The geographical location of Turkey is at the crossroads of many different regions as well as cultures in has significantly determined the foreign policy dynamics regarding the country. The Turkish has consistently followed a path of westernization since its foundation in 1923. Turkey has also made attempts to improve bilateral relations with its neighbor such as Georgia, Armenia, and Azerbaijan. Turkey has complied with most of the European Union conditions necessary to facilitate its accession process. Furthermore, the issue of the Zurich Protocol concerning the treatment of Armenians by the CUP leaders has not been resolved to date. The aforementioned factors have significantly shaped the foreign policy of Turkey.
Since its foundation in the 1920s, Turkey’s foreign policy focused on security. Therefore, the foreign policies developed were meant to strengthen the regime as well as reinforce reforms. However, the Cold War marked a turning point in Turkey’s foreign policy as it was subjected to several structural changes. Moreover, Turgut Ozal’s new government in the 1980s began to put economic interests in the forefront regarding its foreign policy decisions. The foreign policies saw Turkey begin to strengthen its relations with neighbors. Therefore, Ozal’s foreign policy came to be known as the instrument of economic development. Ismayil Cem further improved Turkey’s relationship with Greece after a long time of strained relations. There has been a significant shift in the foreign policy of Turkey since the AKP came to power in 2002. Since then, Europeanization and democratization have been at the center of the Turkish foreign policy. The foreign policy has given great emphasis to the development of relations with the European Union. Consequently, the objective of strengthening EU relations in the Foreign policy gave way to a revisionist and multifaceted Turkish foreign policy. Turkey’s minister for foreign affairs, Davutoglu, has played a central role in shaping the country’s foreign policy. His neo-Ottoman doctrine has led to positive strides towards achieving the country’s goal of “zero problem with neighbors”. He has ensured that Turkey approaches every foreign issue with diplomacy. This has led to improved bilateral relations between Turkey and its neighbors.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Moreover, Turkey needed to manifest itself everywhere in the world because of its economic interests. As such, Turkey had to play an active role in the European and international organizations as well as regional organizations, in order to achieve its economic goals (Alexander, 2006, 953). Much of Turkey’s foreign policy framework has significantly focused on Middle East since its foundation. Turkey plays a crucial role in responding to political crises involving its Middle Eastern neighbors. Therefore, Turkey has made significant progress regarding improving relations with Iraq, Iran and Syria. Turkey’s relations with Iran have been boosted through energy collaboration between the two countries. The energy collaboration not only involves purchase and transportation of Iranian natural gas through Turkey but also development of Iranian hydrocarbon fields by Turkish companies. The relationship between Turkey and Iraq has significantly improved after the Turkish Government, under APK, recognized the Kurdistan Regional Government as a federal unit in Iraq. Moreover, the Turkish consulate has been opened in Erbil to promote the relations between the two countries.
The relations between Turkey and Syria have also improved and they were cemented by Turkey’s mediation role between Syria and Israel in 2008. As a result, political and economic cooperation between the two countries has significantly improved. For instance, the two countries have reciprocally lifted tourist visa requirements. Regarding its foreign relations with Israel, Turkey emerged the first Muslim country to recognize Israel. Therefore, Israel has been Turkey’s major supplier of arms.
In conclusion, Turkey’s foreign policy has undergone significant improvements since it was founded in the 1920. The subsequent administrations have progressively shaped Turkey’s foreign policy. The individuals who have contributed significantly include Ozal, Cem and Davutoglu. The current administration has put in place effective measures necessary to build and maintain relations with its neighbors. The improved bilateral relations have promoted economic development through trade and increased foreign direct investments.
The Caucasus region underwent serious challenges after the disintegration of the USSR and the subsequent end of the Cold War. As a result of the end of the Soviet hegemony, new governments in the Caucasus were formed including Turkey, Azerbaijan, Georgia, and Armenia. The period saw the region undergo a period of unstable political atmosphere. This was brought about by the influences from outside forces, lack of a mature political culture as well as the hardship associated with the democratization process. However, the collapse of the Soviet Union is considered to have provided Turkey, Georgia and Azerbaijan an opportunity to strengthen their relations given their mutual needs and interests in the energy, security, commerce and transportation sectors. The most significant foreign policy issue regarding the three countries revolves around the recognition of their sovereignty, territorial integrity and independence by the neighboring states. Therefore, the collaboration between the three countries is aimed at improving their commercial, economic and military ties. Because of the geographical and political affinities between Turkey, Georgia and Azerbaijan, they have come together to the policies and projects in the security, energy, commerce and transportation sectors (Rovshan, 2015, 86).
