Determinants of Turkish-American relations and prospects for the future.

• Author: Erhan, Cagri
• Position: ARTICLE - Essay

ABSTRACT This article analyzes the fluctuating course of the Turkey-U.S. relationship with a special focus on Barack Hussein Obama's presidency. When Obama held office, he aimed at reinventingU.S.' image and shifting center of gravity from the Middle East to Asia-Pacific. These led U.S. to develop its relations with its allies in the region to provide the course of politics go along with the American geostrategic goals. Obama suggested a "model partnership" concept to draw a line between his Administration's and that of his predecessorGeorge W. Bush. Differences of opinion, however, meant the concept did not go beyond being a surface change. Ultimately, two problems remained unsolved; the FETO leader's ongoing residence in U.S. and American support for YPG/PYD in Syria.

Introduction

Turkey's relations with the U.S. have occupied a special significance in its foreign policy agenda since the end of the Second World War. This priority stems from three essential roots: the comprehensive security and military relationship developed since the Truman Doctrine (1947), the intensive economic and financial relationship that emerged as a result of the Marshall Plan (1948), and the joint strategic initiatives, which emerged after the Cold War in the vast Eurasian region. (1)

Throughout the 1990s, Turkish and American statesmen have characterized bilateral relations as strategic alliance or strategic partnership. Having been critically damaged during the Iraqi War of 2003, the strategic dimension of the relationship was restructured by a series of trust building measures during George W. Bush's second term. (2) However, the AK Party government's efforts to rehabilitate the relations with a new common strategic vision did not yield the expected positive results. Barack Hussein Obama developed another term and called the for a model partnership (3) in 2009. (4) This new approach was welcomed in Ankara and then Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan supported developing a relationship built on a new understanding--a perception of mutual benefits and common interest. Nevertheless this win-win concept only effectively worked for two years until the Arab Spring erupted. After Obama's two terms of presidency, the current situation of Turkish-American relations can more readily be described as well apart from a strategic or model partnership.

Considering the deterioration in 2003 crisis, the U.S. military assistance to YPG/PYD terrorist organization in Syria and Iraq, made relations even worse. On the other hand, the relations are shadowed by public suspicions about U.S. involvement in FETO's coup attempt, and U.S.' resistance to extradite the FETO leader--displaying lack of solidarity in Turkey's fight against ISIS. Therefore Turkish-American relations necessitate an urgent renewal and upgrade. Donald Trump's presidency may create an opportunity to open a new page in Ankara-Washington relations, which face the most dramatic divergence in its bicentennial history.

This article attempts to assess eight years of Turkish-American relations during the Obama administration and analyzes future prospects for the upcoming Trump presidency. Bearing in mind that ignoring the long history of bilateral relations, which present a number of indicators for the elements of continuity and change would endanger the accuracy of the conclusions, this study will first highlight key turning points in Turkey's relations with the U.S.

The overwhelming share of academic literature about the relations between Turkey and the United States assert that the two countries started to interact with each other following the Second World War. Although it is true that the volume and scope of Turkish-American relations dramatically intensified after 1945, no one can ignore the historical roots going back to late eighteenth century. Moreover, early dynamics of the nations' bilateral relations paved the way for the pre- and post-Second World War encounters. (5)

Ottoman Past

The legacy of Ottoman-American relations was disagreement rather than cooperation, with three essential problems emerging during the nineteenth century. The first problem stemmed from the unbalanced nature of economic and social interactions. Except a short period in 1870s, the amount of exports from the Ottoman Empire to the United States was more than the imports and the trade was overwhelmingly done by American vessels. By the time of the Ottoman-American Trade and Navigation Agreement of 1830, a capitulatory regime, which included lower tariffs as well as legal exemption, was established in favor of American merchants. In the following years, the U.S. government intensified political pressure on the Ottoman government to enlarge the scope of extra-territorial legal privileges of American citizens visiting or living in the Ottoman lands. Naturally, this attitude created repeated cycles of tensions between the two governments. Interestingly, almost a century later the issue of judicial privileges granted to American military personnel created problems in both the 1960s and early 2000s.

