Trump-Erdoğan, the Bahçeli-TRC alliance, military coups, and the US

The Erdoğan-Trump meeting seems poised to mortgage Turkey's near future, from the economy to foreign policy, defense, and geopolitics. Before these talks took place, it is worth recalling Devlet Bahçeli's proposal for a Turkey-Russia-China (TRC) alliance against US-Israeli cooperation. This proposal suggests a massive change in course for foreign policy, defense, and the economy. Since the Second World War, whenever Turkey has attempted to deviate from the path set by the US, it has faced military coups. Last week, we promised to write about the relationship between military coups in Turkey and changes in economic direction. Now, let us connect these three issues. 

TRUMP-ERDOĞAN, LEGITIMACY, AND RUSSIA

We do not have the full details of the talks. We do not know what promises were made regarding rare earth elements. The Halki Seminary is a very sensitive issue... It is not my place to judge, but according to diplomatic friends, it would create a major loophole in the Treaty of Lausanne and could eventually lead to a Patriarchate similar to the Vatican. 

 I am setting aside issues such as aircraft purchases, defense agreements, what we should do in Syria, and the Halkbank case.  In my opinion, two fundamental issues are of vital importance: energy agreements and the question of legitimacy.

Purchasing liquefied natural gas from the US. From what I understand from the writings of energy expert friends, diversifying natural gas supplier countries is viewed positively. However, they cannot yet make an assessment as they lack information regarding its economic efficiency. Let us briefly look at the shares of countries in Turkey's natural gas imports: Russia 41 percent, Azerbaijan 22 percent, Iran 14 percent, the US 11 percent, and Algeria 10 percent.

Trump's demand that Turkey stop buying oil from Russia in exchange for cooperation... Dependence on Russia for oil imports is not something that can be easily reduced. Furthermore, in the 2023 elections, Putin provided Turkey with oil at half the global price and on credit, strengthening Erdoğan's hand in the elections.  The shares of countries in our oil imports are as follows: Russia 67 percent, Iraq 10 percent, Kazakhstan 6 percent, Saudi Arabia 4 percent... With this import composition, "I can lift US sanctions on the defense industry and the F-35, but do not buy oil from Russia" if we evaluate this statement together, Trump may not fulfill the promises he made to Erdoğan or he may extract more concessions from Turkey.

The biggest issue in these negotiations is,  legitimization... Ambassador Tom Barrack explained it by rubbing it in our faces. "Trump is a very smart man. There is democracy in Turkey, but there is also autocracy. What Erdoğan needs is legitimacy. Trump can give him that."

 Following this statement, while Trump described the 2020 election he lost as rigged, he looked at Erdoğan and said "He knows rigged elections better than anyone" he used the expression. Doesn't this imply that the elections Erdoğan won and the democracy in Turkey are illegitimate? 

There is an expression I have used frequently since the 2017 referendum. Therefore, I can repeat it with peace of mind. Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu legitimized all the illegitimacies of the AKP government. He acted like a figurehead of the Counter-Revolution. The 2017 referendum and Erdoğan's candidacy for a third term are examples of this. Now that Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu is gone, it seems the job of legitimization has been left to US President Trump. The legitimacy of a government comes from honest and fair elections.

What have we lost and what will we lose in exchange for this legitimacy? We don't know yet, but we can make predictions. If the job of legitimization has been left to the US President, who sits on the throne of imperialism, it means greater unpleasantness is on the way in the realms of law and freedoms. The exploitation mechanisms in the economy and the surrender of our foreign policy and defense geopolitics are another price to pay...

WHAT WILL HAPPEN TO BAHÇELİ'S TRC ALLIANCE?

Following these talks with the US, a vital question now arises. How should we evaluate Devlet Bahçeli's proposal for a Turkey-Russia-China (TRC) alliance? Bahçeli had proposed the TRC alliance following Israel's attack on Qatar—which was carried out with US approval—despite Turkey being under the protection of the US.

