Center for Strategic Assessment and forecasts

Autonomous non-profit organization

Home / Politics and Geopolitics / Russian-Armenian partnership / Articles
Turkey: political prospects
Material posted: Publication date: 28-06-2011

In order to understand the map of Eurasia should be considered located at its strategic points, one of them is Bosphorus, a second Gibraltar: first as a poem, hot in geopolitics as the country that controls the paragraph, the second point cold as a efficiency in London. We choose a point of Hotness, because at the same time – this is our strategic outlet to the free world.

In political science there is a theory of games: playing, at the same time we solve some surveys: the imagination can create problems that are impossible to Express on paper, and, at the same time, using the imagination we can develop such directions that are impossible to implement in day to day life.

In order to understand the map of Eurasia should be considered located at its strategic points, one of them is Bosphorus, a second Gibraltar: first as a poem, hot in geopolitics as the country that controls the paragraph, the second point cold as a efficiency in London. We choose a point of Hotness, because at the same time – this is our strategic outlet to the free world.

But since we're thinking in the framework of game theory, we imagine that we control this country: our text is a strategy of power development of Turkey.

From the point of view of political analysis, Turkey appears to be exemplary by the state problem. This state, which is engaged in (more or less superficially) any expert on international relations, knowing that there's always something with something linked. So, on issues related to Turkey, the public never comes to mind that someone from the analyst knows nothing.

The basis of this approach are three inner element of the Turkish state and one external to Ankara, which we consider separately.

Specifically, the elements that allow any specialist in international relations appear to be "competent in Turkish dossier" in regard to domestic policy are the geographical position, the population of this state and its religion (more accurately, the tensions associated with the role of religion in Turkish society). Any discourse based on these topics will use big names and concepts: Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, Bosphorus, the Straits, the secular army, Islamism, terrorism, and the Kurds.

The outer element is associated with the hope or desire (later classify its nature) of the Turkish state, associated with integration into a supranational formation of the European Union. With all this, Turkey is not at all limited us to these problems (which certainly will be going in the General formula of the grounds of any adequate analysis of the Turkish state). You need to accept other arguments that are less taken into account, as it is believed that some of them have already passed.

1. What is Turkey? Turkey – a country that fits into the historical logic of the negative, European historiography considers Empire historical reality necessity the time when the development of human society was peaceful, but klassificeret them (and eventually their studies) in connection with the direction of their development: with the sole exception of (1) , positive empires are those that have evolved in the direction from West to East (the Roman Empire, the Carolingian Empire, the Holy Roman Empire, the Empire of Napoleon, etc.).

The Turkish state appears as a continuation of the battles in Asia, a struggle inspired less by religion and more than simple material interests: the effect provided by that state are not limited to only financial circulation and in General, all those with a heritage that money can be assessed at the appropriate space, but has a religious component.

Thus, it is necessary to understand the existence of the Turkish state in two forms:

A) In Islam, political and military regime, dominant over Mecca and produces spiritual and moral authority of the Caliphate, therefore, the claim of Istanbul to the leadership in the Muslim world (implemented through the military conquest of the important areas in political-religious space of the Prophet), you need to understand and imagological aspect. In this sense, will be interpreted the duty of the Sultan to attack personally led his troops Baghdad, a city considered as the main competitor in the struggle for supremacy in the Muslim space (excluding the Arabian Peninsula).

B) At the same time, the presence of the Turks in Constantinople meant for the Christian world the beginning of a new dispute about who has a real superiority, and more specifically, how much exists Ream: Rome Catholic center in Vatican, Orthodox centered in Constantinople and new Rome, which would have taken over the role of the former capital of the Greek Empire. Therefore, the fall of Byzantium meant the entry into the competition of the new capital, Moscow. From this follows an important consequence for the whole black sea basin is the superiority of Moscow in the Christian world is the result of output from its isolated position on the vast Russian plain and in the surrounding steppes and involvement in global issues.

Really systematically participate in European Affairs Turkey began when France in order to get the counterweight to its neighbours concluded in the seventeenth century an Alliance with the Sultan. Thus, in reality, the role of the Turkish state was clear from the very moment when the Turks entered to Anatolia, they were pariahs for old Europe. Even in two world wars with Turkey in good faith was not considered, although in terms of geopolitics as a whole, Ankara's presence in one or another camp was needed.

This attitude is clearly expressed at the time of the First world war, when the offensive of the Greek army (project "Megali Idea" of Eleftherios Venizelos and Eleftherakis) with the aim of complete conquest of Asia Minor was supported (or at least was viewed with sympathy or was not strictly disavowals in a period of military conflict) the great European powers. Only the heroism of the Turkish army led to the fact that the Straits remained under the full control of Ankara.

