Increasing Realism in Turkish ForeignPolicy during Post-Davutoglu Era.

• Author: Gumus, Abdurrahman

Introduction

This article compares Turkish foreign policy during and after the Davutoglu era and analyzes the changes and continuities in these two periods of the Justice and Development Party (AK Party) governments. After a long period of domestic troubles, economic difficulties, and short-term coalition governments in the 1990s, the successive one-party governments provided political stability in Turkiye in the AK Party period from 2002 until now, and this domestic change created new dynamics in Turkiye's foreign policy. Ahmet Davutoglu, an academic, came into prominence in terms of formulation of foreign policy principles in the first years of AK Party government and was responsible for implementing foreign policy later. Because of Davutoglu's importance and influence, the period starting in 2002 and continuing until roughly 2015 was called the Davutoglu era in Turkish foreign policy. (1)

In the Davutoglu era, Turkiye adopted soft power and cooperation-based foreign policy to improve its political and economic relations first with its neighbors and the global and regional actors simultaneously. The "zero problems with neighbors policy" became one of the trademarks of that period. The first years of the AK Party period witnessed a reform process toward the goal of EU membership. Reform packages and policies aiming to deepen the democratization and modernization of the society went hand in hand with proactive foreign policy especially in that period. After the reform process slowed, Turkiye could put its soft power and trade-oriented foreign policy approach into practice with the help of favorable external conditions and a proactive approach. As a result, increasing autonomy in Turkish foreign policy was achieved. The electoral successes of the AK Party and the relative political stability in domestic politics led to this continuity in Turkish foreign policy. However, the emergence of the Arab Uprisings changed the regional dynamics and the proactive foreign policy understanding of Turkiye became unsustainable in the new regional context.

Turkiye continued its proactive and multi-dimensional foreign policy in the last period of the Davutoglu era while facing new problems arising from different cases of the Arab uprisings, particularly the Syrian civil war. Turkiye's attempts to adjust its policies to respond to external challenges led to a transition period in the last years of the Davutoglu era. In other words, the changing regional context in the Middle East and North Africa and changes in Turkiye's relations with the regional and global actors made its shift in foreign policy inevitable. In the post-Davutoglu era, the July 15 coup attempt became a turning point for domestic politics and foreign policy. The policies developed as a reaction to the coup attempt reflected a new transformation in Turkish foreign policy.

This article argues that the transformation in Turkish foreign policy in the post-Davutoglu era was caused by various elements, most of which stem from the Arab Uprisings and the Syrian civil war. Soon after, the July 15 coup attempt paved the way for the concrete results of the transformation. The end of the Davutoglu era replaced the soft-power and cooperation-based foreign policy approach with a relatively more autonomous, hard-power-based, and realist foreign policy understanding.

Increasing realism in the post-Davutoglu era refers to the rise of realist elements, mechanisms, and tools compared to the Davutoglu era, such as more frequent use of hard power, the primacy of security rather than economic concerns, the emergence of a zero-sum understanding against the sources of the threat near the borders of Turkiye and the rise of conflictual issues instead of cooperation. Eminent scholars of Turkish foreign policy addressed the primacy of realist elements in the current period. They used different conceptualizations referring to these changes in TUrkiye's foreign policy approach and actions. Fuat Keyman used the concept of "moral realism" by combining humanitarian policies with realist elements while defining this change. (2) Meliha Benli Altunisik points out the "new turn" in Turkish foreign policy toward the Middle East based on domestic and regional insecurities and underlines "heightened threat perceptions, zero-sum competition with other regional powers, the increasing resort to the use of military force, risky behaviors and brinkmanship, and a preference for unilateral action." (3)

Turkiye's military operations in Northern Syria, its logistical support for the Government of National Accord (GNA) in Libya and Azerbaijan in the Second Karabakh War, as well as the conflictual relations and assertive discourse in the Eastern Mediterranean, can be given as examples of increasing realism in the current period. The AK Party's defense policy in the recent period was also interpreted as an indicator of the replacement of decades-long idealism with "a more realistic approach based on the new understanding of 'self-help' in defense." (4) This article will highlight this transformation and the increasing use of realist elements in Turkish foreign policy in the post-Davutoglu era.