The relationship between Turkey and Azerbaijan has been more emphasized given the emphasis on their motto “one nation with two states”. Georgia’s Black Sea coast has been considered by the three countries as a crucial resource that can be shared mutually. The mutual objective of overcoming a geopolitical isolation of the Caucasus has been the main drive of their multidimensional cooperation framework (Zaur & Celia, 2013, 189-194). Therefore, the three countries view each other as strategic partners who should work together to ensure their independence both politically and economically. The common ground for the foreign policies developed by Turkey, Georgia and Azerbaijan was to balance them with the West (Vahram, 2014, 116). However, Turkey’s relationship with Azerbaijan is apparently under threat as a result of Turkey’s efforts to build relations with Armenia. Armenia is Turkey’s greatest enemy after the two countries fought leading to huge losses. It is argued that almost one fifth of Azerbaijan’s soil was annexed by Armenia. The conflict between Azerbaijan and Armenia has led to poor bilateral relations between the two countries.
The three countries have implemented development projects together because the success of their relations with western allies depended primarily on the success of their projects. The trilateral relationship between the countries has attained strategic dimensions since 1991. However, the relationship between the three countries is facing threat from Turkey-Armenian normalization. While Azerbaijan is against Turkey’s relations with Armenia, Georgia has compelled Turkey to consider its relations with Armenia. Therefore, Turkey is facing a dilemma as to the appropriate decision to make. Therefore, the Turkey-Armenian issue is a major threat to the healthy trilateral relations of the three states. The conflict between Iran and Azerbaijan regarding the Araz seabed in the Caspian Sea created security concerns in the region. Moreover, Iran’s air jets violated Azerbaijan’s airspace. Azerbaijan termed the act as a provocation on the part of Iran. In response, the Turkish Chief of General Staff paid Azerbaijan an official visit in a bid to resolve the imminent violence. This was followed by a demonstration by the aerobic demonstration team of the Turkish Air Force which was seen by an estimated one million spectators. This cemented the bilateral alliance between Turkey and Azerbaijan despite other concerns. Moreover, the trilateral business forums between the three states have significantly shaped the Turkish foreign policy.
In conclusion, the trilateral relationship between the three countries is strategic because it works effectively to secure their collective interests. The developments realized by the countries are attributed to the mutual relations that they share in terms of infrastructure development and trade. The relative political stability enjoyed in the region is grounded on the spirit of collaboration between the three countries.
Turkey considered membership to the European Union as an opportunity for westernization. Furthermore, it considered that if Greece alone was to be a member of the EU, it would be to their detriment. Therefore, Turkey applied for EU membership after which ten negotiations were held before signing the Ankara Agreement between Turkey and EU in 1963. The agreement comprised three stages: preparatory period, transition period and the final period. However, the problem of democracy and human rights became a serious impediment to Turkey admission to EU membership.
The westernization of the Turkey reached its peak in 2005 following the opening of European Union membership accession negotiations. The Turkish foreign policy has undergone a major shift since the AKP came to power in 2002. The shift has been towards Europeanization and democratization of the country’s foreign policy. The foreign policy gave great emphasis to the development of relations with the European Union.
There are various positive steps that have been made by Turkey towards realizing its membership to the EU. Several changes were made in the constitution regarding freedoms and rights as well as abolition of the death penalty. The country has also achieved a higher IMF grading for attaining a single digit inflation as well as increase in foreign direct investments in the country. Its will to solve the Cyprus issue and its refusal to allow US troops to use Turkish soil to invade Iraq saw Turkey coming closer to the EU (Bradley, n.d, 250).
Turkey has received reports concerning the official screening of twenty three chapters. There are currently 22 technical opening benchmarks in 8 chapters while 47 closing benchmarks exist in 13 chapters. Moreover, the screening reports belonging to nine chapters are still in the custody of the Council while one is still held at the Commission. No opening benchmark has been envisaged regarding the chapters of Energy and Finance, Free Movement of Workers, and Budgetary and Provisions. Moreover, some of the chapters are still being blocked by other European Union member states.
There has been a slowdown of Turkey’s EU accession process due to several reasons. One of the most significant set-back is the failure of the EU member states to develop a common position regarding Turkey’s application for EU membership. This has given rise to a number of uncertainties including the problem regarding how the Turks would settle in other EU states upon being granted freedom of movement. Moreover, the identity crisis following the rejection of the European constitution in the European Union, and France’s and Germany’s negative stance towards the membership of Turkey have also contributed to the stalling of the accession process. Turkey’s is also to blame for the delay due to its refusal to open its ports to Cyprus.
