![Sample our Area Studies journals, sign in here to start your access, latest two full volumes FREE to you for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5922/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Area-Studies.jpg"})
Abstract
Until the end of the twentieth century, Turkey's East–West paradigm found refuge in the ambiguous construct of Eurasia and was entrenched in an authoritative centralised state. With EU candidature and the radical reforms ushered in by the Islamist-based government, the Turkish Republic finds itself at its most critical juncture since its formation in 1923. In reviewinccg Turkey's reform process, the paper exposes the rifts in its dual Western–Anatolian personality, the ineptness of its Eurasia synthesis, the fragility of its special relationship with the United States and the inherent contradictions embedded in Kemalist statism. The paper argues that by seeking to join the EU, Turkey has also—inadvertently—embarked on a collision course with the Kemalist Devlet (state). The paper surveys the (European) fault line that currently divides Turkey, accentuating deep-seated dualisms—some dating to Ottoman times—that have been concealed by the Kemalist state. Finally, the paper argues that success (or failure) of the Euro-Turkish ‘project’ hinges on Turkey's capacity to reconcile itself with its suppressed historical past and radically reform the inherent contradictions of Kemalism—at the core of which is the military's inherent role as custodians of the Kemalist state.
Notes
1 ‘Europeanisation’ is used in its dual meaning to refer to ‘Westernisation’ and, especially during the paper's second half, the ongoing ‘EU-isation’ institutional process. Originally the term was used in its Cold War security context; the phrase then came to refer to Europe's claim to be a third force in global affairs and from there it acquired a self-identifying function for those who considered themselves Europeans beyond their specific ethno-national origin. In its more recent incarnation, K. Featherstone and G. Kazamias, eds, Europeanisation and the Southern Periphery (London: Frank Cass, 2001) define Europeanisation as a normative process that ‘involves the development of formal and informal rules, procedures, norms and practices governing politics at the European, national and subnational levels’. B. Coppieters, M. Huysseune, M. Emerson, N. Tocci and M. Vahl, ‘European International Models as Instruments of Conflict Resolution in the Divided States of the European Periphery’ (CEPS Working Document 195, July 2003), take the hypothesis even further and explore whether Europeanisation is capable of functioning as a conflict resolution mechanism which, through institutional compliance, changing domestic opportunity structures and framing domestic beliefs and expectations, can transform the interests of the conflicting parties.
2 Meltem Ahıska, ‘Occidentalism: The Historical Fantasy of the Modern’, South Atlantic Quarterly 102, nos 2–3 (2003): 351–79.
3 Faruk Sen, ‘Earthquakes and Foreign Policy’ (opinion), Turkish Daily News, 18 September 1999.
4 Ilnur Cevik, ‘Ankara and Athens Must Listen to Their People’ (editorial), Turkish Daily News, 2 September 1999.
5 The analogy derives from Hikmet's poem ‘Davet’ (1945).
6 See Samuel P. Huntington, ‘The Clash of Civilizations?’, Foreign Affairs 72, no. 3 (1993): 42.
7 Nancy Bisaha, Creating East and West: Renaissance Humanists and the Ottoman Turks (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2004), 94.
8 Leon Dominian, ‘The Geographical Foundation of Turkey's World Relation’, Journal of American Oriental Society 36 (1916): 168–80.
9 A. Davutoğlu, Turkiye'nin Uluslararası Konumu [Strategic Depth: The International Position of Turkey] (Istanbul: Küre, 2001).
10 Ahmet Davutoğlu, ‘The Power of Turkey Does Not Use Is that of “Strategic Depth”’(interview), Turkish Daily News, 14 June 2001.
