Tweet
FM DAVUTOGLU SHOULD CHOOSE HIS WORDS CAREFULLY
Hurriyet Daily News
Sept 10 2009
I had the opportunity to accompany Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu
on his visit to Georgia earlier in the week. During the visit, he
was anxious to clarify some things, particularly about the issue I
raised in my column in Milliyet on the very day that we were flying
to Tbilisi.
My basic argument there was that Davutoglu should select his words
correctly when he puts forward his grand foreign policy vision, since
his remarks can be - and are in fact - interpreted incorrectly in
neighboring or nearby countries that used to be part of the Ottoman
Empire.
My particular focus was on his remarks on the news channel NTV last
week, after the announcement of the two protocols for rapprochement
with Armenia. He openly suggested there that, being the strongest
country in the region, Turkey would be the prime mover in the
establishment of a "new order" in this part of the world.
I had indicated that when you highlight the country's strength,
this generally connotes military strength for many, and that when
you talk about being "instrumental in establishing a new order,"
this has imperial connotations for many in the region.
I had also underlined the fact that it is precisely such remarks by
Davutoglu that have resulted in him being branded as a proponent of
"neo-Ottomanism," a notion that does not go down well in surrounding
countries because it also suggests that Ankara has imperial designs.
Davutoglu explained he had never used the term "neo-Ottomanism"
himself and that "imperial motives" were the last thing on his
mind when saying the things he does. He went on to explain what he
meant. He indicated that the end of the Cold War left a trail of
instability and disorder in its wake in regions such as the Balkans,
the Caucasus and the Middle East, all of close concern to Turkey.
Davutoglu said that if there were something happening in the world
that affected Turkey, then Turkey had a right to speak out and would
always exercise this right. He also explained that when he talked
about the need for a new order in the region he meant this sincerely.
He said his vision included an order that would enhance collective
stability and security in the region, adding that all Turkey wanted
was to play its part in establishing this order by contributing its
share. Although he did not say so himself, we can surmise that being
the strongest country in the region, the role he envisages Turkey
playing in this context is in fact a vital one.
When looked at from the perspective of these explanations, we can
see that what Davutoglu is suggesting is indeed a positive thing,
and one that would also be welcomed by its partners whether they are
in the Europe, the Middle East or the Caucasus, provided everything
is explained clearly and there is no confusion resulting from the
use of certain words.
It is incumbent on him to tread carefully in this respect, because
words do matter in the conduct of foreign policy. We all remember,
after all, how much trouble the use of the word "crusade" caused for
former President Bush after 9/11, even though he had not thought of
the actual Crusades when he used that term.
It is in fact ironic that most Turks don't like to consider the
fact that Turkey also has historical baggage, just like the U.K. or
France, due to the fact that it was born out of the remnants of an
empire. It is strange for Turks to act as if they were one of the
downtrodden people of the world who had to liberate themselves from
Western imperialism.
This is a mentality that results from the events of 1919-1923 and
tends to overlook the centuries of Ottoman rule before that. Neither
do Turks consider the fact that countries liberated from the Ottomans
also remember the past and can be highly sensitive about issues that
pertain to this past.
Therefore it is a foregone conclusion that Turkish officials have
to tread cautiously when addressing subjects that are sensitive for
the countries and people of the region. Otherwise we also know, as
we emphasized in our Milliyet commentary last week, that Davutoglu
has no imperial designs.
But what we believe is not important, at the end of the day, when
such cases are concerned. What is important is what others believe,
whether rightly or wrongly.
Hurriyet Daily News
Sept 10 2009
I had the opportunity to accompany Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu
on his visit to Georgia earlier in the week. During the visit, he
was anxious to clarify some things, particularly about the issue I
raised in my column in Milliyet on the very day that we were flying
to Tbilisi.
My basic argument there was that Davutoglu should select his words
correctly when he puts forward his grand foreign policy vision, since
his remarks can be - and are in fact - interpreted incorrectly in
neighboring or nearby countries that used to be part of the Ottoman
Empire.
My particular focus was on his remarks on the news channel NTV last
week, after the announcement of the two protocols for rapprochement
with Armenia. He openly suggested there that, being the strongest
country in the region, Turkey would be the prime mover in the
establishment of a "new order" in this part of the world.
I had indicated that when you highlight the country's strength,
this generally connotes military strength for many, and that when
you talk about being "instrumental in establishing a new order,"
this has imperial connotations for many in the region.
I had also underlined the fact that it is precisely such remarks by
Davutoglu that have resulted in him being branded as a proponent of
"neo-Ottomanism," a notion that does not go down well in surrounding
countries because it also suggests that Ankara has imperial designs.
Davutoglu explained he had never used the term "neo-Ottomanism"
himself and that "imperial motives" were the last thing on his
mind when saying the things he does. He went on to explain what he
meant. He indicated that the end of the Cold War left a trail of
instability and disorder in its wake in regions such as the Balkans,
the Caucasus and the Middle East, all of close concern to Turkey.
Davutoglu said that if there were something happening in the world
that affected Turkey, then Turkey had a right to speak out and would
always exercise this right. He also explained that when he talked
about the need for a new order in the region he meant this sincerely.
He said his vision included an order that would enhance collective
stability and security in the region, adding that all Turkey wanted
was to play its part in establishing this order by contributing its
share. Although he did not say so himself, we can surmise that being
the strongest country in the region, the role he envisages Turkey
playing in this context is in fact a vital one.
When looked at from the perspective of these explanations, we can
see that what Davutoglu is suggesting is indeed a positive thing,
and one that would also be welcomed by its partners whether they are
in the Europe, the Middle East or the Caucasus, provided everything
is explained clearly and there is no confusion resulting from the
use of certain words.
It is incumbent on him to tread carefully in this respect, because
words do matter in the conduct of foreign policy. We all remember,
after all, how much trouble the use of the word "crusade" caused for
former President Bush after 9/11, even though he had not thought of
the actual Crusades when he used that term.
It is in fact ironic that most Turks don't like to consider the
fact that Turkey also has historical baggage, just like the U.K. or
France, due to the fact that it was born out of the remnants of an
empire. It is strange for Turks to act as if they were one of the
downtrodden people of the world who had to liberate themselves from
Western imperialism.
This is a mentality that results from the events of 1919-1923 and
tends to overlook the centuries of Ottoman rule before that. Neither
do Turks consider the fact that countries liberated from the Ottomans
also remember the past and can be highly sensitive about issues that
pertain to this past.
Therefore it is a foregone conclusion that Turkish officials have
to tread cautiously when addressing subjects that are sensitive for
the countries and people of the region. Otherwise we also know, as
we emphasized in our Milliyet commentary last week, that Davutoglu
has no imperial designs.
But what we believe is not important, at the end of the day, when
such cases are concerned. What is important is what others believe,
whether rightly or wrongly.