2. After the Second world war, the geopolitical situation deteriorated in unimaginable to date extent(2), instead of great Britain (a Maritime power, which in the XIX – XX centuries pursued as a goal only the control of key positions of the planet (3) "non multa , sed multum" quality, not quantity), the global superiority began to possess two powers.
More specifically, the type of control of key positions, which was typical for the UK, can be clearly seen in the attack during the First world war Gallipoli Peninsula (near the Dardanelles), which represents the last attempt of the great powers of the European classical type to be approved in the Euxinus Pontus.

Since that time, as the world balance is determined only by the relationship between the United States and the Soviet Union, Turkey receives the position of the first rank in the zone, but in Ankara (or more precisely, inside the Turkish army) US influence is becoming decisive and until the collapse of the Communist system (see offensive plans of the former Warsaw Pact) operates a strategic Alliance between Washington and Ankara (with some crises associated with the individual problems).

3. 1989 regained the freedom of a considerable part of the planet and contributing towards a repositioning of political forces (more accurately – States as the only real actors on the political scene of the world).

In what space is the Turkey? Let us formulate the answer in terms of the potential head of the state, the more that such exercise is beneficial for any specialist in international relations. Depending on these results, each reader can make observations, offer new options and hypotheses.

The equation that we will keep in mind, noiseroyce in several directions, depending on geographical space, towards which we will direct glance. It is no less true that of these areas many eyes closely watching Ankara and received her solutions.

Another specific feature of Turkey is its rich ethno-linguistic heritage: unlike most countries in the world in which tribesmen live in the neighbouring countries, ethnographic space of turkophone much more extensively, including all of Central Asia (4) (with the exception of Tajiks, who are areazione). With regard to the effects caused by this phenomenon, this issue will be discussed below.

The first area of analysis is represented by Europe, as it is perceived in the eyes of many citizens, Pro-EU, but anti-Islamic minded (5) (anti-Islamic position prevails in their judgment, or most often determines the result of the process). In this synthesis we use the concepts of near and far abroad, borrowed from the Russian geopolitics.

To neighboring countries of Turkey on the European continent will take former territory, on which there was such a form of government and legal-administrative organization as pasalic. Of these countries still exclude Hungary, although since 1541 in Bude we will find that this political form of organization.

Within these countries, we find find special fragility of the state (with three unequal exceptions – Greece, Croatia and Bulgaria (6) ). So, Albania is the state likely does not exist as a legal form because there is corruption could undermine the administrative building. And again, the economic crisis of recent years seriously, although not realsim way, struck on the stability of Greece.

Albania presents two problems for Ankara: the first stems from the fact that with Fatos Nana and his party Greece for a long time almost completely controlled by the Albanian state. In this direction the Greek presence has become a quasi-monopoly in all sectors of the economy (7) (so far as it in reality operates in Albania).

Greece fully blocked Albania, giving her no chance to establish themselves economically (for example, the ancient road of via Egnatia from the Durres of Thessaloniki to resuscitate the money only highway-the highway was restored starting from Thessaloniki and stopped a few kilometers from the Greek-Albanian border). One of the most severe blows to Albania from Greece hit tourism industry.

Realizing this, Ankara had to play the role of protector of Albania, which she did by sending in a time when the financial scandal of the pyramids reached its climax, 5 000 soldiers based in the garrison located in the centre of Albania), which ensured the existence of the state, on the verge of collapse. The strategic position of Tirana in terms of control over the Adriatic can not be taken into account and the political and military leadership of Turkey knows it.

All these actions contributed to the stabilization of Albania, allowing the country to engage in specific operations of an intelligence nature with the aim of creating a greater Albania. It is equally true that as alleged in some studies, the actions of the Turkish troops on the Albanian space have been inspired by the United States, the result became what we said above.

Any potential leader of the Turkish state will have to accept this reality and to exercise a patronage in the future, in order not to allow Greece to become the sole owner of the southern Balkans (especially as Athens can not effectively play a positive role in the economy of the Euro area).

No doubt the pressure on Ankara as a Tyrant, and especially at Athens has hindered the collapse of the Macedonian state. In order to realize this goal, were involved and representatives of the party of the Turkish minority in Bulgaria. Specifically, Macedonia is a buffer state between Serbia (or now Kosovo) and Greece on the strategic line of the Vardar and between Albania and Bulgaria on the line between East and West.

