Allies of a Kind: US-Turkish Relations since 2003 from the perspective of US think tanks

Harry Papasotiriou, Efstathios Koutsourakis, Vasileios Lianeris, Styliani Ziopoulou, Theodora Ziopoulou

The purpose of this paper is to examine the recent tribulations in US-Turkish relations as depicted in articles published by thirteen major US institutes chosen to cover a broad range of ideological orientations and /or relevant expertise. In the period from January 2003 to December 2011, which begins roughly with the formation of the Islamist Erdogan government in Turkey, these thirteen think-tanks published a total of 149 articles devoted exclusively on US-Turkish relations. There were twelve articles published in 2003, then relatively few in the next four years and an increasing number since 2008 peaking in 2011. Overall these articles suggest that the bilateral relations are more troubled than in the past, but that Turkey nonetheless remains a valuable US ally. Only one think-tank proposed some kind of diplomatic sanctions against Turkey, to punish Turkey’s Islamist Erdogan government for moving away from the West. The other twelve institutes promoted policy positions aimed at improving the recently somewhat troubled bilateral relations.

Introduction

Since 2003 US-Turkish relations have been troubled by important divergences in national interests and aspirations. Whereas in the Persian Gulf War of 1991 Turkey proved to be a reliable US ally against Iraq, in 2003 Turkey refused to allow US ground forces to be deployed on Turkish territory in order to open a second front in Iraq’s northern frontiers. More recently the Erdogan government endorsed positions favouring Hamas, Hezbollah and Iran. Moreover since 2009 Turkish relations with Israel have been marked by tensions. These developments are manifestations of a more independent Turkish foreign policy, less constrained than in the past by Turkey’s membership in the Western alliance.

The purpose of this paper is to examine these recent tribulations in US-Turkish relations through a content-analysis of 149 papers focused exclusively on these bilateral relations, which were published by the following thirteen US think-tanks:

American Enterprise Institute (AEI)

Brookings Institute

Cato

The Century Foundation

Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS)

Council on Foreign Relations

East-West Institute

Heritage Foundation

Hoover Institute

National Interest

RAND Corporation

Washington Institute

World Policy Institute

The content-analysis of the 149 papers focused on four questions:

1. What kinds of problems have disturbed US-Turkish relations and what were their causes?

2. Can the bilateral relations be improved and by what means?3. Does Turkey remain a valuable US ally and for what reasons?4. What were the policy proposals for US policy in Turkey?

Graph 1: Number of articles on US-Turkish relations

As is shown in Graph 1, after the publication of twelve articles in 2003, occasioned by the disagreement on the second front in Iraq, in 2004 there was only one article. Since 2005 the number of articles has been rising steadily, peaking with thirty-six articles in 2011, which demonstrates the growing salience of these bilateral relations for US policy think-tanks.

1. What kinds of problems have disturbed US-Turkish relations and what were their causes?

Regarding the 2003 bilateral divergence on the Iraqi second front, only two think-tanks (the conservative Heritage Foundation and CSIS) blamed the rise of the Islamist Erdogan government in Turkey in early 2003 for Ankara’s refusal to cooperate with the United States. Articles in other think tanks tended to blame either American unilateralism

or American disregard for Turkey’s own national interests especially in regard to the Kurdish issue.

US-Turkish relations deteriorated in 2007, when Ankara invited a Hamas leader to Turkey after Hamas’s election victory and control over Gaza. In 2010 Erdogan invited Hezbollah’s leader Nazrallah to Turkey and made openings towards Iran, while Turkey’s relations with Israel deteriorated sharply. These developments altered the US-Turkish relationship from a solid alliance to a more a la cart partnership.

In the years 2009 to 2011 there were 26 articles that blamed the rise of the Islamist Erdogan government for the growing turbulence in US-Turkish relations. Seven of these were published by the conservative Heritage Foundation, indicating disillusionment with Turkey in American conservative circles, which in previous decades tended strongly to support Ankara. The more liberal Brookings Institute by way of contrast did not blame the rise of Turkey’s political Islam, but rather factors such as that the United States did not care about Turkey’s national interests or that the two nations did not have the same threat perceptions in relation to Iran. The divergence of US and Turkish national interests is also emphasized by less ideological foreign policy think-tanks. Across the ideological and expertise spectrum American think-tanks apportioned some blame to the EU for not accepting Turkey as a member after granting her candidate status in 1999. In this view Turkey would have been more firmly anchored within the Atlantic Alliance, had she been accepted into the EU. Another factor for the bilateral turbulence mentioned by several think-tanks is the Gaullist-like new independence of Turkish foreign policy under Erdogan and his recent foreign minister Davutoglu.

