Days of Gloom in Türkiye
The world is going through a period of conflict and uncertainty. Where does Türkiye stand? What is Ankara’s relationship with its allies, traditional partners, regional countries, and neighbors?
Sadly, Türkiye’s relations with its NATO allies and EU partners are characterized by mutual dislike/distrust. The obituary for Türkiye’s EU “accession process” was written years ago. All Europe wants from Türkiye is to remain “anchored” in Europe under a strictly transactional relationship. During a time of uncertainty in Europe-US relations, extending to trans-Atlantic defense, some see prospects for a new kind of relationship between Europe and Türkiye focused on common defense. These are optimistic expectations because the essence of defense cooperation, beyond a common perception of external threat, is like-mindedness and a shared world outlook.
In the broad Middle East, AKP’s unreserved support for the Muslim Brotherhood and obsession with Türkiye’s Ottoman past have been costly. Our relations with the Gulf countries, Jordan, and Egypt have been problematic for years. Moreover, AKP’s Islamist policies have distanced Ankara from the Turkic republics, as shown by their decision to open embassies in Nicosia. In the past, Ankara undertook initiatives for peace in the Middle East. This is no longer the case. Ankara and Baku have maintained a close relationship for decades. Does that mean Azerbaijan’s and Türkiye’s leaderships share a world outlook? No. Moreover, Azerbaijan enjoys excellent relations with Israel based on shared interests. This is why the latest deconfliction talks between Türkiye and Israel were held in Baku.
Because of President Erdoğan’s and the AKP’s anti-Israel rhetoric, our relations with Israel are at an all-time low. Yet, we have done a great service to Israel by helping to bring down President Assad. Following his departure to Russia, the AKP leadership pretended that this was a historic accomplishment, and Ahmed al-Sharaa was our man in Syria. As I have repeatedly written, our involvement in the Syrian conflict was the biggest foreign and security policy mistake of the Turkish Republic. Today, against all claims by Ankara, the US and Israel are calling the shots in Syria, and we are home to millions and millions of Syrian refugees, only receiving “thank-yous” from European leaders.
Add on top of all this, the current economic crisis that is more than likely to last, our foreign and security problems, and last but certainly not least, the arrest of Istanbul’s Mayor İmamoğlu and hundreds with him.
None of the foregoing is to deny that Türkiye remains a country of critical importance in the West-Russia divide. Its strategic location, control over the Straits linking the Black Sea and the Mediterranean, and economic, political, and military potential are great assets. Why will the Russia-Ukraine talks be held in İstanbul this week? Because Moscow, Washington, and Kyiv know that this would be a gift to Ankara, to highlight its involvement in high-level international diplomacy, and thus be thankful to them. My point is only to underline that by remaining on the democratic path and following policies based on national interest rather than ideology, Türkiye could have been at a different point, years ahead, far ahead of where we are today.
At present, we look nervously into the near future, since the long future remains “a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma”, to use Winston Churchill’s words. However, we can look at the past.
In 1994, Mr. Erdoğan was elected the mayor of Istanbul. Three years later, on December 6, 1997, while delivering a speech in Siirt, he quoted from a well-known nationalist poem: “The mosques are our barracks, the domes our helmets, the minarets our bayonets, and the faithful our soldiers.”
This is how former US Secretary of State Madeleine Albright defined the aftermath of the speech in his book titled “Fascism, A Warning”:
“Erdoğan’s words would have attracted little attention had they not been uttered in what was, for his country, a nervous moment. An insecure government – looking for a fight – arrested him on the charge of inciting religious hatred. He was convicted, forced to resign his position, and barred from public office for five years. The authorities hoped to end the popular mayor’s career, but their strategy backfired. The incident gave Erdoğan an aura of notoriety, and in the eyes of some, made him a hero. A two-thousand-car caravan accompanied his journey to prison, and a coterie of admirers returned four months later to greet him upon his release.”[i]
In this part of her book, “Erdoğan the Magnificent”, Ms. Albright has expressed much praise for Mr. Erdoğan’s accomplishments in his earlier years in power.
And this is how she concluded the section:
“No Turkish leader has succeeded in building – or even really tried to build – a democratic society in which citizens who have far different visions of what it means to be Turkish can nevertheless live together productively, freely, and in peace. That would be a worthy monument to any statesman. Might Erdogan choose that path? I think he could, but only if he were to accept that the primary obstacle to advancement is neither the Gülenists, nor the terrorists, nor rival political parties – it is the voice inside telling him that he and only he knows what’s best for Turkey. That’s the siren’s song that transforms power into an end in itself – and leads toward tyranny.[ii]
After his four months in prison, Mr. Erdoğan returned to politics. In 2003, he was elected to parliament. Since then, he has been at the country’s helm, as prime minister and president. Even after twenty-three years in power, President Erdoğan never misses an opportunity to attack past governments for their repressive policies. Yet, those governments did not entirely block his path toward a twenty-three-year rule over the country.
