The Complexity Effect in U.S.-Turkey Relations: The Restructuring of the Middle East Regional Security/ABD-Turkiye ilickilerinde Karmasiklik Etkisi: Orta Dogu Boigesel Guvenliginin Yeniden Yapilandirilmasi.

• Author: Sahin, Devrim

Introduction

This paper analyses how specific aspects of United States (U.S.)-Turkey relations reveal the need to use complexity in International Relations (IR). In applying the complexity theory to this question, the main theoretical argument proposes that the complexity of the international system links the survival of the long-standing partnership between the U.S. and Turkey to the future of the Middle East. The paper first sets out a comprehensive explanation of complex systems that resonates with the characteristics of the international system. It argues that complex systems are non-linear, emergent, co-adaptive, heterogeneous and path-dependent on feedback loops by which the effect of the dynamic interaction of their multiple components serves to provide feedback into this interaction. (1) Combining complexity thinking and assumptions from the Copenhagen School, the paper adds merit to the current literature, which offers no such application to utilize insights from complexity to the Copenhagen School.

A widely used approach to explain complexity in the security field is the Regional Security Complex Theory, the brainchild of Barry Buzan and Ole Waever--the prominent scholars of the Copenhagen School with regard to security studies in the context of IR studies. (2) This theory examines regional sub-systems, that (compared to global system) are relatively small in specific regions such as balance of power system structures based on shared perceptions like the primary cause of conflicts or alliances shaped by international affairs. The paper elaborates on the distinguishing characteristics of regional security complexes and argues that they fit together with complexity thinking as a useful method for analyzing the U.S.-Turkey relationship. (3)

The paper also adds to the existing literature on the U.S.-Turkey relationship by offering a framework based on the process tracing of feedback loops in U.S.-Turkey relations as a methodology. Notably, the idea of interactions and feedbacks has been developed as a supplement to the rather static structural view of Regional Security Complexity Theory. The two could be linked as examples of structure-agency interaction. In doing so, the paper proposes an empirical test of its hypothesis by highlighting internal attributions of states as a cause of systemic transformations. (4)

Considering Turkey's priority of containing Kurdish nationalism, the paper emphasizes how some events like feedback loops (iterations), given their impact on the rise of Kurdish nationalism which Turkey's decision-makers label as an actual threat to the nation's territorial integrity. And, the focus of the analysis demarcates the different iterations laid out in the paper as they are not consequential on this priority. These iterations focus on macro shifts in the international system including the end of the Cold War period, the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks (9/11) and the 2008 global financial crisis - all of which have made the regional nature and definition of security more noticeable in line with the predictions generated by the Regional Security Complex Theory and complexity thinking.

The findings of the paper propose that the current complexities in the US.-Turkey relationship could develop into a complex security situation. Each actor is looking out for themselves and both see things mainly from their own local perspective, despite the implications for the wider system. While this finding fits within state-centric analytical frameworks, the above mentioned three 'iterations' and the repercussions cannot be deducted from mainstream theories without some complex assumptions. One very dramatic consequence of this complexity would be realignment of the Middle Eastern balance of power through regional security complexes in favor of U.S. adversaries which would not always be directly proportional (linear) reactions to foreign policy decisions (such as U.S. support for the armed Kurdish groups).

The following section discusses the literature from which IR theories on complexity are drawn. The paper then reviews theoretical works on IR with specific attention to the studies on Regional Security Complex Theory. The subsequent sections illustrate U.S.-Turkey relations to test principles drawn from a systematic synthesis showing how Regional Security Complex Theory and complexity theory fit together. Finally the fourth section presents the findings that demonstrate how complexity thinking can help advance Regional Security Complex Theory while the last section forms the conclusion.