In principle, none of the old neighbors of the Macedonian state does not wish its existence for various reasons. Its only patrons were Bulgaria, acting directly (8), and remained in the shadow of Turkey, for which it was necessary to prevent the expansion of Greece in the direction of Vardar. Any Manager Turkey will continue to provide this behavior, because the other alternatives in this area do not. Balance is useful for small Balkan States and of Turkey in the EU, as in this case it will be necessary a much greater safety of road and rail connections.

The CIS countries still represented Serbia, a state which no longer has any meaning on the political map of Europe. Lost access to the sea will nullify any claim on a strong policy environment.

Still in this part of the continent there are two States representing Turkey problems: Bulgaria and Greece, member States of NATO and the EU, the Christian state and former basic part of the Ottoman Empire.

The analysis proceeds primarily from demographic perspective: we are talking about Bulgaria, a country in deep crisis from this point of view. The party of ethnic Turks with their 14-15 % equilibrium factor, participating in all coalitions becoming the most consistently present on the political scene a party of our South-Danubian neighbors. Moreover, ethnic Turks control a significant part of the Bulgarian budget from the inside, through the party. And with regard to the Brussels funds, the presence of politicians of Turkish origin in Bulgaria are also noticeable.

The leadership of Turkey, it is only necessary to provide good relations between the two ethnic groups in Bulgaria, as the demographic pressure is more likely to Bulgarians than to Turks. Moreover, the fast economic growth of Bulgaria will attract and ethnic Turks from Turkey, even more complicating the situation.

Greece is the eternal enemy of Turkey and against her at any time can be take appropriate action (for example in the military academies of both countries at the first lecture in which talk about the eternal enemies of the state, Greece or Turkey, respectively, play a major role).

Differences with Athens different from the problem of Islands near the Turkish coast, to disputes over Cyprus and the continental shelf (rich in hydrocarbons). These arguments (as mentioned earlier) make us to believe that the policy of Turkey against Greece, in addition, with regard to small things, will not change.

Foreign countries represented by member States of the EU, where the presence of the Turkish minority is a notable (more than two million ethnic Turks). The main country that is meant, is Germany, followed by Holland and Switzerland.

The differences between the Turkish communities in these three large countries: in Germany, and especially in the former East Germany, the Turkish community are numerous, and the criminal police was facing a lot of problems trying to control a zone mainly inhabited by the Turks; the crime rate among the Turks is much more noticeable than in the other two countries.

In Germany the Turkish minority managed the parliamentary elections in 2002 to achieve the passage of one Deputy in the Bundestag (lower house of Parliament) but on the list of one of the major parties, and not of the minority organization.

In Holland and Switzerland, the Turkish minority is integrated much better here excluded those criminal operations that are possible in Germany. And still originated in Switzerland pronounced problem of minarets, which led to the referendum under procedures established by the Constitution of the Confederation.

Political leader of Turkey will try to develop lipoliticescoe cooperation between Ankara and Berlin, as the great German actor may change the balance in favor of the entry of Turkey into the EU (9). He also will try to change the direction of migration is in the direction of his native country. Since the assimilation of the Turks in Switzerland and Holland was better a good relationship with these countries should also be pursued.

4. Turkey trouble on the other side are the Eastern boundary (we will not consider here the situation of the Kurds, as we will analyze it when be say about domestic policy). The geopolitical landscape in this area can be considered in three sub-areas:

(A) South (South East) – here we find first and foremost Israel and Syria. Therefore, include Palestinian and Jordanian problems.
B) the East – are included here, mostly. position towards Iraq and Iran and the Muslim republics of the former USSR.
In) the North (northeast) – in this space you will analyze the Caucasus and the situation in the Black sea region.

The first strategic direction is marked by a rather strong Alliance with Israel. Although we had problems with the ship, unsuccessfully tried to enter the territorial waters of Israel, and the operation stop ended with the death of several people (in 2010), the geopolitical line in the macro was not changed. Fundamental here is the position of Washington, as one of these two countries could not act freely in relation to the great Atlantic state (10). If Israel was attacked one day by many Muslims, dissatisfied with his policies, and came to the point that it would be necessary to evacuate to the continent (the situation would be more than difficult, as a myth lying at the Foundation of Israel requires that this state was occupied by them on the spot), would Turkey be an appropriate shelter? According to this hypothesis, being just a transit, Ankara would not be able to take a position in the Muslim space.

In this sense, must be created by the Union, and more, it was created and "concreted" through "casting water to the mill". More specifically, between two loyal U.S. States signed an agreement to export water from Turkey to Israel, which caused dissatisfaction of Syria, deprived thus of the water reserves of the Tigris and Euphrates.

