Turkey undaunted by smear campaign over its foreign policy

Turkey should not be alarmed, however, over these accusations that have no bearing on active Turkish foreign policy whatsoever, they argue. Foreign policy analysts point out that rising Turkish political clout in the region as a soft-power wielding considerable influence is the main reason for this hail of criticism, ranging from the betrayal of friends to turning its back on the West. Some allegations even went further to float labels like Turkish extremism, Turkish fundamentalism or Turkish militancy.

Dr. Mehmet Seyfettin Erol, professor of international relations at the Ankara-based Gazi University, says the rise of Turkish influence in the region through engagement and dialogue has alarmed Israel, which fears the Jewish state’s belligerent policies are getting more international condemnation and isolation than ever before. “The hard-power of Israel is clashing with the soft-power approach of Turkey in the Middle East and pro-Israeli media is rushing to the defense of the Jewish state by running smear campaigns across the world against Turkey,” he told Sunday’s Zaman. “What is more, the US administration, having suffered from Bush-era warmongering policies in Iraq and in Afghanistan, is not really forcing Turkey to make a choice, much to the dismay of the Israeli government,” he added.

Indeed the changes in the region are working to the advantage of Turkey. US troops are withdrawing from Iraq and combat operations have already been transferred to Iraqi security forces. Yet the Iraqi government has still not been formed and internal political fighting continues months after the national elections resulted in no clear winner. The EU is pretty much preoccupied with the internal economic crisis and trying to salvage the euro from the second shock that is likely to come soon. The political situation is not certain in Egypt in a post-Mubarak era and Iran is struggling to cope with international pressure, coupled with domestic turbulence.

Turkey-critics on the other hand focus on two recent events -- the Israeli attack on the Gaza aid flotilla on May 31 and Turkey’s “no” vote for the fourth round of UN sanctions on Iran on June 9 -- and blame the ruling Justice and Development Party (AK Party) for allegedly steering the country away from the West. To further score points on that note, the rumor machine, mobilized by the pro-Israeli lobby and spreading messages about radical and militant tendencies in the country, is expanding.

In fact, the accusations have been uttered at the highest level of Israeli government. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told visiting Greek Prime Minister George Papandreou in Jerusalem last month that he is very worried about recent developments in Turkey and increasing extremism in that country. Similarly, Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak targeted the new spy chief of the Turkish Intelligence Organization (MİT), Hakan Fidan, saying: “The appointment of a pro-Iranian chief to MİT is a source of concern for us. Iran might have access to our secrets through Turkey.”

Ankara reacted very strongly to Barak’s accusations and the Foreign Ministry summoned Israel’s ambassador to Ankara, Gabi Levi, and warned Israel not to “interfere” in Turkey’s domestic affairs. Yet, Barak has remained adamant about his stance and has defended the criticism he made of Fidan in an interview with an Israeli radio station. “It’s appropriate simply because it’s true,” he said.

“The Israeli government is trying to absolve itself of its crime by running a propaganda campaign accusing Turkey of collaborating and even secretly organizing the aid flotilla to allegedly ‘provoke’ Israel to use excessive violence,” wrote İbrahim Kalın, foreign policy advisor to the prime minister, in his column in Today’s Zaman. “By refusing to cooperate with the UN and the rest of the international community, Israel has isolated itself and tacitly acknowledged that it has something to hide. The Netanyahu government has now damaged its relations with a major regional power” he said.

“The current campaign against Turkey is really unfortunate. It not only betrays imperial hubris but also invites further chaos and instability in the wider Middle East. Those who write Turkey off so easily should look in the mirror and ask themselves if they really have any plan that will work in the region without Turkey,” Kalın stated.

Many Western countries have good relationship with the Arabs

There are those who see the new Turkish foreign policy as a positive influence in the region. Mohammed Raja al-Hussaini, the Saudi ambassador to Turkey, told Sunday’s Zaman that it is quite cynical for some leaders in Europe to accuse Turkey of turning to the East while they have very close relations with countries in the Middle East.

