Turkey: Where Geopolitics still matters

Click to increase image sizeClick to decrease image size

Notes

1. For a durable and peaceful unipolar system, see for instance: William C. Wohlforth, ‘The Stability of a Unipolar World’, International Security, Vol. 24, No. 1 (Summer 1999), pp.5–41; on the unipolar moment towards multipolarity: Kenneth N. Waltz, ‘Structural Realism after the Cold War’, International Security, Vol. 25, No. 1 (Summer 2000), pp.5–41; on a uni-multipolar system: Samuel P. Huntington, ‘The Lonely Superpower’, Foreign Affairs, Vol. 78, No. 2 (March/April 1999), pp.35–49; and on a system of 1 superpower + 4 great powers + regional security complexes: Barry Buzan and Ole Wæver, Regions and Powers: The Structure of International Security (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003).

2. The regions are socially constructed in the sense that they are contingent on the security practice of the actors. But a regional security complex is defined as such when it qualifies according to analytical criteria, not according to the definition of practitioners. The definition of a security complex is ‘a set of units whose major processes of securitisation, de-securitisation, or both, are so interlinked that their security problems cannot reasonably be analysed or resolved apart from one another’. Buzan and Wæver, Regions and Powers (note 1), p.44. Securitization, as a ‘speech act’ refers to the process, whereby an ‘issue is presented as an existential threat, requiring emergency measures and justifying actions outside the normal bounds of political procedure’. The process of desecuritization refers to ‘the shifting of issues out of emergency mode and into the normal bargaining processes of the political sphere’. Barry Buzan, Ole Wæver and Jaap de Wilde, Security: A New Framework For Analysis (Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner, 1998), pp.24, 4.

3. Hikmet Sami Turk, Turkish Defense Policy, Speech Held at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, 3 March 1999 (typescript),  < www.washingtoninstitute.org/templateC07.php?CID = 34 > . Ministry of National Defence, Turkey's Defence Policy and Military Strategy. Defence White Paper (Ankara: Ministry of National Defence, 2000),  < http://msb.gov.tr/Birimler/GnPPD/GnPPDBeyazKitap.htm > .

4. Isil Kazan, Regionalisation of Security and Securitisation of a Region: Turkish Security Policy After the Cold War, Ph.D. thesis, (Copenhagen: Institute of Political Science, University of Copenhagen, 2003).

5. The concept of pivotal states reappears in the debate on the structure and features of the post-Cold War international system, and the grand strategy of the US, especially among the American scholars. The concept of pivotal means basically to have the capacity to affect regional and international stability, and to be transregional, and is related to the image of Turkey as a geopolitical bridge. See Ian O. Lesser, ‘Western Interests in a Changing Turkey’, Chap. 4, in Zalmay Khalilzad, Ian O. Lesser and F. Stephen Larrabee (eds), The Future of Turkish-Western Relations: Towards a Strategic Plan (Santa Monica, CA: Rand Corporation, 2000), pp.52–78. On the concept of pivotal states, see Robert S. Chase, Emily B. Hill and Paul Kennedy (eds), The Pivotal States: A New Framework for U.S. Policy in the Developing World (New York: W.W. Norton & Co., 1999).

6. Isil Kazan and Ole Wæver, ‘Tyrkiet mellem Europa og europeisæring’, Internasjonal Politikk, Vol. 52, No. 2 (1994), pp.139–75.

7. For example, the first military coup in 1960 and the ‘soul’ of the Constitution of 1961 was basically about broadening the legal framework that generates political pluralism, in order to prevent a single-party ‘dictatorship’. The Turkish Constitutional Court and the National Security Council were also established to check and balance the legislative and executive branches. However, the political pluralism of the 1960s ended in political violence. The second military intervention and the constitutional amendments of 1971 were about restricting political pluralism, thereby putting an end to political violence. This military attempt did not, however, prevent an acceleration in the spiral of violence, a succession of ineffective governments and a paralyzed parliament. The military coup in 1980 was thus a reaction to the paralyzed political system. The constitution of 1982 tightened the legal framework of political pluralism too much, and the 1980s, 1990s and the beginning of the 2000s were marked by political efforts to broaden this restrictive legal system. Kurdish separatism and Islamic fundamentalism since the late 1980s have also opened up a hot debate on cultural pluralism and human rights in Turkey, and have served to broaden and deepen democracy. As a result, at the beginning of the 2000s, a series of political reforms were set in motion that have brought Turkish democracy and human rights closer to the European standards.