2. Can the bilateral relations be improved and by what means?

There are 42 articles that answer this question affirmatively and none that answers it entirely in the negative. Of these 42 only four were published by the conservative-leaning Heritage Foundation, Hoover Institute and AEI. Two were published by the liberal-leaning Brookings. The remainder was published by less ideological think-tanks, though as many as thirteen were published by the Washington Institute alone.

The most frequent reasons mentioned for the expected improvement in bilateral relations is that the two sides share a common long-term vision in the Middle East (peaceful resolution of disputes, favouring democratization, shared perceptions of threats at least to some extent). Obama’s multilateral approach is also often regarded as apt to improve bilateral relations. Some experts also believe that Turkey will not gain much from her openings to Iran and will return to the Western fold in this respect.

3. Does Turkey remain a valuable US ally and for what reasons?

Every think-tank in this study views Turkey as a valuable ally. The most frequently cited reason is her geographical location and its resultant geopolitical weight in the Middle East and Russia’s southern periphery. Another reason often cited is Turkey’s potential contribution to an improvement in US relations with the Muslim world in general. Turkey’s

value as a Western role model for the Muslim world on the other hand has recently been questioned. Some articles emphasize Turkey’s contributions to the war on terror, the stability of Iraq, NATO’s endevours in Afghanistan and Turkey’s part in NATO’s anti-ballistic defence shield. Others emphasize Turkey’s growing importance in the global economy and her role as an energy corridor.

4. What were the policy proposals for US policy in Turkey?

Only the Heritage Foundation has endorsed a US policy of isolating the Erdogan government for straying from the Western line on Hamas, Iran and Hezbollah. Even Heritage nonetheless supports a long-term improvement in bilateral relations and sees the proposed limited diplomatic sanctions as efforts to steer a troublesome ally back into line.

The most frequently cited policy proposal for improving bilateral relations is that the United States should promote Turkey’s accession to the EU. Second most frequently cited is the proposal that the United States should firmly support Turkey in her struggle against the PKK, the armed separatist campaign of which has shown a limited revival in recent years. Third, many articles support a US policy focused on Turkey and its own needs, rather than on American priorities with Turkey seen as a mere adjunct to American initiatives. This line of reasoning is more likely to be put forth by think-tanks that also blamed US unilateralism under Bush for the recent tribulations in bilateral relations and maintained that the Bush administration did not take adequately into account Turkey’s own national interests. A related position is the notion that the United States should respect Turkey’s new foreign policy initiatives under the influence of the new foreign minister Davutoglu. A number of articles also propose a growth in bilateral economic ties, while ten articles suggest that the United States should not officially recognize the Armenian genocide.

For access to the data bases on which this paper is based, please go to:

http://www.keam.gr/?p=245

Appendix: An overview of the positions of the US think-tanks on US-Turkish relations from 2001 to 2011

American Enterprise Institute

According to this institute, Turkey has changed its policy and now pays more attention to the Middle East. The increase of Islamization that has come from Erdogan’s administration has created radical inclinations in Turkey. Now its policy is more aligned with Iran, Syria and Sudan. This institute sees as an inexcusable mistake the fact that the Osama administration allowed Erdogan’s Islamist tendencies to menace the national security and the interests of United States in that region.

Brookings Institution

Brookings Institution has to a great extend emphasized Turkish-American relations. It organizes annually, in cooperation with Turkish institutions like Sabanci, conferences about Turkish foreign policy with important Turkish policy makers such as the Turkish minister of foreign affairs Ahmet Davutoglou and the Turkish President Abdullah Gul. Brookings is also associated with many Turkish specialists on the field of international relations. According to Brookings authors the main reason for deteriorations in Turkish-American relations is not the Islamization of Turkish foreign policy but the unilateralism of American foreign policy during George W. Bush administration. Turkey is a vital ally for the US and for this reason Washington must cooperate. The United States should apply a Turkey policy that integrates the various US interests converging on its pivotal geography, and avoids the crisis-driven, ad hoc approach that over time will hamper reliable cooperation. In many articles Brookings suggests that American policy makers support Turkish membership in the EU and assist Turkish armed forces against the PKK. Moreover some articles (mainly written by Turkish authors) support Turkish positions on Cyprus and the Armenian genocide issue.

