Insight Turkey 2018 Winter 2018 Vol 20 No 1


Download Insight Turkey 2018 Winter 2018 Vol 20 No 1 PDF/ePub or read online books in Mobi eBooks. Click Download or Read Online button to get Insight Turkey 2018 Winter 2018 Vol 20 No 1 book now. This website allows unlimited access to, at the time of writing, more than 1.5 million titles, including hundreds of thousands of titles in various foreign languages.

Download

Insight Turkey 2018​ ​- Winter 2018 (Vol. 20, No.1)


Insight Turkey 2018​ ​- Winter 2018 (Vol. 20, No.1)

Author:

language: en

Publisher: SET Vakfı İktisadi İşletmesi

Release Date:


DOWNLOAD





Today, the world system is in a transition and experiencing a deep international crisis. The U.S. has begun to oppose the basic international institutions such as the United Nations and its subsidiary organs and specialized agencies, even though most of these were established with American motivation. The hegemon state, the U.S., has been alienating most of its partners and even allies. The U.S. governments have begun to focus on the national setting and to underestimate the international one; to favor unilateral policies over multilateral ones. The presidency of Donald Trump has expedited this process. American rejection of providing global public goods such as international security and free trade has led to a systemic crisis. The relative decline of American power coincides with the persistent rise of China. Those who claim that the days of Pax-Americana are numbered assert that the rise of China will determine the future of the world system. China has begun to expand its influence worldwide. For this purpose it has established alternative political and economic international institutions such as the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) and the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB). Furthermore, China leads the establishment of some other international organizations as well. BRICS is only one of these formations challenging the political hegemony of the West, led by the U.S. One of the most promising Chinese projects is the One Belt, One Road (OBOR) Project, aspiring to connect the East (China) to the West (the world markets). It is expected that, on its completion, the OBOR Project will take China to the center of the world economy and politics. China has been the fastest growing economy in the world for the last thirty years. Its share of the world trade has increased dramatically, recording the highest share in world exports for several years. China has been enjoying economic transactions with all major international actors with more than 200 partners in exports and imports. However, in terms of per capita income China still lags behind the advanced Western countries. Furthermore, according to the calculations made by the World Bank and IMF, Chinese per capita income is still lower than the world average. China recently began to invest in the political and military sphere in the non-Western world. It has military bases in its near abroad and in the African continent. That is, Chinese economic influence and technological leadership is supported by its political and military power. In spite of the increase in Chinese military and political might, it is careful not to challenge the U.S. and the West. There are several reasons for this policy. First of all, China is aware of its vulnerabilities. It suffers some economic and political inconsistencies and weaknesses. For instance, it has to fortify its regional dominance first in the South China Sea and achieve its longtime one-China policy as a precondition for a possible global hegemony. Second, China wants to win the global rivalry without resorting to war with the current hegemon. Therefore, Chinese leaders refrain from opposing the American hegemony politically. Even though it has introduced some international institutions, the Chinese leadership does not propose a political and diplomatic alternative to the West. It will take time for China to offer a full-scale global leadership alternative to the world, since the global hegemony requires not only economic and military power but also values and norms for cultural hegemony. Lastly, China is not ready to take the global responsibility, since it brings high costs. As long as the current American hegemony works in favor of China, there is no need for China to change the course of its development. In the light of these developments, this issue of Insight Turkey focuses on some of the most important topics related to China’s persistent rise in the international system. More specifically, this issue postulates on how to read and understand China’s policies towards global powers, i.e. the U.S. and Russia, and regional powers, i.e. India and Turkey. Africa has once again returned to the attention of the global powers after being left for many years in the shadow of western politics. In recent years, Africa has become the center of China’s public, economic and military diplomacy. As it may be expected, China’s investments in Africa are not totally ‘welcomed’ by the U.S. Earl Conteh-Morgan in his commentary focuses on the strategic rivalry between China and the U.S. in Africa. Conteh-Morgan argues that their rivalry has progressed from mild to intense, with both powers increasing their activities on the continent and decreasing Africa’s erstwhile marginalization. Another rivalry that shapes China’s foreign policies in the region is that with India. Especially, since the Doklam Plateau incident in mid-2017, the expectation of a possible tension between the two regional powers is ever present. Taking this into consideration Bruno Maçães, in his commentary, ponders the economic and strategic rivalry between China and India along with a number of dimensions: infrastructure, border disputes, sea power, and trade.