The inseparable political and economic crises we are currently experiencing reminded me of what Madeleine Albright had said in 2018, soon after Türkiye adopted its unique presidential system in another step toward authoritarian rule.
Today, it is abundantly clear that what worries the AKP is the strong possibility that history might repeat itself with Mr. İmamoğlu. They have two options:
Firstly, bringing this episode to a quick end, prioritizing Türkiye’s long-term national interests. This would be the dictate of political wisdom and courage. Secondly, continuing to say that justice must take its course. By all indications, the AKP has opted for the latter approach, deepening Türkiye’s widespread feelings of doom and gloom.
CHP, the main opposition party, has energized itself after Mr. İmamoğlu’s arrest and is having a successful campaign of rallies. Last Wednesday evening, thousands gathered at İstanbul’s Beyazıt Square, in front of İstanbul University. The city lights on the Square were cut off.
The problem is that the political and economic cost of the current political confrontation between the President and the opposition is rising by the hour for our polarized Türkiye. Their standoff bars us from dealing with our important and immediate challenges, starting with the economy. Political stability is the fundamental condition of economic recovery and much-needed foreign investment.
This week, President Trump will visit Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates. There is no visit to Israel on his travel plan, but it still may happen. This is a critical time because Prime Minister Netanyahu declared last week that his country is “on the eve of a forceful entry to Gaza.” Gaza’s casualty figure is approaching 53,000. Gazans are suffering from starvation. Without a shadow of a doubt, Mr. Netanyahu’s endgame is the forced exile of Gazans. The only remaining question is “where ?”
A meeting between Presidents Erdoğan and Trump would not be a surprise.
Last Wednesday, reflecting the disappointment that Mr. Trump is not starting his Middle East tour with Israel, David Horovitz, the founding editor of The Times of Israel, in an article titled, “His first term was remarkable for Israel from the start. What is Trump up to this time?” said:
“On his first trip to our immediate neighborhood as US president, in June 2009, Barack Obama flew to Cairo and delivered an outreach speech to the Muslim world in which he related to Israel largely in the context of the Holocaust and made no mention of sovereign Jewish history in the Holy Land. He flew home without so much as a stopover in Israel, the United States’ one and only democratic, ultra-dependable ally in this part of the world.”
“By contrast, Donald Trump, in his first visit anywhere overseas as president, spent two days in Israel in May 2017, stood with his head bowed at the Western Wall and highlighted what he said was his ‘privilege’ to address the people of Israel in the ancient city of Jerusalem.”[iii]
In fact, on his first trip to our neighborhood as US president, Mr. Obama first traveled not to Cairo but to Ankara, where he addressed the Turkish Grand National Assembly. His principal message was that Atatürk’s greatest legacy is Türkiye’s strong, vibrant, secular democracy.[iv]
Sadly, that was then, this is now, and as the next sixteen years have shown, many listening to President Obama in the chamber on that day had other views.[v]
If Presidents Erdoğan and Trump meet next week, this would allow for a better understanding of the future of Türkiye-US relations, what the Trump White House expects from Türkiye, and the cost of Mr. Trump’s friendship.
During his visit to the region, Mr. Trump might look for places to send Gazans. Türkiye should not be among those countries and should categorically reject any such proposal that may come up. The Arab League has twenty-two member-states, and they are the ones to open their doors to Gazans should this become inevitable. Unfortunately, this is Mr. Netanyahu’s endgame in Gaza in defiance of international law, the so-called “rules-based international order”, and the International Criminal Court.
The former EU foreign policy chief Josep Borrell has launched a blistering attack on Israel, accusing its government of committing genocide in Gaza and “carrying out the largest ethnic-cleansing operation since the end of the Second World War to create a splendid holiday destination”.[vi] If Mr. Netanyahu succeeds in his Gaza project, this will prove that the support given to the “two-state solution” for years was nothing but hypocrisy.
[i] Madeleine Albright, Fascism, A Warning, (Harper Perennial, 2018), pp 137- 138.
[ii] Ibid. p.153.
[iii] https://www.timesofisrael.com/his-first-term-was-remarkable-for-israel-from-the-start-what-is-trump-up-to-this-time/
[iv] https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/remarks-president-obama-turkish-parliament
[v] https://diplomaticopinion.com/2015/01/31/president-obama-and-the-middle-east/
[vi] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/may/09/israel-committing-genocide-in-gaza-says-eus-former-top-diplomat