Between defeating “the warlord” and defending “the blue homeland”: a discourse of legitimacy and security in Turkey’s Libya policy

Abstract

This article seeks to explain Turkey’s critical engagement in the partially internationalised conflict in Libya by relying on a discourse analysis of Turkish political elites. Drawing on thematic discourse analysis, the authors argue that these elites utilise, in the way in which they communicate to the external audience (the international community), a discourse of legitimacy by which they lend political support for the UN-recognised government, and declare the General Khalifa Haftar-led forces, its opponents, as illegitimate. Secondly, Turkish foreign policy elites express their commitment to preserving national security interests in the Mediterranean, thereby justifying Turkish involvement in the conflict via a security-laden discourse addressed to the internal audience (the local constituents). Legal disputes, regarding the delimitation of maritime boundaries has served as the basis for Turkey’s rapprochement with the Government of the National Accord (GNA), led by Fayez al-Sarraj, and its staunch opposition to the Libyan National Army (LNA), commanded by Haftar since the web of intricate relations in the region relevant to such disputes requires the conclusion of bilateral agreements between the governments.

Disclosure statement

No potential competing interest was reported by the authors.

Notes

1 Cihat Yaycı is another essential figure who contributed to the development and distribution of the concept, Mavi Vatan. See Yalçınalp and Temel (2020).

2 This study makes use of the speeches and statements attributed to the president that have been made public via the Directorate of Communications on the official website of the Turkish presidency. The dates of the items included in the analysis are 6 July 2019, 25 September 2019, 27 November 2019, 7 December 2019, 9 December 2019, 15 December 2019, 21 December 2019, 22 December 2019, 26 December 2019, 27 December 2019, 2 January 2020, 8 January 2020, 12 January 2020, 13 January 2020, 14 January 2020, 18 January 2020, 19 January 2020, 22 January 2020, and 26 January 2020.

3 Foreign ministry statements are retrieved directly from the ministry’s official website, dated 4 April 2019, 7 June 2019, 10 June 2019, 17 June 2019, 30 June 2019, 3 July 2019, 11 July 2019, 19 September 2019, 9 October 2019, 1 December 2019, 31 December 2019, 2 January 2020, 16 January 2020, 19 January 2020, 30 January 2020, 28 February 2020, 26 March 2020, 21 April 2020, 29 April 2020, 10 May 2020, 11 May 2020, 15 May 2020, and 21 May 2020.

4 From 24th term of 5th legislative year to 26th term of 2nd legislative year.

5 Three lengthy reports, dated 4 December 2019, 5 December 2019 and 16 December 2019, are included in the analysis.

6 To disclose the discourses which enabled the Libyan civil conflict to be turned into a matter of international legitimacy and national security interests for Turkey, a visual analysis was conducted with the help of MAXQDA, a textual software application (See: Kuckartz and Radiker 2019). The software was utilised to analyze presidential speeches, parliamentary minutes, parliamentary commission reports and national security council resolutions for the purpose of identifying certain directions in the political discourse.

7 The Eastmed Pipeline Project envisages the transfer of 10 Bcm/y from the off-shore gas area shared by Cyprus and Israel in the Levantine Basin. See IGI Poseidon (2020).

8 There is also a sizeable literature in a new line of research making reference to the role of different genres of audience segments in a successful discourse of securitisation. See Salter (2008), Léonard and Kaunert (2011), Salter (2011), Roe (2008), Stritzel (2007).

9 A two-stage process is employed in the visualisation proces within the framework of this study. First, relevant documents are selected with regard to the Libya-Turkey relationship. Second, since there were no preconceived categories for the theory at hand, related categories were determined by looking at the frequencies and relationalities in order to obtain meaningful clusters constituting the relevant discourses.

10 For the exclusion of Turkey from the Eastern Mediterranean Natural Gas Forum see İpek and Gür (2022).

Additional information

Notes on contributors

M. Cüneyt Özşahin

M. Cüneyt Özşahin is an Associate Professor in the Department of Political Science and International Relations at Necmettin Erbakan University. His research interests include Theories of International Relations, Security Studies, and Turkish Politics. His publications have appeared in various edited volumes and journals, most recently in Israel Journal of Foreign Affairs and Contemporary Review of the Middle East. He is also a frequent contributor to Turkish media outlets writing on regional as well as domestic politics and security. Email: [email protected]

Cenap Çakmak

Cenap Çakmak is a professor of international law and politics at Anadolu University's Department of International Relations (Turkey). He received his MS and PhD degrees from Rutgers University in Global Affairs. Dr. Çakmak's research interests include international law, religion and politics, Islam and IR and Turkish foreign policy. Email: [email protected]