​Insight Turkey ​- Winter 2018 (Vol. 20, No. 3): Fault Lines in The European Union


​Insight Turkey ​- Winter 2018 (Vol. 20, No. 3): Fault Lines in The European Union

Author:

language: en

Publisher: SET Vakfı İktisadi İşletmesi

Release Date:


DOWNLOAD





The European Union is a success story. It brought enemy countries together, combined their powers, fostered economic and social development, successfully competed with the American market and also resisted against the Soviet expansionism. As the most developed supranational international organization in modern history, the EU maintained Europe at the center of world politics. With the end of the Cold War, the member states attempted to transform the organization from an economic institution into a political and military structure having the ultimate goal to create a federal state-like institution. However, after unexpected changes in the global system and the emergence of new political actors, the EU began to experience many difficulties. As a result, today the EU is in a political deadlock and it seems that the continental unity achieved by the EU has begun to shatter. The reasons behind this are several. First of all, increasing illiberalism and authoritarianism in the West began to threaten the main liberal values that provide the expedient environment for social development and also for peaceful coexistence. The increase of xenophobia, racism, fascism, ultra-nationalism, and anti-Islamism uncovered the illiberal European traditions. As a result we now witness a division not only between Europeans and non-Europeans, but also between Europeans themselves. Namely, there are many fault lines, which divide and alienate the European countries from one another. For instance, there is an increasing friction between relatively robust economies of the north and volatile economies of the south. Second, the member states of the EU have lost their common other/enemy. Throughout the Cold War most European countries stood behind the U.S. in order to struggle against all global and regional threats such as the spread of communism and the expansionism of the Soviet Union. However, today European countries have different national priorities. For instance, while some European countries have begun to spend more in their defense budget, others refuse to increase their defense allocation and continue to prioritize economic development. A similar division can be seen in terms of the stance towards Russia. Third, the future of the EU is closely associated with the future of NATO. Maintaining the unity in military and security issues requires cooperation in other sectors, especially in the economy. Many European countries are not happy with what the U.S. does regarding NATO. The Trump Administration has been following a nationalist, unilateral and therefore conflictual economic policy towards Europe. Considering the European trade surplus with the U.S, Trump declared Europe “as bad as China.” These developments have further deepened the gap between the EU and the U.S. Fourth, the EU institutionalization was at its peak after the collapse of the Cold War system and the EU enlargement towards Eastern Europe. Nevertheless, it faced important challenges stemming from new topics such as defense and foreign policy, and the accession of possible new members. Following the accession of Eastern European states, the gap between the most advanced members and relatively less developed states widened. Consequently, the EU lost its attractiveness for many European states and the British, who did not want to share the burden of other member states, decided to leave the EU. This was the first step towards disintegration of the EU and this backward tendency will most probably continue. Fifth, due to increasing shallowness and mediocrity, European politics has lost its visionary outlook and strategic depth. The new generation of European politicians on the whole lack the visionary outlook of the previous generations. They are trapped in conjuncture and populist policies with short-term concerns or gains. That is, they just try to save the day. This new political elite in Europe does not believe in EU values such as pluralism and the win-win strategy. Some EU members are reluctant to share the burden of other members. Southern tier EU countries have been experiencing economic problems and struggling against the influx of refugees, but the northern tier countries are relatively free of these problems and do not want to import these issues into their domestic politics. Last but not least, European countries have been otherizing migrants and foreigners. In this context Turkey has been considered as the main ‘other’ for many years. It seems that when it comes to Turkey, the EU institutions and member countries freeze most of their differences and problems, and prioritize Turkey’s domestic and foreign developments. The new generation of politicians welcomes the increase of ultra-nationalism, fascism, racism, xenophobia, anti-Islamism and anti-Turkism. Even mainstream politicians have begun to normalize this tendency and as such the animosity against Islam and Turkey is becoming widespread all over Europe. With these in mind, this new issue of Insight Turkey aims at providing a general framework regarding some of the most important issues that have a direct impact on the future of the EU, including here: German hegemony after Brexit, cyber security, EU relations with Turkey and the U.S. and the rise of the radical right. Simon Bulmer’s commentary focuses on the sources of German hegemony within the EU after Brexit to later suggest two possible scenarios, namely the Franco-German partnership’s revival or a form of German hegemony. André Barrinha, in his commentary, touches upon a very interesting topic that has gained a lot of importance lately. Cyber security has emerged as the focus of many western organizations, especially for the EU as they perceive Russia as a direct threat in cyberspace. In this context, Barrinha analyzes the response of the EU to the Russian threat and its effectiveness. Trump’s arrival has created a lot of chaos in the world and we witness the decomposition of liberal values every day. In such an environment, U.S.