11 The Treaty of Sèvres was the peace treaty signed at Sèvres on 10 August 1920, between the Principal Allied Powers (British Empire, France, Italy and Japan), their associated powers (Armenia, Belgium, Greece, the Hedjaz, Poland, Portugal, Rumania, the Serb–Croat–Slovene State and Czecho-Slovakia) and Turkey (as authorised by the Imperial Ottoman Government). It laid down Turkey's (European and Asian) territorial frontiers (see articles 27–35) as illustrated by the following map:
In defining the territorial boundaries of Turkey, the Treaty established a special regime for the Straits, ceded territory to Greece (Smyrna district, article 65–83) and Armenia (articles 88–93) and provided for an independent Kurdistan (articles 62–64). Although the Treaty was signed by the Ottoman government and endorsed by Sultan Mehmed VI, it was not ratified by the Ottoman parliament and was rejected by Mustafa Kemal Pasha's Turkish National Movements. The Treaties of Peace 1919–1923, Vol. II (New York: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 1924).
12 As A.E. Montomery, ‘The Making of the Treaty of Sèvres of 10 August 1920’, Historical Journal 15, no. 4 (1972): 775–87, notes, this was largely due to Mustapha Kemal's triumphs and the conflicting interests between the Allies themselves (British–French rivalry, Italian pretensions and Greek aggrandisement).
13 In Strategic Depth Davutoğlu provides a theoretical framework for a multidimensional foreign policy and proposes a new Turkish geostrategy, which utilises its vast historical geostrategic position. Not only did Davutoğlu's viewpoint form the intellectual basis for the AKP's foreign policy, but when Erdoğan's chief foreign advisor he ensured it was implemented especially in relation to Turkey's Middle Eastern policy.
14 Dietrich Jung, ‘The Sèvres Syndrome: Turkish Foreign Policy and Its Historical Legacies’, in Oil and Water: Cooperative Security in the Persian Gulf, ed. Bjørn Møller (London: I.B. Tauris, 2001), 131–59.
15 Yusuf Kanli, ‘Our Oriental Style’, Turkish Daily News, 17 August 2005.
16 Gul Demir, ‘Sevres, the Turkish Government's Most Senior Nightmare’, Turkish Daily News, 10 August 1998.
17 Article 38 of the Treaty of Lausanne stipulated that the ‘Turkish Government under[took] to assure full and complete protection of life and liberty to all inhabitants of Turkey without distinction of birth, nationality, language, race or religion.’ Furthermore, article 39 reiterated that ‘[n]o restrictions shall be imposed on the free use by any Turkish national of any language in private intercourse, in commerce, religion, in the press, or in publications of any kind or at public meetings’. This section of the Treaty (Section 3, ‘Protection of Minorities’, articles 37–45) has been interpreted to apply only to the non-Muslim minorities of the time (i.e. Greek, Armenian and Jewish communities), and not to other Muslim ethnic groups such as the Kurds and the Alevis.
18 Pamuk made the statement during an interview with the Swiss newspaper Tages Anzeiger (6 February 2005). Fifty-five years earlier Nâzım Hikmet, in his poem ‘Evening Stroll’ (1950)—in Things I Didn't Know I Loved, Selected Poems of Nazim Hikmet, translated by Randy Blasing and Mutlu Konuk (New York: Persea Books, 1975)—encapsulated in a melacholic tone the guilt and anger of progressive Turks when he whispered, ‘The grocer Karabet's lights are on./This Armenian citizen has not forgiven/the slaughter of his father in the Kurdish mountains./But he loves you,/because you also won't forgive/those who blackened the name of the Turkish people.’
19 Specifically article 301 stipulates that: ‘1. Public denigration of Turkishness, the Republic or the Grand National Assembly of Turkey shall be punishable by imprisonment of between six months and three years; 2. Public denigration of the Government of the Republic of Turkey, the judicial institutions of the state, the military or security structures shall be punishable by imprisonment of between six months and two years; 3. In cases where denigration of Turkishness is committed by a Turkish citizen in another country the punishment shall be increased by one third; 4. Expressions of thought intended to criticize shall not constitute a crime.’ Amnesty International, ‘Turkey: Article 301 Is a Threat to Freedom of Expression and Must Be Repealed Now!’, public statement, AI Index: EUR 44/035/2005 (Public), News Service No: 324 (1 December 2005).
