkey's
Foreign Minister, replacing Ali Babacan (42). Davutoglu had been the
"behind the scenes" figure instrumental in devising what is termed as
the pro-active and multi faceted foreign policy of Turkey's ruling
Justice and Development Party (AKP) which came to power in November
2002. He has now come to the forefront of Turkish politics.
A veteran Turkish diplomat described him as having the capability to
fill old wine in new bottles. This description of Davutoglu stemmed
from the diplomat's conviction that there is little new in Turkish
foreign policy, it is merely being repackaged. Ankara, in his view,
has been unable to match the "pro-active" foreign policy with
practical achievements. This was due to Turkey being a quasi-state
-not functioning like a state- as long as real democracy does not
fully function within all the institutions in the country (Turkish
diplomat in an interview with Jamestown).
Davutoglu is noted for his 2001 book, "Stratejik Derinlik" (Strategic
Depth) in which he asserted that Turkey has become a key country,
emerging from its position of serving as a forward base for NATO
during the Cold War. By using its geopolitical and geostrategic
position, Turkey can become a regional as well as a global actor. As
part of this vision, the government has pursued a policy of ending its
long-term hositilites with its neighbours, mainly in the Middle East,
which the Ottoman Turks had once ruled.
Davutoglu was the architect of dialogue with all the political actors
in the Middle East, including the most controversial ones, such as
Hamas leader Khaled al-Mashal. He was instrumental in Turkey's
mediation between Syria and Israel, and he devised the strategy of
opening dialogue with all groups within Iraq, including the Kurds with
whom Ankara had troubled ties. This increased engagement of Turkey in
the Middle East's politics and conflicts, labelled "Neo Ottomanism"
has however, raised concerns over whether Ankara has been distancing
itself from NATO and its ultimate goal of becoming a European Union
(EU) member.
Davutoglu has denied the policy of Neo Ottomanism on various
occasions, while most recently reaffirming his adhrence to Turkey's
Euro-Atlantic integration, during a ceremony marking his appointment
held on May 4. Turkish foreign policy has changed, he said on May 4,
away from crisis-oriented to being based instead on "vision," allowing
Turkish policy-makers to identify potential crises before they errupt
and devise appropriate policies to tackle them (Today's Zaman, May 4).
Accordingly, he said Turkey now has a stronger foreign policy vision
toward the Middle East, the Balkans and the South Caucasus region,
adding: "It has to take on the role of an order-instituting country in
all these regions. ...Turkey is no longer a country which only reacts
to crises, but notices the crises before their emergence and
intervenes effectively, and gives shape to the order of its
surrounding regions." It is clear that such an active foreign policy
pursued with the inspiration and contribution of Davutoglu, has
increased Turkey's visibility, suggested retired ambassador and Taraf
columnist Temel Iskit (Taraf, May 5).
However, Iskit questioned the success of this new foreign policy: "It
is hard to say that this visibility has increased Turkey's
effectiveness. For example, Turkey could not reap any harvest from its
role as a facilitator in the Middle East. The Palestinian issue
remains in stalemate, and Turkey was not given any credit for the
Israeli-Hamas ceasefire" (Taraf, May 5).
Indeed, many analysts agree that difficult tasks are awaiting
Davutoglu both inside and outside Turkey. Internally, the government
has frequently fallen victim to efforts by the Turkish opposition, as
well as non elected bureaucrats, to insert populism into foreign
policy matters. Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan has been falling
into the trap of either nationalists or Islam sensitive groups
influencing foreign policy issues.
For example, a senior Turkish diplomat explained in an interview with
Jamestown, Erdogan has bowed to the pressure from Azerbaijan,
supported by Turkish nationalists, thus complicating a fresh start
with Armenia. Efforts to control the damage done by other politicians
will keep Davutoglu occupied, he added.
Meanwhile, Iskit warned against forgetting the importance of the
effect of Turkey's politically powerful armed forces, which restricts
not only the government's room for maneuver, but also Davutoglu on
foreign policy issues (Taraf, May 5).