-EU alliance is facing many difficulties and the cracks are becoming more visible. Kılıç Buğra Kanat has presented a brief analysis on the transatlantic relations and contends that unpredictability is now considered the defining characteristic of the U.S. attitude toward Europe. Remaining within the context of the transatlantic relations, Şafak Oğuz’s article focuses on the missile defense system of NATO, entitled the EPAA and argues that it is one of the key regional missile defense projects for the U.S., which claims to protect Europe from the Iranian ballistic missile threat but actually is designed to protect the American homeland, and targets Russian Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles with nuclear warheads. The standoff in the Turkey-EU relations has been present for some years now. By focusing on the topic of the customs union, Ciğdem Nas and Serdar Altay, present a brief analysis and suggestions for a possible new agreement between Turkey and the EU. In her commentary, Çiğdem Nas, contends that the upgrade of the customs union could bring a breath of fresh air to Turkey-EU relations and reignite the process of Turkey’s gradual integration into the EU. While arguing on the necessity of the upgrade of the customs union, Altay states that since membership is no longer an option, the sole contractual framework that will bind Turkey and the EU for the foreseeable future will be an upgraded customs union. As mentioned above, the rise of the far right constitutes a serious threat to European unity and as a result, to the EU itself. In the light of this, Aristotle Kallis addresses the EU’s policies toward the rising far right and argues that the EU needs to take into consideration the causes of citizen resentment without adopting the language and logic of the right wing populists. The article of Sertan Akbaba provides a more detailed analysis of the now dominant discourses in Europe used by the leaders of the far right parties, mainly in Netherlands, Finland, Italy and Hungary. The main targets of these populist discourses have been the Muslim people living in the European countries, for this reason in this issue we bring to our readers two compelling perspectives. On the one hand, Pamela Irving Jackson and Pete Doerschler provide qualitative and quantitative evidence of European identification by Muslims in France, Austria and the Netherlands as a response to the far right political mobilization. On the other hand, Enes Bayraklı, Farid Hafez and Léonard Faytre evaluate how the governments in Austria, France and Germany have tried to assimilate the Muslims living in these states via specific laws and institutions. According to them, the underlying message of these policies is the fact that European states consider the Muslims a security threat to the state and society. The weakening and defeat of ISIS will ironically have a negative impact on European security. This is what Kyle Orton has argued in his article. After providing a detailed analysis of the terrorist organization PKK and its offshoots, Orton explains how the foreign fighters that fought in Syria against ISIS are now going back in their homelands, mainly Europe, becoming a serious threat to its security. Hakan Samur in his article evaluates the stance of the Kurdish people living in Turkey towards Turkey’s membership of the EU. Based on the research field that the author has conducted, Samur concludes by saying that while the Kurds are somewhat distrustful and skeptical toward the EU, they continue to support EU membership. The Balkans is one of the most important regions within Europe and it has a direct impact on European security, economy and policies. However, for a long time people living in this region have fought each other. In response to this, Mirsad Kriještorac, in optimistic tones, argues that in order to move past the enmity that has characterized the Balkans, it is necessary to display the region’s religious and ethnic diversity as an inherent quality, and a building block of cooperation and progress. Lastly, this issue of Insight Turkey brings an analysis of the June 24 elections in Turkey from the pen of Fahrettin Altun. After approximately one year since the Turkish people approved the transition to the presidential system in the April 16 referendum, in a consolidated majority Recep Tayyip Erdoğan became the first president of the new Turkey. For those interested in Turkish politics, Altun’s commentary provides a general background to the new presidential system, the electoral campaign of the parties that participated in the elections and the impact that the results of these elections will have on Turkish politics. In conclusion, internal and external threats have weakened the EU and its political discourse of pluralism and peaceful coexistence. Furthermore, continental and global conjunctures are also at work against the principles of the EU. For this reason, it is possible that one questions the effectiveness and future of the EU. We are confident that this issue of Insight Turkey provides in depth information on important issues that are directly related to the EU and should be read carefully by anyone interested in the EU policies and its future.