CATO Institute

CATO Institute predicts further deterioration in Turkish-American relations due to the “Islamic” Turkish government and the different interests on important issues like the Iraq war and Iran’s nuclear program. CATO also underlines that the deterioration in Turkish-Israeli

relations would consequently affect Turkish-American relations. However Turkey remains a valuable US ally because of the increasing power of the former as well as its increasing influence in the Islamic world.

Council on Foreign Relations

This Institute considers the US-Turkish relationship very important, especially in recent years because of the emerging schism between the West and the Islamic world. The U.S. invasion on Iraq and the possible repercussions for Turkey (Kurdish issue) and other differences such as Cyprus, Syria, Iran, Israel and Hamas have resulted in a deterioration of the relations of the two countries. To repair this important alliance, the Institute proposes that Washington establish and lead a regular trilateral dialogue on Kurdish issues with the Turks and legitimate representatives of the Iraqi Kurds and play a leading role in the long-term resolution of the Cyprus issue. Moreover the Institute proposes that Washington become more active in supporting the integration of Turkey into the EU and finally that the United States should create a Committee of cooperation between the two countries that will meet on a biennial basis and discuss issues of mutual interest. The U.S. continues to regard Turkey as an important partner especially after Obama's election. Additionally, the Institute believes that a stable and prosperous Turkey is an "anchor" for the entire region from the Balkans to the Middle East, Caucasus and Central Asia.

Center of Strategic and International Studies (CSIS)

This institute believes that US-Turkish relations are vital to U.S. national interests but also for peace and stability in the world. For more than half a century, a healthy relationship with Turkey is crucial to promote U.S. interests in Eurasia and the Middle East and create new strategic opportunities for the United States and other NATO allies. Indisputably, Obama’s election has improved the relations between the two countries that had deteriorated during the war in Iraq. Turkey still continues to be an important ally for the U.S. and plays an important role in U.S. strategy in the Middle East and has collaborated with them on many regional issues, although their interests do not converge as much as earlier. The U.S. and Turkey cooperate in areas such as sharing intelligence regarding Turkey’s fight against ethnic Kurdish insurgents, against al-Qaeda, and regarding various regional mediation efforts (Israelis and Syrians and Israelis and Palestinians). Although Turkey remains a member of the Western security bloc, it pursued a more autonomous policy in Central Asia, the Caucasus and Iran. Although this has caused some concern in the U.S., Turkey remains a reliable ally as a stable, secular state with a dominant Muslim population, integrated into the global economy. The key to continue the good relations between the two states is dialogue and balance between policy objectives.

East West Institute

The East West Institute emphasizes the positive role that trade and stronger economic relations in general could have towards a US-Turkey rapprochement. In order to normalize relations between the two countries, Washington is strongly encouraged to increase investments and trade with Turkey. Furthermore, the growing economic influence of Turkey in the region would help the US to develop economic relations with Arab countries.

Heritage Foundation

According to the Heritage Foundation, Turkish foreign policy has changed due to the Justice and Development Party government (AKP). The “Islamic” AKP is leading Turkey toward the Muslim Word and at the same time is distancing Turkey from the West. Washington should not accept Turkey’s current strategic drift. It must take all the necessary measures (even sanctions) in order to deter further deterioration in Turkish-American relations.

Hoover Institute

This Institute claims that Turkey continues to have a great strategic importance for the United States and Europe, especially at this time when the chasm between the West and the Islamic world is emerging as the biggest foreign policy challenge. The Middle East is a vital region for the American interests and Turkey can play an effective role to this. Despite the dramatic deterioration in the relations between the two states in 2003, when the Turkish parliament rejected the U.S. request for the transportation of troops and military equipment from Turkey to Iraq, Obama's election has created a positive climate and restoration efforts in the relationship of the two countries. Regarding the restoration of the relationship between the two countries, the Institute proposed the following: First, Washington has to convince the skeptics in Europe to adopt a more positive approach towards Turkey. The delay of Turkey's accession to the EU may damage the security of Europe. And secondly, Washington has to take a leading role in trying to resolve the Cyprus issue, which threatens to create further obstacles to Turkish EU membership. The U.S. should do everything it can to ensure that Turkey remains aligned to the West. Finally, the Institute believes that if the United States recognizes the Armenian genocide, this could cause a deterioration in relations between the two countries.