Bahçeli softened his alliance proposal  with a statement he made to Türkgün newspaper. "It would be more appropriate for it to be institutionalized around civilian and economic pillars that are not military in nature and do not conflict with NATO obligations... If the current state of chaos in the field of international security continues, it may be possible to support this union with elements that will contribute to peace and stability, including its security dimension, and this may inevitably come to the agenda. It would be accurate to read our proposal not as a step aimed at completely replacing Turkey's existing security architecture (NATO), but as a strategic framework aimed at producing an additional vector of influence for a multipolar system."

CHANGES IN COURSE AND THE 1960-1971-1980 COUPS (1)

I do not think that the process of changing alliances is an easy task. When I look at our recent history, I see that whenever we have attempted to step outside the role assigned to Turkey by the US in the economy, foreign policy, and defense, we have faced military coups after a certain period.

After the Second World War, the role assigned to Turkey by imperialism in the economy was to abandon industrialization based on its own resources, to turn toward agriculture and agricultural product industries and assembly industries, and to prioritize highways over railways. Heavy industry, aircraft production, and tank and engine production were to be abandoned. Indeed, by joining the Marshall Plan, Turkey abandoned its 3rd Industrial Plan based on its own resources in 1947 and, in line with IMF and World Bank reports, became integrated into US imperialism before it could complete its industrialization. The same integration also took place in the fields of foreign policy and defense with the Truman Doctrine and NATO membership. 

Let us briefly look at the military coups of 1960, 1971, and 1980 and the economic reasons behind them.

MAY 27, 1960: Adnan Menderes, an advocate and implementer of American policies, declared in 1958 that he would not pay his debts (a moratorium) due to an unplanned economic model and excessive foreign borrowing. The American economist Thornburg, who ensured that Turkey abandoned its planned development model in 1947 and fell into the lap of the US, suggested in 1958 that the US provide more financial aid to Turkey to prevent it from drawing closer to the Soviets. However, although the US government had ended the Marshall Plan aid to Europe, it had extended the aid period for Turkey and was no longer willing to provide new loans due to excessive borrowing. Just at this time, the Soviet Union offered Turkey a loan with a 20-year grace period to build new industrial investments and renovate old ones.  Independent of this offer, the Şişe Cam company made credit and technical agreements with Soviet companies in 1957 to build a glass factory, and Sümerbank did the same in 1958 for a textile factory. In 1960, Menderes decided to visit the Soviet Union. None of this proves that the US was behind the 1960 coup. But it does show that the US had written Menderes off. I believe the US never doubted the Turkish military. (Except for the 10 years following the 1990 First Gulf War period.) Let us recall that between 1947 and 1965, 45 military agreements were signed between the Turkish Armed Forces and the US without the knowledge of the parliament or the government. The 1960 coup had blocked economic rapprochement with Russia. 

MARCH 12, 1971:Süleyman Demirel, who was presented as pro-American and even nicknamed 'Morrison Süleyman' when he entered politics because he had worked as an engineer for the US engineering firm Morrison Knudsen in 1962, pursued right-wing politics but, along with Bülent Ecevit, became one of the prime ministers who angered America the most and was subjected to military intervention twice. During Süleyman Demirel's premiership, in cooperation with the Soviet Union, Petkim was established in 1965 and the Seydişehir Aluminum facilities in 1969. These facilities were a significant act of defiance following the US warning to Turkey in 1947 not to build its own heavy industry factories. The US,  prevented foreign financial circles from providing loans to Turkey for the Keban Dam. Turkey, again at the insistence of Prime Minister Süleyman Demirel, started the Keban Dam and the GAP project without finding foreign loans, at the cost of creating inflation. The US attempted to impose a ban on poppy cultivation in Turkey. Süleyman Demirel did not implement it. This ban was implemented by the Nihat Erim government following the March 12 Memorandum.

In addition to these, the winds of the left blowing across the world in 1968 also affected Turkey. The movement, which gathered great support among the young generation, was naturally met with sympathy among young officers as well.  Following intelligence that a leftist coup was being prepared outside the military chain of command on March 9, the US took necessary precautions, and the March 12 Memorandum followed immediately. Economic rapprochement with Russia was once again thwarted.

