Fatal Attraction: Why does turkey gravitate towards russia?

The United States, it seems, is out of vogue as Turkey’s ally; instead, Russia is in. Earlier this year, Turkey made plans to purchase an S-400 missile system from Russia. While it had originally intended to purchase the Patriot missile system from the United States, it has since objected to the long waiting period before it would receive the missiles. Instead, Mevlut Cavusoglu, the Turkish foreign minister, stated that Turkey would not purchase the American missile system because it would take too long to arrive, and Turkey announced its intention to purchase the missiles from Russia.

The United States condemned Turkey’s actions, and stated that Turkey should have accepted the US offer of its missile system instead. US Vice President Mike Pence addressed the situation, threatening that Turkey’s purchase could put its NATO membership in jeopardy. He also stated that Turkey’s actions could end its participation in the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Program, through which the United States sends parts for fighter jets to Turkey. The incident illustrates Turkey’s warming relations towards Russia, and a willingness to engage with it on a level equal to that of its other allies. Turkey’s view of Russia has changed considerably over the course of the past century, and their increasing closeness reveals Turkey’s decreasing commitment to democratic ideals.

How is Turkey’s political system organized and who is its current leader?

Turkey’s leader is President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, who represents the Justice and Development Party (AKP). He was elected as Prime Minister in 2003 in a great electoral success by his party. After serving the longest possible term as Prime Minister according to AKP regulations, he became president of Turkey in August of 2014 while the presidency was still a figurehead-variety position.

However, in 2017 the position changed dramatically. Through a referendum, the Turkish people voted in favor of a new constitution that phased out the role of prime minister and made the president the executive of the state. President Erdogan then moved the elections forward by more than a year and claimed his new powers after his electoral victory. The new constitution allows him to dismiss and appoint ministers, choose judges, and govern through direct command with no outside interference. Although the government claims that these measures were put in place in order to protect Turkey from unrest, in reality they give Erdogan the freedom to govern as an autocrat.

Throughout his time in power, Erdogan’s political philosophy has been to maintain his position through manipulation and to occasionally change to the political system to provide himself with more power. President Erdogan has been an unwavering advocate for political Islam since his days as a student, yet is skilled enough in political theory to make compromises on his strict ideological vision. For example, while he was mayor of Istanbul he conceded to protests against a new mosque in city center but implemented a ban of alcohol in cafés. He addresses dissent among his people swiftly and with harsh effectiveness. After his AKP party suffered a defeat during local elections this April, the losing candidates insisted that the results were not reliable and that they would contest the outcome of the elections. Erdogan has stated that he will remove the elected candidates and replace them with members of the AKP party, displaying his willingness to prioritize his party’s power over his nation’s democracy.

How does Erdogan govern?

Despite President Erdogan’s claims to the contrary, his leadership appears to be shaping Turkey in a manner which contradicts its history of democracy and secularism. He uses nationalist ideology, accusations against rivals, and xenophobic rhetoric in order to maintain his power. He mobilized the military during the March elections, giving him the ability to suppress voters. He frequently charges opposition parties with showing support for terrorism, and used attacks on mosques in Christchurch, New Zealand to garner support from his Muslim base.

Although he denies being in favor of an Islamic state, Erdogan has expressed his desire to implement Islamist laws such as restrictions on alcohol sales, earning him the support of the rural population. He ended the ban on women wearing headscarves in federal organizations, with the exceptions of the judiciary, the military, and the police. Erdogan has attempted to implement laws against adultery and ban alcohol in certain areas, and has also condemned the use of birth control among Muslims. He praises motherhood, frequently does not agree with feminist actions, and has stated his belief that men and women are fundamentally unequal.

President Erdogan is unwilling to tolerate dissent among his people. Prominent Turkish newspapers are all heavily influenced and/or owned by the AKP party. It is illegal to insult the Turkish nation or President Erdogan in the Turkish media, and journalists who discuss Islam in politics and the Kurds can face imprisonment. An anti-AKP coup took place in July 2016, during which 256 people were killed in Ankara and Istanbul. Erdogan’s government remained in power, and security forces arrested thousands of judges and soldiers who they suspected of having participated in the coup. With the conviction that the coup was a show of support for his political rival, Erdogan carried out a complete overhaul of his government in which hundreds of thousands of federal workers were fired.