Another problem of the Ottoman era was the involvement of Americans into revolutionary and nationalist movements of non-Muslim minorities. Starting from the Morea Revolt in 1821, some American charitable organizations, volunteers, former army members, diplomats and, most actively, Protestant missionaries enthusiastically supported the independence tendencies of a wide range of Christians including Greeks, Bulgarians and Armenians. On one hand, the personal contribution of Americans to the rebellions against the Ottoman Government have incited quite a number of diplomatic crises and created anti-Turkish sentiments among the American citizens in the U.S. on the other. Stereotypes including 'Terrible Turk' or 'Unspeakable Turk' are original contributions of Philhellene and Armenophil American missionaries to the English lexicon whose missionary schools and facilities in Ottoman lands reached significant numbers by the end of the nineteenth century. Additionally, some American diplomats played an active role in the immigration of Eastern European Jews to Palestine. Travel and settlement restrictions imposed by the Sublime Porte were occasionally criticized by American diplomats. (6) In addition, there are examples of American individual of institutional involvement into Turkish domestic affairs in the upcoming decades. For instance, particular activities of the Peace Corps in 1960s and 1970s resulted in a wave of political discontent. Finally, public perception of American support for the FETO has shaken the U.S. image in Turkey.

The third essential problem emerged as a result of U.S. demands to have maritime access to the Black Sea. Passage through the Dardanelles and Bosporus straits were limited through a series of international conventions beginning with the London Convention of 1841. (7) Being a non-riparian state, the U.S. was not granted right of free passage to and from the Black Sea during peace and war times. Washington's enthusiasm for the straits and Black Sea passage would continue. As the U.S. is not party to the Montreux Convention of the Straits (1936), its naval presence in the Black Sea is restricted. However, legal restrictions did not prevent the American Navy asking for an entrance permit during the Russo-Georgian war of 2008.

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

In fact, the problematic nature of Ottoman-American relations has prevailed until the early years of the Turkish republic. Specifically, abolition of capitulations of American citizens that were given at the Ottoman time and restrictions on the U.S.' Near East Relief organization's activities aimed at Armenians delayed re-establishment of diplomatic relations until 1927, after they were officially withdrawn in 1917. During the 1930s, however, the two countries pursued distant but amicable relations. (8)

Diversification after 1945

The Second World War marked a turning point in Turkish-American relations. In 1943, Turkey became a recipient of Lend and Lease military assistance from the U.S. and Turkey's declaration of war on Germany and Japan paved its way to become a founding member of the United Nations in 1945. After the war, the emergence of strategic and ideological disagreements between the U.S. and the then USSR helped develop closer political and military ties between Ankara and Washington. At the beginning of the Cold War, Turkey was under Soviet pressure, and the U.S. was preparing its policies of containment. The Turkish-American rapprochement gained impetus in 1947, when President Truman declared his decision to send military assistance to Turkey and Greece, both of which were under 'communist threat.' American assistance to Turkey after the Truman Doctrine did not only affect the military dimension, it had rather a political influence on the future of Turkish-American relations. (9)

According to the Article 2 of the Military Assistance Agreement dated July 12, 1947, the usage of the military equipment provided by the American government was limited by the essential goals of the agreement, namely to defend Turkey against foreign invasion. (10) All American military assistance to Turkey in the following years was given under the same condition and, as a matter of fact, it created military and political dependence on the U.S. For instance, when Turkey intended to intervene to Cyprus in order to put an end to Greek EOKA organization's atrocities on the Turkish Cypriots, in 1964, Washington did remind Ankara that it could not use American arms in its military actions. (11) Moreover, when Turkey did finally intervene in Cyprus in 1974, the U.S. imposed an arms embargo, which lasted for 3 years and weakened the fighting capacity of Turkish military. (12)

Following the Truman Doctrine, the U.S. economic aid given to Turkey through the Marshall Plan in 1948 and Turkey's accession to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) in 1952...