8. Ferenc A. Váli, Bridge Across the Bosporus (Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1971), p.11.

9. Thomas Naff, ‘The Ottoman Empire and the European States System’, in Hedley Bull and Adam Watson (eds), The Expansion of International Society (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1984) p.160; Niyazi Berkes, The Development of Secularism in Turkey (Montreal: McGill University Press, 1964), p.77.

10. Kazan: Regionalisation of Security (note 4), pp.122, 178-80.

11. ‘Controversies over tank modernization agreement continue’, Turkish Daily News, 8 April 2002; ‘Crescent and (David's) Star’, Turkish Daily News, 9 April 2002.

12. Yavuz G. Yildiz, ‘Ortadogu'da Silahlanma ve Militarizm’, in Sabahattin Sen (ed.), Su Sorunu, Turkiye ve Ortadogu (Istanbul: Baglam Yayinlari, 1993).

13. For example Gulay Gunluk Senesen, ‘Turk Silahli Kuvvetlerinin Modernizasyon Programinin Bir Degerlendirmesi’, in Faruk Sonmezoglu (ed.), Turk Dis Politikasinin Analizi (Istanbul: Der Yayinlari, 1998), p.599; ‘Sira Askeri Harcamalara Geliyor’, Hurriyet, 31 July 2000.

14. ‘Savunma Politikasi’ (Defence Policy),  < www.tsk.mil.tr/genel_konular/savunmapolitikasi.htm >  see also Ministry of National Defence, Turkey's Defence Policy (note 3).

15. Arms control, disarmament, confidence and security building measures and prevention of the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, available at:  < www.msb.gov.tr >  Weapons of Mass Destruction,  < www.tsk.mil.tr >  Arms Control and Disarmament,  < www.mfa.gov.tr > .

16. Ministry of National Defence, Turkey's Defence Policy (note 3).

17. ‘While rendering ineffective the enemy elements who have crossed the border, the army will at the same time expand the subsequent operation into the territories of the country in question thus breaking the enemy's determination and will to continue with the war, while seizing the kind of targets that give the Turkish Republic political and military advantages’. Lale Sariibrahimoglu, ‘Turkish military adopts doctrine to address terrorist acts’, Turkish Daily News, 13 Sept. 2001.

18. The perceived new threats and risks are: proliferation of WMD and long-range missiles; regional and ethnic conflicts; political and economic instabilities and uncertainties in the countries; religious fundamentalism; smuggling of drugs and all kinds of weapons; and international terrorism. Ministry of National Defence, Turkey's Defence Policy (note 3).

19. ‘General Staff outlines Turkish military's weapons, equipment purchases for coming decade’, Turkish Daily News, 1 Feb. 1999; Lale Sariibrahimoglu, ‘Turkish defense industry busy in January 2000’, Turkish Daily News, 6 Jan. 2000.

20. Colonel Gurbuz Duruk, ‘Airborne Early Warning and Control’; Suleyman Demirel, ‘Defence to Maintain Peace’; General Vural Avar, ‘The Turkish Armed Forces in 2000 and Beyond’ all in Nato's Sixteen Nations, Special Supplement ‘Defence and Economy in Turkey: Pillar of Regional Stability’ (1998); see also Ministry of National Defence, Turkey's Defence Policy (note 3).

21. Sariibrahimoglu, ‘Turkish defense industry busy in January 2000’ (note 19); ‘Scharping: we want to be in the tank tender’, Turkish Daily News, 21 Dec. 1999; ‘Speculation mounts over secret tank deal between Turkey and Germany’, Turkish Daily News, 20 March 2000; ‘Way clear for German arms to Turkey’, Turkish Daily News, 7 Aug. 2001.