Insight Turkey 2018​ ​- Spring 2018 (Vol. 20, No.2)


Insight Turkey 2018​ ​- Spring 2018 (Vol. 20, No.2)

Author:

language: en

Publisher: SET Vakfı İktisadi İşletmesi

Release Date:


DOWNLOAD





The Gulf is a sub-region consisting of Saudi Arabia and five small states, namely Kuwait, Qatar, Oman, the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain. This sub-region emerged after the British recognized the independence of the above-mentioned small entities between 1961 and 1971. Having an abundant amount of natural resources, i.e. oil and natural gas, the Gulf States are among the richest countries in the world; therefore, they do not share the poverty and political instability widely found in the Middle East. The Gulf is a sub-region consisting of Saudi Arabia and five small states, namely Kuwait, Qatar, Oman, the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain. This sub-region emerged after the British recognized the independence of the above-mentioned small entities between 1961 and 1971. Having an abundant amount of natural resources, i.e. oil and natural gas, the Gulf States are among the richest countries in the world; therefore, they do not share the poverty and political instability widely found in the Middle East. The sub-region was institutionalized with the establishment of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) in 1981 as a result of three important regional developments –the Iranian Islamic Revolution in 1979, the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in 1979, and the outbreak of the Iran-Iraq war in 1980. The GCC was mainly designed as a security institution to counter regional threats emanating from the other side of the Persian Gulf, namely Iran. However, after the invasion of Kuwait, by Saddam’s Iraq, the Gulf States became alarmed and asked the United States to protect their political independence against all regional threats. After the collapse of the Cold War, the Gulf States initiated a process of regional integration and significant steps were taken to achieve a monetary and economic union. At the end of the first decade of the 21st century, the Gulf States decided to introduce “al-khaleeji” as the common currency. However, this promising process was halted with the eruption of the Arab uprisings and revolutions. The Arab uprisings have imposed the greatest threat to the unity of the Gulf. For the first time in their history, the Gulf States began to be challenged politically from not only external threats but also internal dynamics. The process of sweeping changes throughout the Middle East instigated great concern in the Gulf, the most pro-status quo states in the region. During the first two years, 2011-2013, the Gulf States tried to follow a defensive policy against the powers of change. They strived to keep the wave of uprisings away from the Gulf. After they had overcome their shock and confusion, they began to take initiatives to intervene into the regional crises. Some of the Gulf countries, especially Saudi Arabia and the UAE, organized a military coup against the region’s first and only democratically elected government of Muhammad Morsi, placing Egypt in an economically and politically vulnerable position. Furthermore, these two countries interfered into the domestic affairs of other regional states in crisis such as Libya, Yemen and Lebanon. They succeeded in turning the “Arab Spring” into an “Arab Winter” by eliminating, de-legitimizing and weakening the carriers of reform, the Muslim Brotherhood and its affiliates, throughout the Arab world. Thus, indirectly they suppressed the moderate non-state actors in favor of radical actors and terrorist groups such as ISIS and al-Qaeda. Saudi Arabia and the UAE went further and tried to redesign the region through their ambitious regional policies. Encouraged by the United States and Israel, they gained the support from countries that are dependent on their petro-dollars such as Bahrain, Egypt and Jordan. These two states attempted to lead both the Arab and Muslim worlds; and therefore, mobilized their only asset, billions of petro-dollars, to buy influence in the region. In order to be able to lead the Arab world, Saudi Arabia and the UAE had to delegitimize the Muslim Brotherhood and affiliated groups and political parties –the main carriers of popular demonstrations throughout the Arab world. Therefore, they declared all these political groups and social movements as “terrorist organizations.” They even attempted to ostracize those regional countries, i.e. Turkey and Qatar that support these popular movements, while at the same time forcing other countries to support their regional policies. The first target was Qatar; the Arab state most open to liberal values and diversity. In 2014, Saudi Arabia and the UAE forced Qatar to cut its relations with regional non-state actors such as the Brotherhood and Hamas, but the Obama Administration did not allow Riyadh and Abu Dhabi to instigate a crisis. However, after Trump came to power, these two states reintroduced the crisis and imposed their blockade against Qatar. Nevertheless, with the strong support of Turkey and Iran, two significant regional powers, the policy of Saudi Arabia and the UAE has failed. As a result, Riyadh and Abu Dhabi have shattered the unity of not only the Arabs but also that of the Gulf. While Oman maintained its neutral position, by following an active neutrality policy and playing a mediating role, Kuwait tried to prevent the breakup of the Gulf region. Although it has not declared so publicly, Kuwait rejects the regional design attempts by the Saudi and Emirati governments. To lead the Muslim world, Saudi Arabia led the foundation of the so-called “Islamic Military Alliance” comprising of more than 50 nations. However, it became clear in a short time period that this attempt was not a real Islamic alliance to bring stability to the region, but a measure to fortify a Sunni bloc against Iranian regional expansionism. That is, Saudi Arabia tried to utilize