The Century Foundation

This institute encounters positively Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan’s policy, which has turned Turkey into a more open and dynamic country, both socially and economically. Turkey is now in a position to influence the Middle East for the first time since the Ottoman Empire. The continuation of Turkey's progress is important for the United States as potential instability in Turkey may affect the Middle East and especially Iraq. The Institute considers Turkey as a very important country because it can provide significant military assistance to Afghanistan, more than any other American ally in terms of combat forces. Regarding Iraq, differences of the past should be minimized through dialogue. Both countries are aiming to a united and stable Iraq. The benefits of the U.S. and Turkey are a two-way street which creates more cooperation. According to the Institute President Obama should try to convince Europeans to

precede with the negotiations regarding the conditions of Turkey's accession to the European Union and to help the two Cypriot communities to reach an agreement on the unification of the island in order to eliminate a major obstacle to Turkish membership. The U.S. should also help, financially and politically, to build a pipeline from Central Asia to Europe that Turkey wants, in order to further reduce Europe's dependence on Russia.

The National Interest

Although the relations between the two countries have deteriorated because of different interests in Iraq, Iran and Gaza, the U.S. and Turkey continue to share important common interests and to cooperate closely in Iraq, Afghanistan, NATO and on energy issues. Although Turkey remains in NATO, the change of its foreign policy and the fact that it has become a more independent political actor creates uncertainty on whether it is a reliable ally, without this meaning that it is now an adversary. The reason for this change is that Turkey has upgraded its status to a major regional power in the region. The old dependence on the West no longer persists to the same degree. Turkey is now more powerful. The U.S. has been slow in realizing that Turkey's interests have changed. Russia is no longer Turkey’s enemy, but a valuable economic partner. The policy that the US should follow, especially on important issues, is to adjust their relation according to the new reality so they can respond to a Turkey whose interests are different from its own. This institute believes that a country can be a reliable NATO ally and the same time maintain good relations with Russia and the Muslim world.

The Rand Corporation

The Rand Corporation claims that the United States should consider Turkey as a very important strategic ally. However, things have changed in relation with the past. During the Cold War, Turkey constituted an obstacle against the expansion of the Soviet Union’s influence. Today, the strategic meaning of Turkey is its capacity to act as a connective tie with the Muslim world and to be used as a stabilizing power in Middle East and Central Asia, two sectors with growing strategic meaning for the United States. Turkish’s cooperation with United States is very important for the American interests. Despite the aggravation (mainly after 2003) in the relations of the two countries, Rand Coorporation considers that there exist signs of willingness from both parts to improve their relations and for this reason they pay attention to the development of a new strategic agenda that will concern various subjects like the democratization of the Middle East, the incorporation of Turkey in the European Union, the resolution of the Cyprus issue, the settlement of the disputes between Turkey and Greece concerning the Aegean Sea etc. In the future, Turkey will probably be less predictable. The modernization of Turkish society will constitute a big challenge for US policies. Possibly Turkey will be preoccupied more with the Middle East, the Kurdish issue,

the nuclear ambitions of Iran and the repercussion of the Lebanon crisis. At the same time the divergent interests between Turkey and the United States are probably going to increase.

Washington Institute

The Washington Institute, with an amount of articles in newspapers and magazines and a number of transcripts of various events (scientific sessions, seminars, interviews etc), tries to give us the whole image of Turkish-American relations from 2003 to 2011. Both the downgrading of relations between the two countries and the turn of Turkey’s interest in the Muslim World are obvious through the majority of the articles. The main arguments for the turbulence in these bilateral relations are: The Islamism of Turkish foreign policy and the rise of anti-Americanism (especially in 2009-2010). On the other hand, policies are being proposed in the direction of normalizing Turkish-American relations in order that Turkey becomes again a strong and trusted ally to the West. The most frequently mentioned proposals are the promotion of common Turkish and U.S. financial and political interests as an outcome of Iraq’s and Middle East’s stabilization, the adoption of an anti-Kurdish strategic attitude by the Americans and the promotion of Turkey’s European integration.

World Policy Institute

According to the World Policy Institute, the disappointment caused by the lack of progress in the Turkish accession process in the EU, in addition to the US stance toward Turkey’s security interests has altered Ankara’s foreign policy. The “Islamic” Justice and Development Party developed a more dynamic and flexible foreign policy which will no longer necessarily coincide with Washington’s strategies. In that context, Ankara chose to develop strong ties with the Muslim world instead of West.