“Those leaders in the West have the best relationship with the Arab world. I do not want to name names, but they are the ones who turn to the East, actually. How come they hold this against Turkey while Turkey has more common values to share with countries in the Middle East? Many Europeans have hugely benefited from ties with the East and they cannot afford to lose this relationship. Then when Turkey does something like that, they say, ‘How come you are turning to the East?’” al-Hussaini said.

Most Turkey-bashing articles focus on what they call increased “Islamization” in Turkey by the Islamist-rooted AK Party government, yet they fail to grasp the real change in social-political life of the emerging middle class, not just in metropolitan cities but across the country, including the heartland. This newly emerging powerful class is liberal, market-oriented and sees democracy and civilian supremacy over the military as the core values to advance business interests, not only in Turkey but abroad as well. They push the government to find new markets abroad and in most cases both the president and the prime minister take along hundreds of businessmen in their entourage during official visits to other countries.

What is more, foreign policy is a bipartisan issue in Turkey in most cases and the government is not the only one holding the steering wheel to set the course. Steven Cook, in a Foreign Policy article published, in June wrote that “despite the bitter political battle being played out in Turkey over the country’s political trajectory, there is general agreement across the political spectrum on the direction of Turkish foreign policy.” He emphasized that “other Turkish governments might have been more cautious about the TRR [Tehran Research Reactor] deal, but they certainly would be seeking to maintain good relations with Iran, Iraq, and Syria, not to mention Russia.”

Smear campaigns will not have an impact on Turkey-US relations

Cook also dismisses Islamism arguments for the shift and says “the easy temptation is to blame creeping Islamization for Turkey’s foreign-policy shift.” He describes Foreign Minister Ahment Davutoğlu as the man responsible for the country’s new international activism. “He [Davutoğlu] correctly perceived the role Turkey can play in a much-changed world. The structural changes resulting from the end of the Cold War, Europe’s continuing rebuff of Turkey and the economic opportunities to the country’s south, east, and north have driven Davutoğlu’s thinking, not the Quran” he said.

Erol believes the smear campaign accusing Turkey with breaking off from the West or tilting towards militancy will not have a real impact on Turkey’s relations with the US. “The Obama administration realizes how much value Turkey can bring to the table for the US. Turkey represents a critical partner to the US on its three most urgent strategic issues: Afghanistan, Iraq and Iran. The US can’t simply afford losing a strategic ally during a critical juncture when it has been trying hard to secure stability in Afghanistan and Iraq” he said.

On Afghanistan, Turkey is the best candidate to help Americans to shore up the fragile government and secure the allegiance of most tribal leaders because of the close cultural, historical and religious ties that Turkey has had. In Iraq, the US had to rely on Turkey to keep the territorial integrity of the country after the withdrawal. Turkey, which has very good relations with all major factions in Iraq, can also buffer Iranian influence and help calm fears in Sunni Arab countries. On the Iranian front, both the US and Turkey share the same goal of a nuclear arms-free Iran, yet they differ on methods to achieve that.

Erol acknowledges that the Obama administration has to pay attention to concerns aired mostly by the pro-Israeli lobby on the domestic front especially on the eve of congressional elections in November, but underlines the strategic thinking on both the Turkish and American sides are by and large the same. “That is why Israel is very much concerned on how things are going with the US or with Turkey for that matter. They are trying to force Washington’s hand in choosing Israel over Turkey. But that is unlikely to happen any time soon” he explained.

Erol stated that the US wants to use Turkey’s growing influence in the wider region, including on Arab streets, to repair its tarnished image from Bush-era policies. “Unlike Arab governments which lack legitimacy among their own populations and Israel that is isolated, Turkey with its huge popularity among Arabs may offer a unique venue for the US to promote a positively tuned public relations campaign,” he said. “Otherwise the vital US national interest in the region will continue to take heavy blows and people in the Obama administration realize the urgency to act on the soft power,” Erol noted.