At the same time, Turkey is too important not to anger Syria, as Damascus, due to the fact that the government is basitki mode, is a dam in the way of infiltration of radical Islamists into the Turkish territorio: the fall of Syria would mean that the only barrier protecting Europe in the face of any Islamist penetration of the substance would remain Turkey, and its internal problems too would have complicated the situation, despite 680 000 soldiers at its disposal in the region (it should be noted that from 1990 to 2004, the Turkish army increased by 100 000 military).

In this sense we must understand the visit that the head of Syria Bashar al-Assad struck in 2007, the desire for stability of both countries is stronger than the difference (it is noticeable that the two States are secular in their grounds, though it is inspired by different doctrines).

The southern border means and sympathy towards Palestine in the Turkish society, but one must not allow it become the dominant social orientation, although such sentiments in recent times was supported by the Party of Justice and Development, as will immediately begin criticism from other countries about the problems of Armenians in the First world war. Even if 2010 has been a slight reduction of tension in Armenian-Turkish relations, the main problem is too deep to allow.

In this region there are new multiple problems because of the recent declarations of us President Barack Obama of may 19, 2011, when he announced the necessity of creating a Palestinian gosudarstva within the 1967 borders, which angered tel Aviv. Possible defeat Obama in the 2012 elections contribute to the intensification (in a positive way) Turkish-Israeli relations.

5. In the North (North-East) of Turkey are the Black sea and the Caucasus, where the main problem is the ethnic mosaic of the region. Currently, Turkey is the most powerful pillar for consolidating democracy, but:
Azerbaijan is together with Turkey in language, but not by religion (the majority are Shia, but you need to keep in mind, and the influence of Moscow via atheism, advanced in the last 70 years, which feels good so far). The presence of oil contributes to the fact that Azerbaijan constantly attracted the attention of many countries, but Ankara cannot fully establish their domination.

Azerbaijan is also a country with 16 million ethnic Azeris living in Iran (with 8 million population of Azerbaijan itself, which makes this question a matter of dispute between the two great regional powers (the only points of contact were now the Kurdish problem and the most profitable use of the situation in Iraq).

You need to find a state which would be supported by Iran, thus creating problems for Turkey: such a state cannot be Georgia because Tbilisi does not want to have bad relations with Ankara, Yerevan remains. Armenia is a country that enjoys tripartite support, two of the three States as goals the creation of a counterweight to Turkey in the Caucasus ( and now felt the absence of the Khazars in the positions that they occupied at the time of its maximum expansion), it is primarily Iran and then Russia ( a goal which Moscow supports Yerevan more numerous, it is only one of them).

A third state, which has supported Armenia is the United States as a result of the influence of the Armenian lobby in Washington DC (a considerable part of the Armenian legislation inspired by examples from USA). This raises a problem for Turkey and Armenia: how grateful will be the United States while it is now the state supports both and decides not to give greater support to one state at the expense of another?

We should not forget that Russia supports Turkey (but only in order to block the Black sea), and Armenia (the most loyal ally in the Caucasus). Then what is the maximum benefit can to get Turkey in this challenging game?

For Ankara, the most important is to achieve direct access to Caspian oil, but in order to do this she needs a real common border with Azerbaijan (the shortest crossing of the Nagorno-Karabakh is the most desirable goal). Otherwise, oil must go through Iran but the relations between Baku and Tehran is not high) or through Georgia (as is happening now).

Therefore, the key to relations between Turkey and Iran is represented by a small enclave of Azerbaijan, are under Armenian control: Ankara will do everything to get the border and territory, continuously stretching to the Caspian sea and from there to the Turkic republics of Central Asia (former Soviet) – the greatest strategic promotion, not desirable neither Tehran nor Moscow.

The logical consequences of this: both Russia and Iran will do anything in order to block the direct path of Ankara to the Caspian sea, in this sense should be interpreted and understandings between the two powers. Repeat: the Turkish-Armenian reconciliation is not possible, in full uniform, with all the implications which follow from this. In this sense can be interpreted the last message to the Turkish press, which specify that without the consent of Turkmenistan – the state, which has an important border in the Caspian sea is the Nabucco project from the outset doomed to failure.

The relationship in this area has highlighted another problem – the space of the former Soviet Muslim republics. Here in fact is facing four States, each of which has a distinctive approach to the problem, fundamentally affecting this space: Russia (visible patron), Saudi Arabia (government funding of religion), Turkey (ethnolinguistic patron) and Iran (a barrier).

Every actor in the zone of moderate policy, based on their interests, but only Ankara is a real pole, because it has economic power, backed up as a linguistic unity and a free attitude towards Islam.

