Reinvention of Turkish foreign policy in Latin America: the Cuba case.

• Author: Akilli, Erman
• Position: Essay

Introduction

On 11 February 2015, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan paid a visit to Cuba as part of a three-leg Latin American tour. This was the second visit of a high-level Turkish delegation to Latin American countries, the first being in 1995. Erdogan's trip drew the attention of international media and scholars to the special features of Turkey's relations with Latin America and the Caribbean.

Turkey's political, economic and cultural influence in regional and global affairs has been gradually increasing in the last few years, following a multi-directional or multi-regional vocation. In the last decade, Turkey's growing relevance in different regions has gone beyond that of a trade partner. Under the AK Party, Turkey has launched a so called paradigm shift in its foreign policy, which former Prime Minister and former Minister of Foreign Affairs Prof. Ahmet Davutoglu (1) underlines as a 'Multi-Dimensional Foreign Policy Approach.' Following Davutoglu's guidelines, Turkey has formed new routes in international policy and enhanced those new routes with humanitarian and development aid, making use of both the cultural element and the religious dimension. As part of this larger initiative, policies aimed at strengthening Turkey's strategic ties were directed toward Latin America and the Caribbean region, including Cuba. Thanks to this new approach and to Turkey's economic growth, Ankara is now acknowledged as a development partner that provides humanitarian aid and developmental assistance, mainly through the gradual involvement of the Turkish International Cooperation and Development Agency (TIKA). In light of these trends, Turkey's soft power in the region is growing.

Drawing on the conceptualization of soft power given by Joseph Nye Jr., this article studies two linked elements of Turkish soft power: agents and behavior. Turkey's soft power has gained importance, thanks to the gradual involvement of new state and non-state actors (agents) along with the adoption of novel frameworks, such as cultural diplomacy, public diplomacy and humanitarian diplomacy (behavior). The current research has the purpose of analyzing Turkey's approach toward Latin America and the Caribbean region through the prism of soft power theory, and through a specific case study, i.e. Turkey-Cuba relations. The working assumption is that Turkey has been able to increase its presence and influence in the region, thanks to a particular soft power-oriented approach known as multi-dimensional policy, which reflects both new behavior and new agents. An analysis of Turkey-Cuba relations will not only help improve the literature about Turkey's foreign policy on a subject which has not yet been adequately examined, but will also underline features and peculiarities of Turkey's soft power, such as the emerging "Mosque Diplomacy." (2)

Theoretical and Conceptual Background of Soft Power

Power is one of the most central and yet problematic concepts in political science and international relations (IR), where it has a variety of forms and features. In the most general sense, power may refer to any kind of influence exercised by objects, individuals, or groups upon each other. (3) One of the most influential definitions of power remains that of Max Weber, who defines power as the "probability that one actor within a social relationship will be in a position to carry out his own will despite resistance, regardless of the basis on which this probability rests." (4) In other words, power is a 'zero-sum' game: either you win or you lose. According to the literature, the best way to materialize national interests is to use military and economic power elements with a view to forcing other actors to undertake a cost-benefit calculation. In summary, most actors pursue a 'carrot and stick' policy in their foreign policies. (5) However, in a post-modernist and globalized society, 'soft' power, which is based on a 'value-based' notion of power, becomes increasingly important relative to 'hard' power, which is dependent upon military and economic resources.

This essay assumes the definition of power asserted by Joseph Nye Jr., who argues that power is "the ability to influence the behavior of others to get a desired outcomes one wants." (6) During the last two decades, Nye's concept of soft power has become widely known in IR literature and elsewhere; it is now a term used by scholars, policymakers, and others, albeit in many different ways. The origin of the concept is deeply related to an analysis of US power and foreign policy during the 1980s, when declinist theories and interpretations of the international order dominated mainstream IR debates. (7) The concept of "soft power," which Nye coined in his 1990 book, Bound to Lead: The Changing Nature of American Power, was strengthened by his Soft Power: The Means to Success in World Politics (2004), and further elaborated in his The Powers To Lead (2008); it is rooted in the idea that alternative power structures exist in international relations alongside economic and military power. Soft power is neither an evolution or involution nor a substitute for hard power, it is simply another form of power.