SEPTEMBER 12, 1980: In 1974, Bülent Ecevit discarded the military agreements made with the US. He launched a military operation against the genocide Turks were facing in Cyprus. An arms embargo was imposed on Turkey. With the oil shock that followed immediately, Turkey entered a balance of payments crisis. Ecevit, in response to the US,  lifted the ban on poppy cultivation. Ecevit fell from power, and Demirel became Prime Minister again. The US did not lift the arms embargo, and Demirel closed all American bases in Turkey. By 1978, Ecevit was back in the Prime Minister's seat. Turkey created the 4th Five-Year Development Plan. The plan envisioned embarking on heavy industrial investments led by the state using its own resources, in line with the Atatürk principles that Turkey had abandoned in 1947. Turkey was going to abandon the economic model under the yoke of imperialism. This stirred up the US, the World Bank, the IMF, and the OECD. The World Bank and the US mobilized TÜSİAD, the domestic big capital that did nothing but assembly work. TÜSİAD launched a campaign against the government, and suddenly, the black market surged. In 1979, the World Bank sent Kemal Derviş to attempt to dictate an economic model to Turkey. The Ecevit government rejected this model. History repeats itself; the same Ecevit took the same Kemal Derviş into his government as a savior after the 2001 crisis. The program that Kemal Derviş wanted to dictate when he came to Turkey in 1979 was the set of decisions Demirel would adopt on January 24. The Ecevit government was ousted.  Demirel became prime minister again. His undersecretary, Turgut Özal, had already come from the World Bank and announced the program prepared by Kemal Derviş in 1979 as the January 24, 1980 decisions. The biggest obstacle to the implementation of these decisions was the freedoms and union rights in the 1961 Constitution. Bülent Ecevit, the leader of the CHP who had fallen into the role of main opposition, said that the January 24 decisions could not be implemented by a civilian government and would lead to military coups like those in South America. He was proven right, and the January 24, 1980 decisions ultimately resulted in the September 12 military coup. 

Atatürk founded the Republic together with the Army and the CHP. But he entrusted the Republic not to the army or the CHP, but to the Turkish Youth.  With the military coups of March 12, 1971, and September 12, 1980, the Turkish youth and labor unions were steamrolled. The army and the high judiciary took the role of the insurance of the Republican regime away from the youth and assumed it themselves. I don't think there is any need to remind you of where the army and the high judiciary stand today.   

With the September 12 military coup, Turkey began to fully fulfill the role assigned to it by the US. The role assigned to Turkey is as follows:  Turkey is not permitted to industrialize using its own resources. Before it could complete its industrialization, Turkey was integrated into the emerging neoliberal economy through open-market economic policies, which increased its foreign debt and its economic, political, and military dependence. On the other hand, in line with the US Green Belt Project, the path was cleared for Political Islam. Although the journey began under the banner of being Kemalist, the Turkish-Islamic synthesis—which is completely contrary to Atatürk's principles—became the official ideology, first in education and subsequently within the state.

In the climate created by the coups and their aftermath, Atatürk's "Freedom and independence are my character" and the source of his democratic revolutions, "The truest guide in life is science" were forgotten. Over time, the scientific approach gave way to superstitions and religious interpretations. Finally, even the 'Turkish' component of the Turkish-Islamic synthesis, which has become the official ideology, is on the verge of disappearing. 

As for military coups... We understand from the Trump-Erdoğan meeting that Erdoğan seems likely to fulfill US demands in exchange for legitimacy. Furthermore, in the current conjuncture, does the US even need a military coup? They hold a very powerful trump card to destabilize and bring Turkey to its knees: the Afghan-origin American soldiers, whose exact numbers we do not know but are around one million, and the jihadist terrorists hidden among the nearly 10 million refugees, whose exact numbers are also unknown...  

If we try to summarize the aftermath of this visit in a single sentence... The survival problem of the Republic of Turkey is becoming more severe with each passing day. 

(1) For route changes and military coups, see "Turkey's Factory Settings for the Twenty-First Century / Counter-Revolution in the Economy." Meriç Köyatası, Naviga Publishing...