20 According to the MFA's website Turkey's main foreign policy issues include Cyprus, relations with the EU, terrorism, Armenian allegations, energy, water and the environment, the Turkish Straits, arms control and disarmament, the Turkish diaspora, human rights and humanitarian aid, illegal migration and refugees, human trafficking, combating drugs, organised crime and corruption (⟨http://www.disisleri.gov.tr/MFA/ForeignPolicy/MainIssues/⟩ (accessed 6 June 2006).
21 Kerem Öktem, ‘Incorporating the Time and Space of Ethnic “Other”: Nationalism and Space in Southeast Turkey in the Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries’, Nations and Nationalism 10, no. 4 (2004): 573–4.
22 Advocates of resolution 106, including Speaker Nancy Pelosi, had recruited 225 sponsors (more than the minimum 218 needed to assure passage) in the summer of 2007 but refrained from submitting due to Turkey's national elections. On 10 October, the Foreign Affairs Committee approved the bill (27–21 vote), but, following intensive lobbying from the US President and the Turkish government, it was withdrawn. Carl Hulse, ‘U.S. and Turkey Thwart Armenian Genocide Bill’, New York Times, 26 October 2007.
23 Falah Mustafa Bakir, ‘Kurds: Armenians Win, We Pay the Price’, Washington Post, 15 October 2007.
24 Gerald J. Libaridian, ‘The Past as a Prisoner, the Past as a Different Future’, Turkish Policy Quarterly 4, no. 4, (2005), ⟨http://www.esiweb.org/pdf/esi_turkey_tpq_id_45.pdf⟩.
25 One of the most notable activities was the academic conference Ottoman Armenians during the Decline of the Empire: Issues of Scientific Responsibility and Democracy (24–25 September 2005, Bilgi University). Banned twice, the controversial conference was co-organised by academics from Turkey's three leading higher education institutions, Bilgi, Bogaziçi and Sabanci Universities. Criticism of its initial banning saw five journalists charged under article 301 of Turkey's penal code for insulting the state. BBC News, ‘Scffles in Turkey “Insult” Trial’, 7 February 2006, ⟨http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/4688992.stm⟩ (accessed 21 November 2006).
26 On the basis of a MoU an independent legal analysis was prepared for the International Centre for Transitionary Justice on ‘The Applicability of the United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide to Events which Occurred during the Early Twentieth Century’ in 2003, which concluded that the Events (terminology of the TARC) included ‘all the elements of the crime of genocide as defined in the Convention’ (17).
27 Elie Wisel Foundation for Humanity, ‘Nobel Laureates Call for Tolerance, Contact and Cooperation between Turks and Armenians’, open letter, 9 April 2007.
28 At the UN recently, Turkey's Foreign Minister Ali Babacan reiterated Erdoğan's 2005 proposal for a joint commission of scholars to investigate the Events, whilst Armenia's Foreign Minister Vartan Oskanian, for his part, reiterated Armenia's request for the opening of its border gate with Turkey, which has been closed for more than a decade. ‘Babacan Tells Oskanian Turkey Open to Dialogue’, Today's Zaman, 4 October 2007. However, a few days later Armenia's Foreign Affairs Spokesman Vladimir Karapetyan denied that there was any ‘process of reconciliation’. ‘Impossible to Hinder a Process that Does Not Exist’, Panorama.am, 11 October 2007, ⟨http://www.panorama.am/en/politics/2007/10/11/agn/⟩ (accessed 30 October 2007).
29 M. Hakan Yavuz, ‘Turkey's Fault Lines and the Crisis of Kemalism’, Current History (January 2000): 33–38.
30 N. Göle, ‘The Quest for the Islamic Self within the Context of Modernity’, in Rethinking Modernity and National Identity in Turkey, ed. S. Bozdoğan and R. Kasada (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1997), 84.