Motivation: for many people in Central Asia Russia is still a state less attractive, and a significant part of keeping them strong dislike (at least because the support of various political leaders). In addition, it is not an Islamic state (house of Islam). Her role (which in reality falls) is the result of two factors: a) demographic ratio between Russia and Turkestan (known imbalances) and b) the fact that the poverty that prevailed after the 1990s (when most States in the zone did not receive grants from the Federal government) increased the number of illiterate in their native language, and much more in Russian.

Saudi Arabia – sponsor of the religious, but religion is not always saved from starvation. In addition, the version of Islam offered by Riyadh (with a high degree of rigor in following the injunctions of the Quran) is not the most user-friendly for citizens, accustomed during 70 years of atheistic propaganda have left their traces...

Iran is a state which benefits from the common border with many of these States, but he is a Shiite, and the common language of the Persians is from Tajikistan – government, constantly under the scrutiny of Uzbekistan, as on its territory there are water sources (important for the monoculture of cotton in Fergana valley and the rest of the Uzbek territory). The disparity in mass between Uzbekistan and Tajikistan does not give high hopes Iran (which show sufficient indifference lately, being more interested in Iraq).

Turkey has many advantages: is ethno-linguistic patron of the zone, all States of this zone (except Tajikistan speak Turkic languages, is an Islamic government (the ruling party), but not excessively, and this trait will work better for ordinary people (especially due to the fact that at the beginning of the 1990s, Turkey used the religious card, not having succeeded, she was forced to change tactics). In addition, she has the healthiest economy in the region. All these arguments allow us to conclude that Turkey in the future will be the most important actor in this area.

6. Earlier we said that Turkey's relations with Iran are crucial in regard to its Eastern borders. The collapse of the Arab factor in this zone (Iraq currently) leaves two States, which seriously benefited from the operations that started in 2003, the only way – cooperation.

In this sense shall be understood to mean any contact between the two countries: not only is this a common thing that unites them (the instability in the region increases its importance), but the problem of the Kurds, a people who failed (for him or oil – we can't even say) settled in the region. This factor makes them good to think about: the proclamation of state independence may lead to ingress in the military hard ticks between Ankara (which was demonstirovalo that does not avoid the protection of their national interests) and Tehran (forced again and again to improve its military potential in case of occurrence of turbulent times). Even if there existed an independent Kurdish quasi-state on Iraqi territory, officially it may not be recognized. The position of these two States and growing geopolitical context makes us believe that the moment the secret of a strong Alliance between them is not far off, just that moment, when the agreement will become "an open secret".

With regard to domestic policy, Turkey is a state that has solved many of the issues previously destroying it (especially after the introduction of a stronger currency), this brought her to first place in the regional economy, and the economic crisis affected Turkey's not so serious.

The fact that in recent years, Ahmet Davitoglu and Recep Tayyip Erdogan gave the actions of Turkey more firmness, made her a true leader in the region, despite the fact that other Islamic state seems to be faced with serious problems, and other regional powers on the background of the success of the representatives of the Turkish state are not allocated more energy.
No doubt, the Turkish government will be brought to the attention of many geopolitical States of the world, we believe that the place of Turkey in the European Union and it must be implemented without delay.

1) And that the Byzantine Empire of Justinian, as directly after it launched a powerful attack because of the migrating peoples against the Empire, then at the end of VI century Emperor Phocas left the line of the Danube, making possible, thus, the invasion of the Slavs.
2) the hope is that since all stabiliziruemost "forevermore".
3) Known diplomatic vehemence with which London defended the key position of Gibraltar in defiance of Spain.
4) In terms of real space in Central Asia, see: J. P Roux, Asia Centrală , ed. Semne , Bucureşti, 2007, and P. Karam – islamului Revenirea în fostul imperiu rus . Allah after Lenin , ed. Scripta , Bucureşti , 1998 .
5) On this question is doing quite a lively debate in academic circles, where gusts can often be calm reasoned and structured solutions.
6) Romania is not included in the list, as it legally was not in this position
7) it is Recognized that Albania has the highest tariffs for mobile communications in Europe, due to the fact that the market consists of two Greek roofing firms that split it.
The Macedonian language is very close to Bulgarian.
8) the Macedonian language is very close to Bulgarian.
(9) While the French partners in the face of Sarkozy actively oppose this idea.
10) A. Lapidot – Firilla : Turkey's search for a "third option" and its impact on relations with the U.S. and Israe l// Turkish Policy Quarterly , nr. 1 / 2005 (spring) , pg. 167.

Marius Vecherelo


RELATED MATERIALS: Politics and Geopolitics
Возрастное ограничение