According to Nye, "the distinction between hard and soft power is one of degree, both in the nature of the behavior and in the tangibility of the resource." (8) Unlike hard power, soft power explains fields of influence and attraction beyond military and economic indicators, and refers to a country's social human capital. This is why soft power may differ from country to country. Soft power is an autonomous form of power, which has its own rules, features and characteristics, and "does not depend on hard power." (9) For Nye, soft power is better seen as a strategy a country may use in order to gain its objectives without coercion or payments, but with attraction founded on culture, political values, and legitimate and moral foreign policy. As such, soft power helps to shape international institutions and policy agenda. To Nye, soft power explains the "attractiveness of a country's culture, political notions and policies," the power of attraction, as opposed to the power derived from military force and economic sanctions. In sum, soft power rests on the ability to shape the preferences of others, without the use of force, coercion or violence. That is, the ability to coopt people rather than coerce them.

As we have seen, co-optive or soft power rest on the resources, behavior and agents that comprise a country's attractiveness. Resources are tangible or intangible capabilities, goods, and instruments at disposal; behavior is the action itself, the manner or way of acting, and the conduct of an agent. In terms of resources, soft power resources are the assets that produce attraction; co-optive power can be seen in the attraction exerted by an agent through a certain behavior. According to Nye, the soft power of a country rests on three resources: its culture (in places where it is attractive to others), its political values (when it lives up to them at home and abroad), and its foreign policies (when they are seen as legitimate and having moral authority). This is because "in international politics, the resources that produce soft power arise in large part from the values an organization or country expresses in its culture, in the examples it sets by its internal practices and policies, and in the way it handles relations with others." (10) Culture, education, arts, media, film, literature, higher education (universities, research centers, think tanks, etc.), non-governmental organizations, tourism, platforms for economic cooperation and diplomacy, are all soft resources that may be used to produce and to feed soft power. (11)

Another important feature of Joseph Nye's theory, which is also useful in terms of understanding Turkey's foreign policy agenda, has to do with the agents or actors that really hold soft power. The definition of hard and soft power given by Nye does not differentiate between agents. For many years, international affairs have been understood in state-centric terms, and only recent studies consider non-state actors in terms of contributions and challenges to a government's decision-making process. (12) Even though Nye is commonly known as one of the fathers of interdependence theory, (13) in his work there is a lack of attention given to non-state actors or agents. However, on the basis of this theory, we can argue that institutions, large corporations, civil society organizations and movements, and even individuals hold soft power.

Behaviors and Agents of Turkey's Soft Power

Turkey's soft power is different from that of other countries in both its form and content. In other words, it has distinctive features in terms of both resources and agents, both of which mark an original approach. The values that Turkey represents, as well as its historic and cultural depth, have mobilized regional dynamics and provided opportunities for the creation of new spheres of influence. (14) Some elements and features of Turkish soft power are similar to those of other non-Western rising powers such as Brazil and South Africa. (15) Similarly to these countries, Turkey's foreign policy has mainly followed strategies that deploy non-material aspects of power: consensus-building initiatives, diplomacy and persuasion. Considering its history, recourse to soft power seems to make sense in view of Turkey's interests, goals and resources. (16)

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

Prior to the rise of the AK Party, Turkey's foreign policy tradition, for the most part, stayed within the parameters of the Kemalist foreign policy approach, which can be summed up as a security oriented, status quo focused, and strategic alignment. After their electoral victory in 2002, the Justice and Development Party (Adalet ve Kalkinma Partisi, or AK Party) began cautiously revitalizing Turkey's role in the international sphere...