31 Nurin Eren, Turkey Today—and Tomorrow: An Experiment in Westernization (London: Pall Mall, 1963), 249–51.
32 Olivier Roy, ‘Turkey—A World Apart, or Europe's New Frontier?’, in Turkey Today—a European Country? ed. O. Roy (London: Anthem, 2005), 11.
33 On the final page of the article, Lewis flags the term ‘clash of civilizations’, made infamous by Huntington forty year later; Bernard Lewis, ‘Islamic Revival in Turkey’, International Affairs 28, no.1 (1952): 38–48.
34 Socio-economic transformations in Turkey during the 1960s saw the re–emergence of a militant left, which the Kemalist establishment feared might coalesce with Kurdish and Islamist radical elements to mount a common front challenging the prevailing status quo. Heightened armed clashes between left and right militants, along with incompetent civilian governments, during the 1970s framed the ‘Years of Terror/Chaos’ as a precursor to the military intervention of September 1980. See Ahmet Samim, ‘The Tragedy of the Turkish Left’, New Left Review 1, no. 126 (1981): 60–85. Anxious to combat the left the nationalists forged a Turkish–Islamist Synthesis as an alliance of convenience that prevailed until the end of the Cold War. See Binnaz Toprak, ‘Religion as State Ideology in a Secular Setting: The Turkish–Islamic Synthesis’, in Aspects of Religion in Secular Turkey, ed. Malcolm Wagstaff (University of Durham, Center for Middle Eastern and Islamic Studies, 1990), 10–15; Ertugrul Kurcu, ‘Turkey: Insolvent Ideologies, Fractured State’, Middle East Report, no. 199 (1996): 2–7; for athe intellectual impact of Turkey's left between the wars see Kemal H. Karpat, ‘The Turkish Left’, Journal of Contemporary History 1, no. 2 (1966): 169–86.
35 Ümit Cizre Sakallioğlu, ‘Parameters and Strategies of Islam–State Interaction in Republican Turkey’, International Journal of Middle East Studies 28, no. 2 (1996): 231–51.
36 ‘European Parliament Resolution on EU–Turkey Relations’ (RE\68396EN.doc, 11 September 2007), 3.
37 Despite the military's concern that these amendments would further erode its role in protecting Turkey's secular system, the Grand National Assembly overwhelmingly approved legislation by 453 to 4. Other related constitutional amendments included the elimination of the state security courts—used to prosecute suspected insurgents and separatists—and removed military officers from various governmental panels that oversaw higher education and broadcasting; ‘Turkey's Military Loses its Budget Autonomy’, World Tribune, 13 May 2004.
38 Mehmet Ali Birand, ‘Brainstorming with Schoeder’, Turkish Daily News, 12 May 2006.
39 Cihan Tuğal, ‘NATO's Islamists’, New Left Review 44 (March–April 2007): 8–13.
40 See the BBC World Service poll, ‘Global Poll Slams Bush Leadership’, BBC News, 19 January 2005, ⟨http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/americas/4185205.stm⟩ (accessed 21 March 2006); the Pew Global Attitudes Project, ‘American Character Gets Mixed Reviews: US Image up Slightly, but Still Negative: 16-Nation Pew Global Attitudes Survey’, Washington, 23 June 2005; and Turkish Daily News, ⟨www.turkishdailynews.com.tr/poll⟩ (accessed 9 May 2006), which revealed that 79% disagreed with US policy on Iraq, whilst only 14.7% considered the United States Turkey's best friend (compared with the EU at 22.4%), with 66% believing that there was anti-Americanism in Turkey, whilst 52.1% feared a ‘clash of civilisations’.
41 See Ömer Taşpınar, ‘The Anatomy of Anti-Americanism in Turkey’, Brooking Institution, 16 November 2005.
42 Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI), ‘Turkey's Islamist Dailies Spread Anti-American, Antisemitic Incitement’, Special Dispatch Series 1147, 26 April 2006.
