Determinants of Turkish Foreign Policy

Structural Determinants are continuous and static variables that shape a country’s foreign policy. They are not directly related to the international political developments and current issues in international politics. They can have long term impact on the determination of foreign policy such as geographical position, historical experiences, and cultural background.

In the early years, the Ottoman Empire followed a military-offensive approach in its foreign relations. However, after the late 17th century, with the beginning of the imperial decline, its main foreign policy objective shifted to preserving the status quo by all military and diplomatic means in an attempt to slow down the loss of territory. Thus, Ottoman Empire adopted the concept of ‘balance of power’ as a strategic behavior.

The First World War resulted in the collapse of the Ottoman Empire. After three years of national struggle, the Treaty of Lausanne, signed on July 24, 1923, established the new Turkish nation-state. The Treaty of Lausanne replaced the Peace Treaty of Sevres, which the Republican Turkey had never signed, and Turkey asserted its complete sovereignty over its current territory with the exception of Hatay (the district of Alexandretta), which finally (re) united with the motherland in 1939.

Despite the fact that the Turkish Republic was born out of the Ottoman Empire, there are significant differences between the two states:

• Turkey is a nation-state; it is not an empire like the Ottoman State.

• The political regime of Turkey is not an autocracy or theocracy but was a parliamentary democracy between 1923 and 2017, and it has been presidential republic since then.

• The Turkish Republic has not been founded on expansionist principles of an empire, but it has aimed mainly to maintain the status quo toward building and preserving a stable nation within its boundaries.

• While the Ottoman Empire was a multinational, multi-racial, and multireligious state, the Turkish Republic has more or less a homogenous society based on a specific understanding of constitutional “Turkish nation.”

Turkey inherited the central geography of the Ottoman Empire with its blessings and complications. First of all, this geography provides Turkey with a larger role in world politics to play than its size, population, economic strength, and military power would signify.

In addition to its central geographic position, Turkey also inherited most of its bureaucratic elites from the Empire. This relatively experienced bureaucracy was an important value for the Turkish Republic in the post-empire period.

Another important continuity in Turkish politics is the Western orientation of the country’s elite. The Ottoman Empire and then Turkey fought against the Western powers during the First World War. However, following the national independence Turkey decided to embark on full Westernization, which at the time was equated with modernization.

The realistic stance of the Ottoman diplomacy adopted during the nineteenth century against the overwhelming power disparity with its enemies has also had historical significance for Turkey

Together with the constructive elements, Turkey also inherited some characteristics from its Ottoman past that still have implications for Turkish foreign policy. First of all, although it was eventually replaced by the Treaty of Lausanne, the Treaty of Sevres had posed some challenges to the Turkish independence and its territorial integrity.

Second, the displacement (tehcir) of Armenians during the First World War in the Ottoman Empire resulted in the subsequent Armenian claims on some Turkish territory in the Sevres Treaty.

Third, although most of the Kurdish tribes had sided with the Turks against the invading powers during and after the First World War and the Kurdish identity was primarily based on religion rather than on ethnicity, the Sevres Treaty also recognized the “Kurdish separate ethnicity,” allowing the establishment of an autonomous Kurdish region with possible independence later on.

Another problematic legacy is the “sense of greatness” in the common Turkish mind. Belonging to a nation that established a powerful Empire, which had straddled three continents, is a source of pride for all Turks.

Finally, the centuries-long hostilities with the neighbors forced the Ottoman Empire to be cautious about, and suspicious of, its political environment as well as other powers’ intentions.

Sevres Syndrome or Sevresphobia is the conviction that the “external world and their internal collaborators are trying to weaken and divide Turkey”. The term was originated from the Treaty of Sevres of 1920, which split most of the Ottoman territories among the occupying powers, creating an independent Armenia and an autonomous Kurdistan as well as a Greek presence in the Eastern Thrace and on the West coast of Anatolia. Despite the fact that the Treaty was stillborn and never entered into force, the perception of foreign forces wishing to divide and destroy Turkish homeland has remained as an underlying concern in Turkish society and among the decision-makers.