However, the Turkish people’s objections to Erdogan are certainly warranted. Turkey’s economy is in a recession as a result of Erdogan’s policies and the US tariff on Turkish steel and aluminum. The prices of basic goods have increased rapidly and the lira, Turkey’s currency, has lost a quarter of its value. The Turkish inflation rate is at 19%, and the unemployment rate is 13.5% and has hit 25% among young people. The growth of Turkey’s GDP in 2018 was the slowest it has been since 2009; the government has gone so far as to force farmers to sell produce at lower prices. By the end of 2018, Turkey’s consumer confidence index was 58.2%. Clearly, the Turkish people do not believe that their government can provide them with financial security.

How did Turkey become a regional power?

At the end of the first World War, Turkey had an advantage that other Middle Eastern countries lacked; it was the center of the former Ottoman Empire, and could thus benefit from the remnants of Ottoman policies, army, and culture. Most Middle Eastern nations were once united under Ottoman rule, and could look to Turkey as a beacon of legitimacy in the midst of a region divided according to British and French mandates. During the period of European imperialism which followed World War I, Turkey was able to marshall these resources in order to stay independent. The Republic of Turkey was created in 1923 by Kemal Ataturk, a former Ottoman general, after he and the remaining members of the Ottoman army thwarted European colonial efforts in Turkey.

Ataturk was the first president of Turkey and led the Republican People’s Party (CHP), which dominated Turkish politics until 1950. The president could easily push his agenda through the legislature due to its CHP majority, and his policies served to promote Turkey’s international ambitions. Before the 1960’s, the Turkish foreign policy strategy was to secure and maintain friendly relations with Western nations, as Turkey would ideally gain power and influence by following their example. During this period, Turkey wished for protection from the nearby Soviet Union, relied on military and financial resources from the US, and sought recognition as a Western, secular democracy by the international community.

During the 1960’s, however, the strict divisions between the followers of Western powers and all other nations became more relaxed. Nations that had formerly been vehemently pro-Western began to place their own priorities above their fierce loyalties and considered partnerships with other nations. Turkey displayed its commitment to securing its interests in international affairs after its neighbor, Cyprus, became independent in 1959. The nation watched as recurrent conflict emerged between the Greek and Turkish inhabitants of Cyprus throughout the 1960’s and 1970’s. In 1974, a Greek-led coup ousted Cyprus’ government and united it with Greece. Turkey then invaded and occupied northern Cyprus in order to protect the area’s Turkish population. This incident, along with arguments over other strategic areas in the Mediterranean, created a contentious relationship between Turkey and Greece. For example, in both 1987 and 1996, Turkey almost went to war with Greece. It also fueled Turkey’s resentment towards the United Nations, as the Turkish people believed that the UN had backed Greece over Turkey.

Turkey then began to reach out to other nations besides the Western powers. It established an agreement of friendship with the Soviet Union in 1978 and reached out to China, the Balkan states, and other Middle Eastern nations. It then involved itself in various disputes in nations throughout the region and elsewhere. For example, Turkey supported Bosnian Muslims in former Yugoslavia, and was involved in UN operations there. It worked with Iraq to put down Kurdish rebellion but then allied with US against Iraq in the Gulf War, which earned it military and financial support from the US. Currently, Turkey is opposed to Syria’s support for rebellious Kurds, who it believes are connected to a Kurdish terrorist organization that is active in Turkey. Overall, Turkey’s regional influence derives from its historic might, strategic location, inclination to weigh in on outside conflicts, and willingness to form relationships with nations of varying ideologies.

What are Turkey’s international aims?

Turkey is indisputably powerful throughout the Middle East. Its advantageous location on both the Mediterranean and Black Seas as well as its strong military ensures a great deal of influence in the region. Erdogan uses this power by taking a public stance taking a public stance on pertinent and controversial issues. He has shown support for other Muslim nations by condemning Israeli actions towards Palestinians as well as advertising Turkish sympathy for the Egyptian branch of the Muslim Brotherhood, a political organization, through a public display of their hand sign. However, Erdogan’s ultimate ambition is to establish a position of power for Turkey on the world stage.

The recent rise in the numbers of immigrants who wish to go to Europe has given Turkey’s policies a greater range of international impact. Turkey is a destination for many Syrian refugees whose final destination is Europe.

Due to this large refugee population, the Turkish government has the ability to control the number of refugees who migrate to European nations. Immigration is a contentious issue in Europe today, and debate on the subject has led to major social and political divisions among Europeans. Many European populations disagree with the immigration stances held by their leaders, and have empowered populist leaders due to their anti-immigration rhetoric. The influx of Syrian refugees to Turkey has given Erdogan additional influence over European nations, as he has the ability to generate political instability by manipulating waves of immigrants and potentially directing them to countries whose populations do not want them.