43 Ian O. Lesser, ‘Off Autopilot: The Future of Turkish–US Relations’, Turkish Policy Quarterly 4, no. 4 (2005), ⟨http://www.turkishpolicy.com/default.asp?show = winter_2005_Lesser⟩ (accessed 24 June 2006).
44 Gokhan Bacik and Bulent Aras, ‘Turkey's Inescapable Dilemma; America or Europe?’, Alternatives: Turkish Journal of International Relations 3, no. 1 (2004), 56–74.
45 Andrew Mango, ‘Turkey in the Middle East’, Journal of Contemporary History 3, no. 3 (1968): 225–36.
46 William Hale, ‘Turkey, the Middle East and the Gulf Crisis’, International Affairs 68, no. 4 (1992): 679–92.
47 See Ümit Enginsoy, ‘Expert Blasts AKP Gov't for “Anti-American’ Policies”‘, Turkish Daily News, 18 September 2006; and Semih Idi, ‘Turkish–US Dialogue of the Deaf Grows’, Turkish Daily News, 13 April 2006.
48 Gülnur Aybet and Meltem Müftüler-Bac, ‘Transformations in Security and Identity after the Cold War: Turkey's Problematic Relationship with Europe’, International Journal 55, no. 4 (2000): 567–82.
49 ‘Pour ou contre l'adhésion de la Turquie à l'Union européenne’ [For or against the accession of Turkey to the European Union], Le Monde, 9 November 2002.
50 In an interview on French TV, President Jacques Chirac, speaking in favour of Turkey's membership, argued that it was in Europe's ‘interest for Turkey … to lean toward Europe [… rather than] Asia’, as well as to consolidate the progress made in Turkey ‘in the areas of democracy, freedoms, human rights, sexual equality, religious freedom, the respect for minority rights’. ‘Interview with Jacques Chirac, President of the Republic, by Patrick Poivre D'Arvor’, TF1 - 8:00 Journal, 15 December 2004, ⟨http://www.elysee.fr/elysee/elysee.fr/anglais_archives/speeches_and_documents/2004/interview_with_mr_jacques_chirac_french_president_by_mr_patrick_poivre_d_arvor_tf1-800_journal-elysee_ palace.27965.html⟩ (accessed 18 June 2007).
51 See Thomas Diez, ‘Europe's Others and the Return of Geopolitics’, Cambridge Review of International Affairs 17, no. 2 (2004): 319–35; also Ziya Onis, ‘Turkey, Europe, and Paradoxes of Identity: Perspectives on the International Context of Democratization’, Mediterranean Quarterly 10, no. 3 (1999): 107–36.
52 A. Sözen, ‘The Role of the European Union as a Third Party in Resolution of External Conflicts: the Case of the Cyprus Problem’, paper presented at the 15th Annual Meeting of the International Association for Conflict Management (ICAM), City Park, UT, 8–12 June 2002, 5, ft. 1.
53 G.R. Copley, ‘The Turkish Schism Deepens’, Defence and Foreign Affairs Strategic Policy, nos 11–12 (2001): 12.
54 In 2001 the Institute for the Study of Diplomacy identified eight such key challenges confronting Ankara. These were: economic frailty, an ossified political elite, division over the military's domestic role, perception of Turkey's importance to the Western alliance, lack of foreign policy vision, lack of reform, regional tensions and the US-led ‘war on terror’. A.D. Jovovic, ‘A Turning Point for Turkey’, Schlesinger Working Group on Strategic Surprises, 2001, 1.
55 Chris Morris, The New Turkey: The Quiet Revolution on the edge of Europe (London: Granta Books, 2005), 6–7.
56 Commission of the European Communities, Turkey 2007 Progress Report, SEC(2007) 1436, {COM(2007) 663}, Brussels, 6 November 2007, 10–15.
57 Mike Rosen-Molina, ‘Turkey Pledges to Amend Controversial Insult Law after EU Criticism’, Jurist Legal News & Research, 6 November 2007.