22. ‘Turkish military warns US over withdrawing from JSF in favor of Eurofighter, France stands in the middle of row between Turkey and US’, Turkish Daily News, 22 May 2001; ‘US further narrows Turkey's room for manoeuvre in defense industry’, Turkish Daily News, 17 July 2001; ‘Turks and Americans get together to solve mission computer dispute: SSM Head Ercan rules out US control over mission computer’, Turkish Daily News, 31 July 2001; ‘Turkey's big defense fair IDEF-2001 opens under shadow of US attack’, Turkish Daily News, 27 Sept. 2001.

23. Kemal Ilter, ‘Tarasyuk presents letter from Yuchenko to Ecevit on MBT tender’; Lale Sariibrahimoglu ‘Turkey eyes Asia for arms production’, Turkish Daily News, 22 March 2000; ‘Russian minister urges strategic cooperation between Russia, Turkey’, Turkish Daily News, 6 Sept. 2005.

24. Ministry of National Defence, Turkey's Defence Policy (note 3).

25. ‘Turkey's preparedness to possible war under scrutiny’, Turkish Daily News, 16 Feb. 2003.

26. Speech of Defence Minister Vecdi Gonul, TUTANAK DERGI˙SI˙ (The Minutes of the Turkish National Grand Assembly) DÖNEM: 22 CI˙LT: 35 YASAMA YILI: 2, 32 nci Birleşim, 20 Dec 2003 (typescript).

27. ‘TESEV survey: Turkey is listed in the top ranks of leading armed countries’, Turkish Daily News, 30 Dec. 2002.

28. Sitki Egeli, ‘Suriye ve Ortadogu'da NBC/Balistik Füze Tirmanmasi’, Dis Politika Bulteni, Vol. 4, No. 1 (Autumn 1992), pp.76–7; Cemal Acar, ‘Degismekte olan Dunyada Silahsizlanma ve Turkiye’, in Sabahattin Sen (ed.), Yeni Dunya Düzeni ve Turkiye (Istanbul: Baglam Yayinlari, 1992), pp.259–70.

29. For example, Hasan Koni, ‘Iran'in Nukleer programi ve Füze Sistemleri’, Savunma ve Havacilik (Defence and Aerospace), Vol. 14, No. 80 (April 2000) pp.56–7; Ahmet Corekci, ‘Fuze Meraklisi Komsu’, Ulusal Strateji (National Strategy), Vol. 2, No. 15 (Nov.–Dec. 2000), pp.22–7.

30. Ministry of National Defence, Turkey's Defence Policy (note 3).

31. Sariibrahimoglu ‘Turkish defense industry busy’ (note 19).

32. Lale Sariibrahimoglu, ‘Turkish military splits on ballistic missile defense’, Turkish Daily News, 19 Jan. 2000.

33. Lale Sariibrahimoglu, ‘Israel to host Turkey and U.S. for second missile meeting’, Turkish Daily News, 5 June 2001.

34. Lale Sariibrahimoglu, ‘US freezes anti-ballistic missile defense plans with Turkey and Israel’, Turkish Daily News, 10 Dec. 2001.

35. Ibid.

36. ‘CHP's Elekdag: Iranian nuclear weapons would harm Turkey’, Turkish Daily News, 24 Dec. 2004.

37. ‘Edelman: Common interests may prevail’, Turkish Daily News, 28 May 2005.

38. Genelkurmay Baskani Orgeneral Sayin Hilmi Özkök'ün Harp Akademileri Komutanligindaki Yillik Degerlendirme Konusmasi (20 April 2005),  < www.tsk.mil.tr/bashalk/konusma_mesaj/2005/yillikdegerlendirme_200405.htm > 

39. ‘Turkey-US: Longstanding allies together on one more front’, Turkish Daily News, 15 June 2005; ‘New F-16 deal with US’, Turkish Daily News, 7 March 2005; ‘Ankara rediscovering Israeli weapons’, Turkish Daily News, 10 May 2005.

40. ‘Syria express regret over missile debris falling into Turkish territory’, Turkish Daily News, 30 May 2005.

41. ‘Brief false missile alert at Incirlik Base’, Turkish Daily News; and ‘Incirlik'te Scud panigi’, Aksam, 29 Jan. 1998.