The term “Millet” refers to a “religious community” or to certain “people” in the Ottoman Turkish language. In the Ottoman Empire, it was used for organizing different religious communities with limited administrative power under a religious leader with authority over their co-religionists. The system allowed each community to regulate their own affairs under the supremacy of the Ottoman administration. Only the “religion of the books” (kitap ehli) were recognized as millet in the system; thus, originally there were Orthodox Christian and the Armenian millets, which later joined by the Jews and Catholic Armenians. Empire’s Muslim population (the Ummah) was not considered as part of the Millet system.

One of the geographical concerns for Turkey is the Aegean Islands. If these islands are controlled by a hostile power, Turkey would lose the connection of its two principal harbors (Istanbul and Izmir) to international waters. In this case, so long as Cyprus has a friendly government, access to international waters could still be maintained from the Eastern Mediterranean. However, if the ideology of Enosis (the union of the Cyprus Island with Greece) were realized, Turkey would be totally cut off from the open seas. This was why Turkey has resisted such designs as Enosis in the Eastern Mediterranean since the 1950s. The same security concern played a role in Turkey’s declaration of casus belli against the Greek claim of twelve-mile territorial waters in the Aegean Sea. In this way, Turkey can keep all open-sea exits from the Aegean Sea through its territorial seas.

In order to reduce the sense of insecurity and to counterbalance potential rivals, Turkey has joined the existing alliances at the time or it allied with regional states and outside powers. For this reason, Turkey, between 1920 and 1955, signed a number of friendship declarations with the neighbors and bilateral agreements with the USA. In an attempt to feel more secure, Turkey joined the Balkan Pact (1953), the Balkan Alliance (1954), and the Baghdad Pact (1955). Nevertheless, Turkey’s adherence to NATO in 1952 was the biggest step in terms of securing its borders.

Conjunctural Determinants are dynamic variables that can change depending on the domestic and international developments. They can be considered as the changes in the international system, shifts in balance of power in world politics, dramatic changes in domestic politics, economic factors.

One of the most important international developments that has affected Turkish foreign policy is the transition from the Cold War to détente. The Cyprus issue has been another important factor since it has long been a concern for Turkish foreign policy makers. Other important issues are related to Turkey’s attitude to certain groups of states, the constitutional and political changes in Turkey as well as economic and social developments.

The end of the Cold War was another major turning point not only because of the transformations in the international system but also because of the dramatic changes that took place in political, economic, social, and cultural life in Turkey. Finally, the international developments after 9/11 and Arab uprisings in 2011 have largely affected the international system and Turkey as well. Moreover, the revisionist policies of the Justice and Development Party (AKP- Adalet ve Kalkınma Partisi) caused main transformations in the decisionmaking process of Turkish foreign policy.

The Republic of Turkey gained its independence at a time when the world was passing through a systemic change. It was Mustafa Kemal’s influence at that moment that set the course of Turkish foreign policy in much of the 20th century. His foreign policy approach, like his political views, represented a break with the past. While the grand ideas of the late Ottoman Empire (i.e. PanOttomanism, Pan-Islamism, and Pan-Turkism) were discarded, he insisted on replacing them with the principles of republicanism, secularism, and nationalism, all of which had major impacts on the country’s foreign policy, in addition to its domestic policy.

Bipolar system can be defined as a system of world order in which the distribution of power is held between two states. In this context, these two states control most of economic, military, and cultural impact factors at the international level and/or regional level. In a bipolar system, spheres of influence may develop. The Cold War between the United States and the Soviet Union (1947-1991) is the most known case for a bipolar system.

Multipolar system is a system of world order in which power is distributed between more than two states that have varying degree of military, cultural, and economic impacts; but no one state can dominate the system alone. Maintaining the balance of power among the poles is important to achieve stability in this system.

The Turkish-American relationship and Turkey’s Western attachment that started with the 1939 Turkey-UK-France Alliance and grew stronger with the Truman Doctrine, Marshall Plan, and Turkey’s membership in NATO began to cool down during the 1960s and deteriorated in the 1970s. With the change in the international environment, domestic political changes as well as the rise of anti-American sentiment in Turkey, Turkish foreign policy moved into a phase of reevaluation during the 1970s.