The Core Assumptions of Complexity

Complexity approach in IR, which has a history going back to James Rosenau (a pioneer in the globalization studies field) and others, is derived primarily from the works on complexity theory in other disciplines. (5) Despite a plethora of literature on complexity, the concept still suffers from a lack of both onto logical and epistemological underpinnings. (6) There is no consensus on the hierarchy of the core assumptions of complexity thinking which points to a lack of ontology that continues to be a weak spot of complexity thinking in general. (7) This weakness necessitates both thorough discussion of the evolution of complexity thinking and a working definition of complexity.

In his 1997 book 'System Effects,' Robert Jervis conceptualizes core assumptions of complexity such as nonlinearities, feedbacks, indirect effects, contingencies, interaction effects and unintended consequences to help in the resilience of systems-based studies. (8) He argues that a minor variation in any one of numerous components of systems might trigger other reactions in that vein, causing radical changes in the system and its components. A more familiar example of complexity behavior is the interaction of complex organizations; what the American sociologist James D. Thompson defines as a set of interdependent parts which together make up a whole. (9)

Raymond A. Thietart and Bernard Forgues, in their attempt to apply complex properties to organizations, claim that organizational behavior is subject to not just internal forces but also to the external forces of the system. (10) Through a diverse agenda, these forces seek to coordinate actions in the present which are activated by past actions undertaken by other actors and will influence actions to be initiated by other actors. What these characteristics of complex organizations lead us to expect is that the international system would be provided with a complete description in terms of the interaction of its dynamics that are sensitively dependent on non-linear feedback loops. The literature holds feedback loops to be either positive or negative with significantly different results by which "feedback can result in stability or if there is positive feedback and a change is reinforced rather than dampened down, dramatic shifts can take place and a system can be said to have become 'path dependent'". (11)

Non-linear mathematics was first applied in the prediction of complex systems such as Edward Lorenz's weather related work. (12) Through an effort to replicate atmospheric conditions by computer models of atmospheric convection, Lorenz found that non-linear type of behavior shows evidence of a high dependence on the initial conditions. (13) Lorenz used systems of deterministic equations which are an idealization of hydrodynamic systems that show evidence of symmetric and steady output under certain conditions while showing an irregular flow pattern under different conditions. (14) He found that 'non-periodic solutions' are typically reactive regarding slight alterations, such that slightly differing initial states can evolve into considerably different states. (15) In his experiments, small changes in weather conditions have shown various weather patterns which can trigger alteration of the atmosphere.

Since the weather related work of Lorenz, interest in complexity has grown among researchers in different scientific fields, including the IR discipline. Lars-Erik Cederman, in his 1997 book 'Emergent Actors in World Politics,' contributes to the theoretical development of complexity thinking by applying the emergence notion as a basis for the assessment of the progress of countries and their people. (16) In terms of international affairs, emergent properties imply that characteristics of the international system cannot be drawn merely from the characteristics of its elementary components. (17 )As for complexity, the IR system does not appear as an exterior and solid structure but interacts as an emergent system. Its emergent characteristics, stemming from the repeated interaction of its elementary parts, are neither constant nor purified from its elements.

In his 'Turbulence in World Politics' in 1990, which is seen as pioneering the application of complexity thinking to IR, Rosenau conceptualizes 'global turbulence' as global chaos (a term widely used as synonymous to complexity). (18) According to him, global complexity is formed by any kind of disorder brought by advances in people's capabilities through better education and technology. The rise of new actors and the decline of state authority promote both greater fragmentation as well as greater integration throughout global system. (19) Rosenau s subsequent work in 2003 observed that although works on complexity are restricted in prediction, they "challenge prevailing assumptions that political, economic and social relationships adhere to patterns traced by linear processes". (20) The focus of complexity thinking on "strategic interaction and unintended consequences" makes it particularly appropriate for the study of social systems. (21)

Erika Cudworth and Stephen Hobden, in their 2012 article, "The Foundations of Complexity the Complexity of Foundations" attribute a particular character to social systems as being embedded in scientific systems (non-social and non-human systems). (22)...