May 8 2009
Davutoglu Promoting "Strategic Depth" in Turkish Foreign Policy
Eurasia Daily Monitor Volume: 6 Issue: 89
May 8, 2009 04:39 PM
By: Lale Sariibrahimoglu
On May 2 Professor Ahmet Davutoglu (50) was appointed as Turkey's
Foreign Minister, replacing Ali Babacan (42). Davutoglu had been the
"behind the scenes" figure instrumental in devising what is termed as
the pro-active and multi faceted foreign policy of Turkey's ruling
Justice and Development Party (AKP) which came to power in November
2002. He has now come to the forefront of Turkish politics.
A veteran Turkish diplomat described him as having the capability to
fill old wine in new bottles. This description of Davutoglu stemmed
from the diplomat's conviction that there is little new in Turkish
foreign policy, it is merely being repackaged. Ankara, in his view,
has been unable to match the "pro-active" foreign policy with
practical achievements. This was due to Turkey being a quasi-state
-not functioning like a state- as long as real democracy does not
fully function within all the institutions in the country (Turkish
diplomat in an interview with Jamestown).
Davutoglu is noted for his 2001 book, "Stratejik Derinlik" (Strategic
Depth) in which he asserted that Turkey has become a key country,
emerging from its position of serving as a forward base for NATO
during the Cold War. By using its geopolitical and geostrategic
position, Turkey can become a regional as well as a global actor. As
part of this vision, the government has pursued a policy of ending its
long-term hositilites with its neighbours, mainly in the Middle East,
which the Ottoman Turks had once ruled.
Davutoglu was the architect of dialogue with all the political actors
in the Middle East, including the most controversial ones, such as
Hamas leader Khaled al-Mashal. He was instrumental in Turkey's
mediation between Syria and Israel, and he devised the strategy of
opening dialogue with all groups within Iraq, including the Kurds with
whom Ankara had troubled ties. This increased engagement of Turkey in
the Middle East's politics and conflicts, labelled "Neo Ottomanism"
has however, raised concerns over whether Ankara has been distancing
itself from NATO and its ultimate goal of becoming a European Union
(EU) member.
Davutoglu has denied the policy of Neo Ottomanism on various
occasions, while most recently reaffirming his adhrence to Turkey's
Euro-Atlantic integration, during a ceremony marking his appointment
held on May 4. Turkish foreign policy has changed, he said on May 4,
away from crisis-oriented to being based instead on "vision," allowing
Turkish policy-makers to identify potential crises before they errupt
and devise appropriate policies to tackle them (Today's Zaman, May 4).
Accordingly, he said Turkey now has a stronger foreign policy vision
toward the Middle East, the Balkans and the South Caucasus region,
adding: "It has to take on the role of an order-instituting country in
all these regions. ...Turkey is no longer a country which only reacts
to crises, but notices the crises before their emergence and
intervenes effectively, and gives shape to the order of its
surrounding regions." It is clear that such an active foreign policy
pursued with the inspiration and contribution of Davutoglu, has
increased Turkey's visibility, suggested retired ambassador and Taraf
columnist Temel Iskit (Taraf, May 5).
However, Iskit questioned the success of this new foreign policy: "It
is hard to say that this visibility has increased Turkey's
effectiveness. For example, Turkey could not reap any harvest from its
role as a facilitator in the Middle East. The Palestinian issue
remains in stalemate, and Turkey was not given any credit for the
Israeli-Hamas ceasefire" (Taraf, May 5).
Indeed, many analysts agree that difficult tasks are awaiting
Davutoglu both inside and outside Turkey. Internally, the government
has frequently fallen victim to efforts by the Turkish opposition, as
well as non elected bureaucrats, to insert populism into foreign
policy matters. Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan has been falling
into the trap of either nationalists or Islam sensitive groups
influencing foreign policy issues.
For example, a senior Turkish diplomat explained in an interview with
Jamestown, Erdogan has bowed to the pressure from Azerbaijan,
supported by Turkish nationalists, thus complicating a fresh start
with Armenia. Efforts to control the damage done by other politicians
will keep Davutoglu occupied, he added.
Meanwhile, Iskit warned against forgetting the importance of the
effect of Turkey's politically powerful armed forces, which restricts
not only the government's room for maneuver, but also Davutoglu on
foreign policy issues (Taraf, May 5).