Search

The Turkish Grand National Assembly's decision not to allow the US troops to use Turkish territory to move into Iraq was widely considered in academic literature as a major turning point in the development of Turkish-American strategic partnership. In this context, this article questions the central role of individual, group and bureaucratic decision making disparities between Turkey and the US during the 2003 Iraq crisis. This article suggests that the divergence of Turkish and American foreign policies towards Iraq in 2003 was connected with their existing perceptions to Kurdish and PKK problem. Therefore this article asserts that whether Turkey had supported the US regime change policy in Iraq or not, Turkey could still not able to receive the US support in her fight against PKK. This article first questions whether the 2003 Iraq Crisis was an out-come of diplomatic and political errors emanating from the mismanagement of the negotiation process between Turkey and the US. Secondly the main disagreement between two parties will be defined and in the final step the main factors which diverged Turkish and American foreign policies towards Iraq in 2003 will be explained. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The fact that public opinion matters in foreign policy decisions has been a matter of general consensus in the literature. Yet, the existing research on the interaction between domestic politics and international relations remains inconclusive. Still, most of the existing studies are based on the research conducted during the Cold War, and the effects of American foreign policy on the views of foreign publics about the United States have been rarely investigated.Today, in the post-911 era, where threats are no longer emanating only from the nuclear arsenals of the superpowers, and when the streets of developing countries have the potential of breeding future terrorists, the perception of the United States abroad has become an element of American security more than ever before. Hence, studying the means of how the United States can influence the views of foreign publics about the United States has gained an unprecedented importance. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper advances a realist based argument to explain the allied-rival relationship between Greece and Turkey. It analyzes Greek-Turkish relations over the past fifty years against propositions derived from neoliberal institutionalism, constructivism, and our proposed alignment model. An examination various episodes of cooperation and non-cooperation reveals that in general cooperation tended to occur when mutual abandonment fears were high and complex abandonment fears were low or when alternative exit options were limited. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

When do states grant trade inducements to strategically important countries to secure their military-security cooperation? Are special interest groups able to influence trade policy-making when it is designed to achieve national security goals? Under what conditions international political considerations trump special interest group influences? These are some questions that remain largely unanswered in the international political economy literature. To help fill this gap in the literature, this study examines the degree to which international political relations and special interest groups shape US textile trade policy-making by examining the US-Turkey and US-Pakistan textile trade relations from January 2002 to March 2003. The study shows that although US officials wanted to use textiles as a carrot in the war on terrorism in the wake of September 11, their ability to offer textile trade incentives to encourage international political cooperation was limited by the US textile industry, which at the time was very influential because the US administration depended on the textile state representatives to pass the Trade Act of 2002. However, the study also demonstrates that international political considerations may trump domestic political influences when the US administration needs to gain the alliance of a country, whose military cooperation is presented by the US administration as an 'immediate' security necessity. The study concludes by recommending that both domestic and international influences should be taken into account when analyzing trade policy-making. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]