The tension between the two blocs gradually softened in international relations during the 1960s, which came to be known as the détente period. Also in this period, the interdependence in international relations increased as well as the developing world occupied a relatively crucial role in international politics. Thus, global politics moved from a strict bipolar balance toward a relatively complex and multidimensional configuration, where secondary powers (including Turkey) became much more independent in their policymaking and in building relations with each other, bypassing the bloc lines.

With the adoption of the ‘liberal’ constitution of 1961, a relatively free political atmosphere followed in the rest of 1960s that had a crucial impact on Turkey’s domestic and, consequently, foreign policy.

First, until the early years of 1960s, Turkish foreign policy-making was under the control of a small elite as an exclusive privilege. The 1961 constitution, however, designed a new political system that promoted a relatively pluralistic polity through recognizing fundamental human rights, basic freedoms, multi-party politics, and public involvement in the policymaking process. 

Another important development in this period was the reorientation of Turkey’s foreign policy in a way to establish closer relations with the newly emerging non-aligned countries as well as with the Arab-Muslim world.

Moreover, the military government of 1960 and the following civilian governments also tried to renegotiate a number of bilateral agreements signed with the US during the 1950s in order to align them more closely with Turkish national interests.

Another contribution to the reorientation of Turkish foreign policy came from the emergence of smaller parties representing hitherto fringe political interests.

Eventually, with the emergence of a relatively free political atmosphere during the inter-coup period and the development of student activism all around the world, Turkish youth started to develop radicalism during the late 1960s and this grew stronger in the 1970s. What started as peaceful student demonstrations in late 1960s quickly polarized and turned into armed clashes between the left-wing and right-wing student groups during the 1970s.

For many reasons, Cyprus was vital for Turkey. First, because of its geographical position, Cyprus was strategically very important. Since it is located in the Eastern Mediterranean, the channels from Turkey to the open seas would be cut off if it were to fall into the hands of a hostile country. For this reason, starting from the 1950s, Turkey resisted to the Greek designs on the island. Secondly, because of the presence of a large Turkish community on the island, the Cyprus issue was perceived emotionally and in the context of a national pride. The Greek plan of Enosis was considered as the first step for the Megali Idea. Thus, when violent clashes started between the two communities on the island at the end of 1963, Turkey, governed by a fragile coalition government, immediately found itself involved in the crisis.

Enosis is a political movement that aims at the unification of Cyprus with Greece. The movement was an outcome of the nationalist awareness among the Greek-Cypriots between 1882 and 1960. After World War II, with the anti-colonial movement against the British Empire, the idea of enosis became a way for independence from the British rule. From 1955 onwards, the EOKA (Ethniki Organosis Kyprion Agoniston), conducted a campaign against the British rule on the island and promoted enosis with Greece that lasted until 1959. In 1960, the Republic of Cyprus was established with two communities. After the independence, President Makarios III declared its support for an independent state instead of enosis. However, in 1971, EOKA-B, a pro-enosis paramilitary group, was formed and attempted to overthrow Makarios in 1974 through a coup d’état organized by the Cypriot National Guard with the support of the Greek government. Following this attempt at changing the constitutional structure of Cyprus, Turkey militarily intervened to prevent the enosis.

When Johnson’s letter was partially leaked to the press, it had a shocking effect on Turkey with regard to the trustworthiness of its ally. President Johnson remarked that “NATO allies have not had a chance to consider whether they have an obligation to protect Turkey against the Soviet Union if Turkey takes a step which results in Soviet intervention without the full consent and understanding of its NATO allies.” Johnson added that “the United States cannot agree to the use of any US supplied military equipment for a Turkish intervention in Cyprus under present circumstances.” Although İnönü replied that “there are wide divergences of views” between Turkey and the US with regard to “the nature and basic principles of the North Atlantic Alliance,” the Turkish leaders concluded that the Turkish national interests were not identical with those of the US and of other Western allies.

The Cuban missile crisis and the removal of the Jupiter missiles, the American attitude toward the evolving Cyprus issue, the formation of the EEC, the NATO’s new flexible response strategy, and the isolation of Turkey in the UN with regard to the Cyprus issue had nudged Turkey to change its policies.

During the 1980s, Turkey experienced various political models: the multi-party democracy at the beginning of the decade, the direct military rule between September 1980 and November 1983, a quasi-democracy afterwards, and a further democratization process following 1983.