Before doing so, it will be helpful to elaborate on Turkish foreign policy in the Davutoglu era. Therefore, the upcoming section will point out the main principles, foreign policy approach, instruments, and critical turning points in the Davutoglu era, which will constitute the reference point for analyzing the transformation in Turkish foreign policy in the current period. Then, Turkiye's foreign policy moves and approach in the post-Davutoglu era will be discussed. The three main changes in the post-Davutoglu era will also be explained as the main elements or indicators of transformation in Turkish foreign policy after the July 15 coup attempt. Last but not least, the results of a thorough analysis of Turkish foreign policy during the AK Party government, in general and in the post-Davutoglu era, in particular, will be presented in conclusion.

Turkish Foreign Policy in the Davutoglu Era

The Davutoglu era in Turkish foreign policy was relatively long so it is more effective to determine analytical divisions and periodization to highlight the turning points and decisive factors in that period. Though the proactive and more autonomous foreign policy in the AK Party period reflected the domestic transformation in Turkish politics, external factors continued to play decisive roles and the decision-makers had to adjust the policies in accordance with the changing regional and international context. Among the external factors, the Arab uprisings and the consequences of different cases played a more decisive role and became critical in shaping Turkish foreign policy.

Between 2002 and 2005, the reform process toward the goal of European Union (EU) membership shaped domestic politics and foreign policy. The harmonization packages not only supported progress toward the goal of EU accession but also increased the level of democratization and modernization and resulted in legal changes regarding significant issues. This reform process created a positive atmosphere in domestic politics and consolidated societal support for the AK Party policies. The continuation of societal support was vital for political stability and pursuing a more autonomous foreign policy. The reform process in that period was defined as a "silent revolution." (5)

On the other hand, the first AK Party government coincided with the period after the U.S. declaration of its "global war on terror" and the Bush Administration was about to make an operation against the Saddam regime in Iraq. Despite the negotiations between the AK Party government and the U.S. administration, the Grand National Assembly rejected the March 1 Memorandum, which would have permitted the U.S. military forces to use Turkish soil during the operation against Iraq in 2003. The rejection resulted from the negative stance against the U.S. invasion of Iraq in public opinion, the lack of expected benefits in exchange for unlimited support during the First Gulf War, and the legal debates about the U.S. operation. (6) This decision greatly disappointed the U.S. officials and led to the deterioration of U.S.-Turkiye relations. Despite the attempts to recover the relations and positive messages about the strategic importance of U.S.-Turkish relations, the loss of confidence on both sides continued for years. As a result, Turkiye had troubled relations with the U.S. in the first years of the AK Party period despite the improvements in the EU-Turkiye relations.

The period between 2005 and 2010 witnessed the implementation of soft power and cooperation-based foreign policy formulated by Davutoglu with the help of a favorable external context. Despite this general positive atmosphere in the external context, the improvements in the EU-Turkiye relations in the initial years were replaced with some disagreements and problems such as the slowing down of the reform process, the acceptance of Cyprus membership to the EU despite Turkiye's and Turkish Cypriots' support for the Annan Plan, and the changing attitudes of some leading EU members, such as France and Germany, after the leadership changes, and those problems led Turkiye to a search for new alternatives. (7) On the other hand, there were some improvements in U.S.-Turkiye relations starting with the second term of the Bush Administration. During this period, Turkish foreign policy diversified by improving relations with many actors, pursuing proactive policies, taking the initiative to resolve long-term problems, and playing the role of mediator in several regional disputes. The Davutoglu principles could be put into practice in that period. Since there were almost no high-intensity military conflicts in the regional and international arena, Davutoglu's proactive foreign policy approach based on principles such as zero problems with...