58 See Nergis Canefe and Tanıl Bora, ‘The Intellectual Roots of Anti-European Sentiments in Turkish Politics: The Case of Radical Turkish Nationalism’, Turkish Studies 4, no. 1 (2003): 127–148.
59 German Chancellor Angela Merkel, who held the EU presidency in 2007, was emphatic on this issue. See Deutsche Welle World, ‘Merkel: Turkey's EU Bid Hinges on Resolving Cyprus Issue’, 5 November 2006, ⟨http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,2144,2195732,00.html⟩ and ‘Germany's EU Presidency Plans Marred by Turkey Dispute’, 6 November 2006, ⟨http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,2144,2226388,00.html⟩ (accessed 7 November 2007).
60 EU–Turkey Information Network ABHaber (EUNews), ‘Prof. Dr. Karluk: “The Cyprus Issue Had Become Precondition for Turkey to Get a Full Membership to the EU”’, 11 September 2007, ⟨http://www.abhaber.com/news_page.asp?id = 3589⟩ (12 October 2007).
61 Mehmet Ali Birand, ‘The Real Fight Will Be on Cyprus and Northern Iraq’, Turkish Daily News, 2 January 2004. In 2007 Birand saw the Cyprus problem (together with the Armenian issue) as forming one of the three obstacles preventing Turkey's access to Europe—the other two being the Kurdish problem and secularism versus Islamism. Mehmet Ali Birand, ‘Why Are We So Afraid to Change?’, Turkish Daily News, 14 August 2007.
62 Since the Turkish census had not included ethnicity as a denoted question, the actual numbers of Kurds in Turkey has become a contested political issue: state authorities tend to underestimate their numbers, whilst pro-Kurdish separatists tend to overestimate them. However, most independent accounts, such as the CIA World Factbook 2007 (<https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/tu.html#People > [accessed 1 November 2007]), place Turkey's Kurds at approximately 20% of the total population. In addition, both Martin Van Bruinessen (Agha, Shaikh and State: The Social and Political Structures of Kurdistan [London: Zed Press, 1992], 15) and David McDowall (‘The Kurds, a Nation Denied’, Minority Rights 1992, 12) estimated the Kurdish population in Turkey in 1975 and 1991, respectively, to be 19% of the total.
63 See Michael M. Gunter, The Kurds in Turkey: A Political Dilemma (Boulder, CO: Westview, 1990), and The Kurds and the Future of Turkey (New York: St Martin's Press, 1997); Jonathan Rugman, Atatόrk's Children: Turkey and the Kurds (New York: Cassell, 1996); Aliza Marcus, Blood and Belief: The PKK and the Kurdish Fight for Interdependence (New York: New York University, 2007); Ferhad Ibrahim and Gόlistan Gόrbey, eds, The Kurdish Conflict in Turkey: Obstacles and Chances for Peace and Democracy (New York: St Martin's Press, 2000); Christopher Houston, Islam, Kurds and the Turkish State (Oxford: Berg, 2001). For a broader regional perspective see also A. Manafy, The Kurdish Political Struggles in Iran, Iraq and Turkey: A Critical Analysis (Lanham, MD: University Press of America, 2005); Denise Natali, The Kurds and the State: Evolving National Identify in Iraq, Turkey and Iran (Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press, 2005).
64 See Philip Robins, ‘The Overlord State: Turkish Policy and the Kurdish Issue’, International Affairs 69, no. 4, (1993): 657–76.
65 See Kerem Oktem, ‘Return of the Turkish “State of Exception”’, Middle East Report Online, 3 June 2006, ⟨http://www.merip.org/mero/mero060306.html⟩ (accessed 5 June 2006).
66 See Bill Park, Turkey's Policy towards Northern Iraq: Problems and Perspectives (London: International Institute for Strategic Studies, 2005).
67 Ahıska, op. cit., 352.