Turkey’s difficult choice: Eurasia or the Atlantic?

Turkey’s errors in foreign policy, its indecisiveness, and its efforts to escape the “strategic depth” and “precious loneliness” it once boasted about are also increasing its encirclement. On one hand, the inability to correctly analyze objective conditions and the direction of the world; on the other, structural dependence on the US and NATO; and furthermore, the ideological and sectarian prejudices of the ruling bloc are weakening Turkey’s hand. It is narrowing its room for maneuver. Therefore, the government is trying to overcome this impasse with short-term, tactical steps.

When it experiences problems with the US, it draws closer to Russia. As it experiences tension with Russia, it turns toward the US. When it has problems with both, it sends warm messages to the European Union, which it speaks against in domestic politics. As a result, it can neither conduct a stable and convincing foreign policy nor take reliable, predictable steps. On the contrary, its existing reputation and credibility are eroding. When sharp U-turns (Israel, United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, and most recently Egypt) are added to this, the bill becomes even heavier.

There is more. The ruling bloc’s use of foreign policy as a tool to consolidate its base at home is no longer working. Criticizing, or even insulting, European leaders in election squares before elections and referendums, but adopting the exact opposite attitude and being ready to make concessions in bilateral contacts with European leaders behind closed doors, causes Turkey to lose. Especially in relations with the US, the submissive and passive attitude toward the previous US president Donald Trump and the current president Joe Biden does not go unnoticed. Among the reasons for this situation, besides reckless foreign policy, empty rhetoric, and structural economic problems, the limited state capacity of our country undoubtedly has a major impact. Because states cannot conduct foreign policy despite these four elements: Geography, state capacity, commercial relations, and energy dependence.

TURKEY’S DILEMMAS

The tensions Turkey has experienced in recent years with the US, NATO, and the European Union, and its rapprochement with Russia as a result of these tensions, are sometimes interpreted as Turkey changing its axis, breaking away from the West, and turning toward Eurasia. Especially following the purchase of the S-400 air defense system from Russia and the subsequent sanctions from the US, it is being written and drawn that Turkey has now turned its face to the East. The active neutrality policy pursued by Turkey in the Ukraine-Russia War also worries those who think that Turkey has broken away from the West.

So, are these concerns correct or justified? They are not. Because Turkey does not have a decision taken in this direction with national consensus. Furthermore, Turkey’s mainstream politics, including the government and the opposition, the civil-military bureaucracy, the business world, academia, and professional organizations, have no such preparation. Most importantly, the Turkish nation has no expectation, intention, or desire in this direction.

Should it? Can it in the short term? Let’s discuss…

The historical orientation of the Turks, who have an uninterrupted history of at least 7 thousand years (in some sources this period is stated as 8 thousand or even 15 thousand years), is from east to west. Except for Turkey, the TRNC, and Azerbaijan, which is a Caucasus country, the Turkic Republics (Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Turkmenistan) are in Central Asia. The Ottoman Empire is also known as a Balkan empire. The Republic of Turkey, on the other hand, connects two continents. This is not just a geographical feature. Turkey also combines two ancient civilizations with its cultural dimension. This situation is both a strength, a richness, and a difference, and it also creates significant dilemmas. Besides the historical orientation, the geography the society turns its face to is also the West. The important and effective international organizations of which Turkey is a member, such as NATO and the Council of Europe, are in the West and are Western. The European Union, which it wants to join, is one of the largest organizations of the West and is a supranational organization. In contrast, most of Turkey’s territory is in Asia. Its two largest foreign trade partners after Germany, Russia and China, and its largest energy suppliers, are in the East.

Turkey conducts half of its imports and exports with Europe. The largest Turkish diaspora is in Germany, where over 4 million of our people live. However, Turkey also experiences its biggest problems with the US and Europe. The greatest support for the PKK-PYD-YPG and FETÖ terrorist organizations comes from the US and Europe. In many bilateral and multilateral issues to which Turkey is a party, the US and Europe support the opposing side. The politicians and organizations that speak and work most against Turkey’s independence, integrity, sovereignty, and political unity are also in the US and Europe.

THE DIRECTION OF THE WORLD

Turkey’s priorities, goals, expectations, interests, and threat definitions and perceptions are undoubtedly not independent of the objective conditions of the world. In this context, an important factor influencing Turkey’s choices is the direction of the world. The shift of economic and political power on a global scale from the West to the East, from the Atlantic to the Asia-Pacific and Eurasia, the increasing weight of China and Russia, and the disagreements between Germany, the leader of the European Union, and the US are affecting Turkish foreign policy and choices.

Namely; the share of Eurasian powers in world production is expected to surpass Atlantic powers within 10 years. The influence of Russia and China is increasing from Central Asia to the Middle East, and from Africa to Latin America. US hegemony, on the other hand, is weakening. China is projected to become the world’s largest economy, surpassing the US, before 2030. The influence of organizations such as BRICS, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, ASEAN (Association of Southeast Asian Nations), and APEC (Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation Forum) is increasing.

However, despite all this, Turkey avoids not only thinking about leaving NATO but even discussing it. In short, even if Turkey periodically draws closer to and cooperates with Eurasia on certain topics, it cannot afford to break away from the Atlantic.