The Turkish prime minister outlined his foreign policy vision, based on a spirit of peace and cooperation. The Middle East suffers from many problems, Mr. Erdogan stated, and these issues can only be solved by regional players rather than by outsiders.A few years ago, the notion that Turkey was one of the Middle East's players would have elicited horrified reactions among a Turkish audience. It is perhaps a measure of how much things have evolved that it is now perfectly acceptable to make such a claim, without questioning Turkey's Western orientation.
Turkey's new pro-active diplomacy is generally welcomed in the region and beyond. Europeans and Americans alike believe that Ankara can indeed play a constructive role in a zone fraught with conflicts. But although it is not always acknowledged in foreign policy speeches these days, which are at times over-enthusiastic, there are clearly limits to what Turkey can achieve. A “zero problem” philosophy may sound nice, but when you step in the minefields of Middle Eastern politics, you will inevitably encounter difficulties.
The current tension with Israel is a case in point. Turkey's leaders stress that justice and fairness needs to be a foundation of their foreign relations. Israel's Gaza campaign was seen as a disproportionate response to the threat it faced and it caused very strong reactions in Turkey. The offensive, whose impact on civilians was recently documented in the Goldstone report, was also condemned by many Westerners.
While it is natural for the Turkish government to criticize Israeli policy and seek to take some distance from Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's hard-line approach, the manner in which military exercises were abruptly cancelled and Turkey's dismissive response to the outcry that followed the broadcast on TRT of a television series depicting Israeli soldiers shooting civilians, has caused tension that may not be in the country's best interest in the long term.
The government's stance will undoubtedly satisfy the domestic audience, but several Western analysts I spoke to at the conference, who had nothing but praise for the progress Ankara has achieved elsewhere in the region, expressed concern that Turkey's uncompromising approach to Israel could be a weak link that undermines future diplomatic successes. While some analysts advance the thesis that angering Tel Aviv may not carry a huge cost since progress toward peace is unlikely under the current Israeli government, others believe this attitude to be short-sighted.
While it is true that Turkey needed its strategic relationship with Israel much more in the 1990s than it does now, there is a risk that Ankara could become over-confident and exaggerate the power that it really wields in the region.
Turkey's leverage in the Middle East rests largely on its soft power and on its ability to talk to all of the regional actors. It is also what makes Ankara a special interlocutor in the eyes of the United States and European powers. Closing this particular avenue would therefore not be in Turkey's interest. The more Turkey can get its own house in order and resolve its internal issues, the more attractive a source of inspiration it also becomes for neighboring states.
Achieving friendship with everyone in such a difficult neighborhood may not be possible and choices will inevitably have to be made. While recent achievements in the Middle East, such as the lifting of visas with Syria and the numerous cooperation agreements signed in Baghdad last week, have been rightly praised, the Turkish government and the country's foreign minister must keep their feet firmly on the ground and not let these early successes go to their heads.
A slower and considered approach is needed to ensure that Turkey's new foreign policy lasts the distance and that more traditional areas of its diplomacy, such as the European Union accession process, are not neglected.