42. ‘Urfa'ya Ucuncu Fuze’, Aksam, 29 March 2003.

43. ‘Severe Iraq crack in NATO’ and ‘Analyts: NATO vase is broken’, Turkish Daily News, 11 Feb. 2003; ‘Turkiye Uzun Menzilli Fuze Alacak’, Aksam, 21 Feb. 2003.

44. ‘Gonul: Hedefimiz yarı profesyonel ordu’, Radikal, 4 Nov. 2003.

45. ‘Gonul: Fuze denemesi hikaye degil gercektir’, Milliyet, 9 Nov. 2004.

46. ‘Turkey's first mini satellite ready for orbit’, Turkish Daily News, 7 May 2003. ‘Turkey pushes button for national UAV program’, Turkish Daily News, 21 Feb. 2005. Lale Sariibrahimoglu, ‘Turkish military-initiated symposium, marking a further step towards establishing a national space agency, will be convened in Ankara today’, Turkish Daily News, 30 May 2001; ‘Ruya gercek oluyor’, Aksam, 7 April 2002; ‘Turkish NASA, TUK, to start to operate next year’, Turkish Daily News, 7 Sept. 2002; ‘Military demands Turkish space agency’, Turkish Daily News, 7 May 2003; ‘One small step for man, one giant leap for Turkey’, Turkish Daily News, 12 March 2005; ‘Turkey re-launches military satellite program’, Turkish Daily News, 21 July 2005.

47. ‘Turkey, China eager for military cooperation’, Turkish Daily News, 5 April 2005.

48. ‘Türkiye füze kalkanina istekli’, Cumhuriyet, 4 May 2001; ‘Dogu'ya yeni füze rampalari’, Türkiye, 4 June 2001; ‘U.S. Defense Secretary begins visit to Turkey’, Turkish Daily News, 4 June 2001; Burak Bekdil, ‘Missile Games’, Turkish Daily News, 5 June 2001.

49. ‘Turkiye Kalkan'a olumlu bakiyor’, Cumhuriyet, 6 June 2001; Bekdil, ‘Missile Games’ (note 48).

50. ‘Füze kalkani kaygi yaratti’, Cumhuriyet, 12 May 2001.

51. Ferai Tinc, ‘Yeni savunma mimarisinde Türkiye'nin rolü’, Hürriyet, 4 June 2001; Yasemin Congar ‘Nükleer yaris yeniden baslamasin’, Milliyet, 14 May 2001; Sami Kohen, ‘Bir guvenlik sorunu daha …’ and ‘Nasil bir Kalkan?’, Milliyet, 1 June 2001 and 4 May 2001, respectively.

52. Erol Manisali, ‘Füze kalkani yeni Soguk Savas politikasi mi?’, Cumhuriyet, 21 May 2001.

53. Aydin Engin, ‘Kilic Kalkan ve Fuzelere Kalkan’, Cumhuriyet, 6 May 2001.

54. Akif Emre, ‘Rumsfeld'in ve F. Hüseyni'nin Türkiye'si’, Yeni Safak, 5 June 2001.

55. ‘Greenpeace activists in Turkey protest U.S. missile defense program’, Turkish Daily News, 7 Aug. 2001.

56. A. Serdar Erdurmaz, ‘Yeni bir konsept: ABD Ulusal Fuze Savunma Sistemi, Dunya ve Turkiye’, Stratejik Analiz, Vol. 2, No. 16 (Aug. 2001), pp.82–97.

57. Mustafa Kibaroglu, ‘Amerikan Ulusal Fuze Savunma Sistemi’, Avrasya Dosyasi, Vol. 6, No. 2 (Summer 2000), pp.90–105.

58. Isil Kazan, ‘Turkey Between National and Theater Missile Defense’, asien afrika lateinamerika, Vol. 30, No. 6 (Dec. 2002), pp.645–55.

59. European Commission, Recommendation of the European Commission on Turkey's progress toward accession, COM(2004) 656 final; and European Commission, Issues Arising from Turkey's Membership Perspective, Commission Staff Working Document, pp.6–12,  < http://europa.eu.int/comm/enlargement/report_2004/pdf/issues_paper_en.pdf > .