the Sunni Islamic understanding for its regional policies. It is not difficult to claim that Saudi Arabia and the UAE will not be able to realize this project. The possibility of ending up with the disillusionment of the Arab and Muslim streets and alienation of some Sunni countries is quite high. Overall the project, which has been executed with the support of the U.S. and Israel, is an attempt to deepen the sectarian strife between Shias and Sunnis and it will not bring political stability or peace to the region. In conclusion, in order to protect themselves against regional threats and to establish a balance of power against other regional powers, the small Gulf States must form military alliances and political institutions with other regional countries. First, they need to maintain the unity of the Gulf. Second, Riyadh and Abu Dhabi should encourage other regional actors to contribute to the regional stability. Saudi Arabia and the UAE have to end the Qatari crisis, a lose-lose crisis manufactured by these two states, since it is undermining the sub-region’s security and economic outlook. Third, the Gulf States must keep the sub-region as the island of political and economic stability in the chaotic Middle East and contribute to the gradual and peaceful reconstruction of the region. To achieve this objective, the Gulf States must stop using conflicting political discourses. Considering all these important developments, the Gulf region has attracted a lot of attention among the scholars and Insight Turkey, through this special issue, aims to cover some of the main topics such as the Qatari crisis, the rise of sectarianism, the foreign policies of the pro-status quo countries and the relations of these states with Turkey. The situation in the Gulf region gets more complicated as time passes and the division between blocks has started to become deeper. Ufuk Ulutaş and Burhanettin Duran provide a comprehensive analysis of all of the actors, including here global and regional ones, which are currently included in the Gulf affairs. Without any doubt, the Qatari crisis has played a decisive role in manifesting the existing regional rifts. In the light of this, Kristian Coates Ulrichsen and Marwan Kabalan focus on this crisis, which started with the blockade of Qatar by the so-called Quartet, i.e. Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Bahrain and Egypt. With a special focus on the Gulf and U.S. policies respectively, both of the authors provide valuable insights regarding the crisis and the future of the Gulf. The main division in the region comes as a result of the rise of sectarianism, which has transformed into local sectarian and regional geopolitical confrontations among some Gulf States –mainly Saudi Arabia and the UAE– and Iran. Emad Kaddorah, in his commentary, argues that the regional conflict over the Gulf region is geo-sectarian, meaning that it is a geopolitical contest, which has recently been engulfed by a sectarian dimension. Saudi Arabia remains one of the main actors in the region and it deserves special attention. The articles of Simon Mabon and May Darwich help to better understand the domestic and foreign policies of Saudi Arabia. Mabon looks at the actions of the new crown prince to explore the impact of Bin Salman’s influence on both the Kingdom and the Middle East more broadly. On the other hand, Darwich analyzes the Saudi intervention in Yemen, a war that many have started to consider as “Saudis Vietnam war.” More specifically, May Darwich offers an alternative explanation for the abrupt Saudi aggressiveness toward Yemen and argues that this intervention is driven by the Saudi leadership aims to assert the Kingdom’s status as a regional power in the Middle East. Despite Saudi Arabia, the UAE is another important actor in the region, whose impact is underestimated. By focusing on the military bases built by the UAE in the Horn of Africa, İsmail Numan Telci and Tuba Öztürk Horoz provide an explanation on the real motivations behind the Emirati foreign policies which have started to focus more on hard power, a deviation from the perpetual foreign policies of the other Gulf States. Amidst the shattering order of the Gulf, Turkey has pursued a careful and balancing policy, finding itself sided neither with the Saudi-led block, nor with the Iranian-led block. At this point it is important to understand the background of the Turkey-GCC states relations and Özden Zeynep Oktav in her article brings a detailed analysis of the root causes that led to the policy divergences between Turkey, and some GCC states, i.e. Saudi Arabia and the UAE. This special issue of Insight Turkey includes five off-topic pieces, which indeed are closely related with the Gulf affairs. In his commentary, M. Akif Kireçci, focuses on the initiatives undertaken by Turkey after Trump declared Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and how the divided Gulf States left aside their disparities to protect the rights of Palestinians against this fallacious decision. The article of Osama Anter Hamdi complements Kireçci’s commentary, as the author provides a comprehensive analysis of the American foreign policy toward the Arab-Israeli conflict since the establishment of the Israeli state. Iran, of course, deserves special attention as the foreign policies of the Gulf States are mostly designed to balance the Iranian influence in the region. The three remaining articles of the issue deal with U.S. Iranian relations, the nuclear deal and how Iran and Turkey serve as a model of emulation for other states in the region. Written by İmran Demir, Farhad Rezaei, and Ibrahim Khatib and As’ad Ghanem, respectively, these three articles are worth reading in order to better understand the Iranian policies. “The Gulf on the Verge: Ambitions, Crises and Shattering Order,” provides timely analyses for a region that once again has become the linchpin of global affairs. We are confident that this issue of Insight Turkey will be a great contribution to the Gulf studies.