In conclusion, it is demonstrable that the uncertainties surrounding Turkey’s admission to the EU have contributed to the slowdown in the accession process. The EU member states have not been able to define what EU should ultimately be. Despite of the challenges facing Turkey’s journey to the EU, a solution may be found because Turkey is potentially central the future of the EU. Furthermore, Turkey has the responsibility of fulfilling all the conditions necessary for EU membership including opening its ports to Cyprus.
The center of the Zurich Protocol is the strained relationship between Turkey and Armenia. The greatest challenge facing the normalization process is arguably the problem of presenting the protocols to the parliament. Moreover, there are psychological barriers that exist between the two societies which are hard to overcome. The normalization process has been criticized by both countries. This has led to the opposition of the implementation of the protocol from the two countries. The societies have also viewed the matter from a nationalist perspective making the ratification of the protocols challenging.
Another argument is that the current administration led by Erdogan has impeded the realization of the purpose of the protocols by linking the normalization process to the Karabagh issue (Bulent & Pinar, 2011, 60). The Karabagh issue is a problem currently haunting the relations between Azerbaijan and Armenia because Azerbaijan considers Armenia’s presence in Karabagh as an occupation. Moreover, the opposition parties in Turkey are against the normalization process and the Turkey’s border with Armenia is still closed.
The problem was further aggravated by the Turkish problematic policy in accounting for the events following the trial and conviction of the CUP leaders by the Ottoman military tribunals (Gerard, 2013, 57). The CUP leaders were tried and convicted for their treatment of the Armenians during the First World War. It is also widely argued that what was done to the Armenians by the CUP leaders amounted to genocide. Therefore, the reluctance of the Turkish government to address the historical treatment of the Armenians objectively is due to geopolitical considerations. For instance, the relationship between Turkey and Azerbaijan are partly to blame. This is because Azerbaijan is against Turkey’s normalization of relations with Armenia.
Turkey’s refusal to allow Iran to mediate between the two countries also served to delay the normalization process. The Armenian diaspora have also been opposed to the efforts geared towards normalizing the relations between Armenia and Turkey. Failure of Turkey’s closest allies like Azerbaijan to contribute positively towards the normalization process is observed to be a reason for the delay in ratification of the protocols. Moreover, Azerbaijan’s opposition is against the improvement of the relations between Turkey and Armenia. On an otherwise strange twist, Azerbaijan hopes that the delay of the process may perhaps help in solving the Kabaragh conflict.
The normalization process between Turkey and Armenia has been marred by challenges that have plagued the two countries. The two countries are responsible for the delays in the normalization process. The societies of the two countries are apparently not ready to bury the hatchet and forge ahead. Therefore, the whole process has been affected by the geopolitical interest existing in the region.
In conclusion, the Turkish foreign policy has improved since the entry of APK into power. Many constitutional reforms have been made in order to enhance democracy. Europeanization and democratization have been the center of the reforms. Turkey’s efforts to be admitted into EU membership have inspired several constitutional changes as well as economic and political reforms in the country. However, various factors have slowed down Turkey accession process to the EU. The trilateral relations between Turkey, Azerbaijan and Georgia have promoted economic development and political stability in the region due to the mutual collaboration in energy, security, transportation, and commerce sectors. However, the relations between Armenia and Turkey have not been normalized due to the reluctance of the latter’s government to facilitate ratification of the Zurich protocols.
References
Bulent, A., Pinar, A. (2011). “The relations between Turkey and the Caucasus”, Perceptions , 16(3), 53-68
Gerard, J. (2013). “Erdogan and his Armenian problem”, Turkish Policy Quarterly , 12(1); 43-63
Bradley, A., Nurray, V.( n.d). Debates in international relations . New York. Longman.
Rovshan, I.(2015). “Turkish-Azerbaijani energy relations: significant leverage in the implementation of the foreign policy interests of both countries”, Insight Turkey , 17(2), 83-100
Zaur, S., Celia, D. (2013). “The Turkey-Armenia-Azerbaijan triangle: the unexpected outcomes of the Zurich Protocols” Perceptions , 18(1), 185-206
Alexander, M. (2006). “The strategic depth doctrine of Turkish foreign policy”, Middle Eastern Studies , 42(6), 945-964
Vahram, T. (2014). “Cooperation paradigms in the South Caucasus”. Etudes Armeniennes Contemporaines , 4(2014), 103-123