In December of 2018, US President Trump stated that he intended to remove American troops from Syria. Before making this statement, he had received phone calls from President Erdogan on a weekly basis during which Erdogan objected to the United States’ involvement in the Syrian conflict and to US support of the Kurds. Turkey’s efforts to occupy a role of greater responsibility in the Syrian conflict reveal the nation’s aim of gaining greater influence on the world stage. If the United States withdrew completely from Syria, Turkey would have the opportunity to fill the US’ place in the fight against ISIS, which would include rebuilding northern Syria and ensuring the effectiveness of the Syrian state. In this scenario, Turkey could also attack the Kurds living in northern Syria without facing the threat of retaliation by US forces. However, Turkey does not yet have the resources, wealth, and military strength to combat ISIS alone. It has a great deal of influence in the Middle East, but it does not have the strength of a world power. In order to achieve its goals, Turkey must expand both its military capabilities and its international influence.

Who has Turkey allied with in the past, and how have those alliances functioned?

Turkey joined NATO in 1952, and was welcomed because of its large army, Westward-leaning government, strategic location, and resulting ability to serve as a bulwark against Communism.

As NATO has been a US-led alliance from its inception, Turkey’s position in NATO was less secure due to the other members’ identity as Western democracies, which Turkey lacked. It was designated as a Middle Eastern nation rather than a European nation, so it was a strategic ally for the rest of NATO, not a natural one. It continued to be a reliable ally for member states throughout the political turmoil of the late 20th century in the Middle East; for example, it was friendly to the United States during the largely anti-US Iranian revolution of 1979. Turkey was involved in NATO missions in Afghanistan, Kosovo, Bosnia, and Herzegovina. Turkey is still involved in NATO missions, and it is home to a part of NATO’s missile system and allows NATO members to use its military buildings. It continues to be an important member of NATO due to its location and strong military. However, with the fall of the Soviet Union and the beginning of the 21st century, NATO had a crisis of identity which prompted infighting and a need to develop new tactics beyond the spread of its ideology. Since NATO did not know what its role was as an organization, Turkey’s role was certainly never defined. This uncertainty caused it to drift from the path of NATO’s initiatives, resulting in its lack of support for NATO’s agenda during the Iraq War in 2003.

Ever since it joined NATO, Turkey has frequently had arguments with other NATO members. Turkey and other NATO nations first joined together to combat the reach of the Soviet Union but also to create an international, liberal, and democratic order. NATO’s ideology stemmed from US President Wilson’s beliefs in the free market, democracy, peace, and stability in nations. According to the NATO communique, members must agree on the necessity of individual liberty, human rights, the rule of law, and democracy in their nations.

However, democratic norms have declined in Turkey over the course of the 20th century. As populism becomes more prevalent, the United States and other international proponents of democracy are not as globally influential as they were in the past. Erdogan’s policies have attracted support from authoritarian figures in Europe such as Viktor Orban, who went to Erdogan’s inauguration. Today, Turkey and other NATO members clash over Turkey’s increasingly undemocratic presidential system. Turkey’s disinclination to support democratic principles and ensure human rights for its population has caused it to face hurdles in many aspects of its foreign policy, such as its attempts to join the European Union. But since Turkey does not have oil or gas as natural resources, it must maintain its connections with other nations in order to have a viable economy. This state of affairs gives the US and EU power over Turkey, resulting in an uneasy balance between Turkey’s ideology and its need for well-functioning international relationships.

Why ally with Russia?

In the past, the Russian and Ottoman Empires often found themselves at odds due to their international agendas: in particular, they clashed over access to the Black Sea.World War I effectively destroyed both empires, and created a scenario of renewal in which the two nations could potentially collaborate. During the Soviet era, the two countries’ relationship slowly improved, as both countries sought to gain power outside of the US sphere of influence. When the Soviet Union collapsed, Turkey and Russia no longer had a shared border, easing the tensions in their relations. Currently, Putin and Erdogan share the same platform of returning their nations to their former imperial glory and have a loose attachment to democracy, making them unpopular with Western nations. Both countries want to redefine themselves in the international community and both have leaders who use populist tactics. Turkey and Russia ended their support for the other nation’s rebel groups (the Chechens and the Kurds) in 2002. Turkey also pulled back its support of Turks living in former Soviet territories. The two nations became so friendly that Russia was Turkey’s largest partner in trade as of 2008, and during this period of cooperation Turkey bought two-thirds of its natural gas from Russia. After its attempts to join the European Union failed, Turkey also became a “dialogue partner” of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), a Russian-led coalition, in 2013. However, Russia-Turkey relations have grown more fraught during the Syrian Civil War, as Russia supported the Syrian government and Turkey supported the Syrian resistance. But since that conflict is currently reaching its end, the two countries may now be in a better position to work together.

Today, Turkey is vulnerable to attack from other Middle Eastern nations, as NATO’s defense system does not fully cover Turkish territory. If the US or Israel ever fought Iran, the NATO radar located in Turkey would most likely come under attack. This vulnerability prompts Turkey to seek out allies who can quickly bolster their defenses. Turkey hopes to encourage the US to re-evaluate its support for Syrian Kurds by establishing a closer relationship with Russia, the US’ enemy. Turkish support and trust for United States has decreased considerably as a result of its alliance with Syrian Kurds, prompting them to consider purchasing weapons from Russia. Additionally, the US’ reaction to Turkey’s purchase of missiles from Russia has made their relationship even more strained. The United States’ plans to sanction Turkey and remove it from the US programs for military and economic development will likely only serve to encourage Turkey to abandon its alliance with the US. Unlike the US and other members of NATO, Russia has no issue with Turkey’s manipulations of democracy and oppressive government. Russia will support Turkey’s initiatives more readily than NATO, which balks at Turkey’s increasingly autocratic system. For example, Russia is willing to supply Turkey with military resources more quickly than NATO. Instead of working with the US, Turkey will seek aid from a nation that will help it to become stronger without scolding the nation about its lack of democratic principles. So far, that nation has been Russia.

Why is the Russia-Turkey relationship significant?

Turkey is drawing ever-closer to an amicable and mutually beneficial relationship with Russia. Russia can offer Turkey military support, and Turkey has access to both the Black and Mediterranean Seas, a tactical advantage for which Russia longs. The two nations also bond over their leaders’ similarities. Both Erdogan and Putin embrace populist tactics and rhetoric, and embrace popular nostalgia for their nations’ former empires. However, Turkey and Russia’s friendly relations pose a serious threat to the liberal world order. Despite Turkey’s drift from democratic ideals, it is still a part of NATO, an organization dedicated to the preservation of democracy worldwide. NATO has also worked to thwart Russia’s international ambitions, so if one of its members is sympathetic to Russia, NATO’s mission will inevitably be compromised and it will struggle to function effectively. Russia’s interest in Turkey is certainly motivated in part by its desire to establish a foothold in NATO. Factoring in the global rise of populism, if NATO appears to be inefficient and unnecessary, other member nations may feel pressure from their populations to abandon the organization. This state of affairs would leave Russia even less regulated, giving them freedom to pursue their vision of a new Russian empire (as evidenced through their occupation of Crimea). Turkey will ultimately have to choose the source of their military support and decide where their loyalties lie. Its decision has the potential to disrupt the balance in the international community, which governments have worked for generations to secure.

Bibliography

Fahim, Kareem. “Stunning setback in Turkey’s elections dent Erdogan’s aura of invincibility.”

The Washington Post, 1 April 2019.

“Turkey Defiant as US Threatens Ankara over Russian S-400 Missiles.” Al Jazeera, 4 April

2019.

“Turkey Country Profile.” BBC News, 10 July 2018.

Ulgen, Sinan. “It’s Not Too Late to Stop Turkey from Realigning with Russia.” Foreign Policy,

11 April 2019.

“Recep Tayyip Erdogan.” Encyclopedia Britannica, 3 April 2019.

“Recep Tayyip Erdogan: Turkey’s Pugnacious President.” BBC News, 17 April 2017.

“How Turkish Foreign Policy Strategy Could Shape 2019.” NPR, 26 December 2018.

Pearson, W. Robert. “Turkey’s Election: Wins and Illusions.” Middle East Institute, 27 March

2019.

Kirişci, Kemal and Ilke Toygür. “As Turkish Democracy Declines, What’s the Role for Fellow Nato Members?” Brookings, 23 July 2018.

Aybet, Gülnur. “Turkey’s Security Challenges and NATO.” Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 2012.

“Turkey.” Encyclopedia Britannica, 5 May 2019.

Mankoff, Jeffrey. “Best of Enemies: The Russia-Turkey Confrontation beyond Syria.” Center for Strategic and International Studies, 6 January 2016.

Jahnike, Marie. “Map of Eastern Europe and Central Asia.” Pinterest.

“Treaty of Sèvres 1920.” The Map Archive, 2019.

“Quick Facts: What you need to know about the Syria crisis.” Mercy Corps, December 2018.