Search

It is often argued that Turkish foreign policy entered into a new era with the Justice and Development Party (better know with its acronym in Turkish, AKP) coming to power in 2002. The first term of AKP government (2002-2007) witnessed a surge of interest in the Middle East, troubled relations with the US over the war in Iraq, an initial "honeymoon" with the EU, and radical policy reversals in the issue of Cyprus. AKP's foreign policy is said to be at odds with the long-established foreign policy positions of the Turkish state, represented by the "old guard", the Western-oriented, secular military and the bureaucracy. But to what extent the AKP's view of the world is different from that of the "old guard"? Do they really see the world and the proper ways of acting in this world differently? In this study I examine the belief systems of the key decision-makers in the Turkish foreign policy establishment by using operational code analysis in order to answer these questions. I use foreign policy speeches by the Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, then the Foreign Minister Abdullah Gül, and then the Commander of Turkish Armed Forces, Hilmi Özkök from the years between 2002 and 2007 in order to construct and compare their operational codes. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper seeks to explain and predict the Iranian behavior in the current crisis over its nuclear program. James and Ozdamar (2005, 2008) developed a foreign policy behavior model for the comparative foreign policy analysis that is based on systemism (B ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Since November 2002 the Turkish government is headed by Justice and Development Party (better known with its Turkish acronym AKP) that has Islamist roots. From time to time AKP's Islamist legacy created tensions in domestic arena between the government and civil-military bureaucracy, which is know for its staunch secularism. Examining whether ideological differences between the AKP government and civil-military bureaucracy is carried over to the foreign policy issues such as EU membership, the Cyprus issue, and the developments in Iraq is the main focus of this study. In other words, the main question I ask in this study is whether the Turkish state speaks with one voice with regards to foreign policy issues or whether there are notable differences among the key players such as the Prime Minister, Minister of Foreign Affairs, and the Chief of General Staff? Do they share a common understanding with regards to the nature of the international system and the best tactics and strategies one should employ to achieve one's goals? In this study I examine the belief systems of the key decision-makers in the Turkish foreign policy establishment by using operational code analysis in order to answer this question. I use foreign policy speeches by the Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the Foreign Affairs Minister Abdullah Gul, and the most recent Chiefs of General Staff, Hilmi Ozkok and Ismail Hakki Karadayi in order to construct and compare their operational codes. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Examines the evolution of Turkey-U.S. relations before and after the Cold War. Assumptions and definitions regarding alliance management; Expectations concerning the transformation of Turkey-U.S. relations; Impact of the rejection of the March motion on the relationship of the countries.

Will the Turkish-Israeli alliance continue in the event of a severe crisis in the Middle East? The main purpose of this study is to find an answer to this question. Turkish-Israeli alliance formed in mid-1990s is an untested alliance to this day. Whether the two states will continue to support each other if one is engaged in a severe crisis with Iran or Syria is our main inquiry. To analyze this question, we use the expected utility model developed by Bruce Bueno de Mesquita?s (2002). The actors in the negotiations are Turkey, Israel, US, Iran, and Syria. We develop eight different scenarios, and run ten simulations for each scenario, ending up with a total number of eighty simulations. The results of this initial research suggest that in the majority of the simulations Turkish-Israeli alliance holds, and both countries continue to support each other in a severe crisis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Turkey and the U.S.: NATO members on divergent paths?The long term political ramifications of the U.S./U.K. deposition of Saddam Hussein in early 2003 are unclear. What is clear is the stress that such an action had on direct U.S.-Turkey relations and U.S.-Turkey relations vis-à-vis NATO. The ‘alliance politics’ that took place prior to the U.S. invasion of Iraq are key in understanding the changing nature of the relationship between the U.S. and Turkey as well as the larger U.S.-Turkey-NATO picture. This paper provides a better comprehension of pre and post-war ‘alliance politics’ by examining Turkey’s domestic politics, the decisions made by its policymakers and the potential reasons behind those decisions in the face of intense U.S. pressure to allow the stationing of its troops on Turkey’s southern border with Iraq. A combination of interviews with Turkish MP’s, reviews of pertinent pre & post-war literature and official U.S. action/reaction will prove to be an adequate means to enhance the aforementioned comprehension. Furthermore, the paper will not only demonstrate the ‘looseness’ of the NATO alliance in the current era it will also address the degree to which the U.S.-Turkey relationship has shifted to a realm somewhere between an alliance and an alignment. This will be most easily accomplished with an examination of the ‘systemic context of alliance’ as outlined by Glenn Snyder (1997), in which the structure, relationships, interactions and units are all taken into account. This will open the door for future research into the ‘alliance politics’ of NATO in general and U.S.-Turkey in particular, in the wake of the second Gulf War as issues of entrapment and abandonment continue to cloud U.S. relations with its allies. Keywords: alliance politics, Turkey-U.S. relations, NATO Contact information: Nick L. Beatty Balkan Devlen E-mail: nlbfgd@mizzou.edu E-mail: bdff5@mizzou.edu Phone: 573-815-9813 Phone: 573-771-4264 Affiliation: Department of Political Science University of Missouri – Columbia phone: 573-882-2843 fax: 573-884-5131 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The English School as a Scientific Research Enterprise:This paper evaluates the English School (ES) as a prominent approach to the study of International Relations (IR) as a ?scientific research enterprise? (James, International Relations and Scientific Progress, 2002). Analysis begins with introduction of a ?continuum of aggregation? that conveys a given scientific research enterprise, such as the English School, at different conceptual levels. The ES?s axioms, along with its negative and positive heuristics, are identified and evaluated on the basis of classic and more recent works from Wight, Bull and others. Conclusions and prospects for further development of the ES complete the paper. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Will the Turkish-Israeli alliance continue in the event of a severe crisis in the Middle East? The main purpose of this study is to find an answer to this question. Turkish-Israeli alliance formed in mid-1990s is an untested alliance to this day. Whether the two states will continue to support each other if one is engaged in a severe crisis with Iran or Syria is our main inquiry. To analyze this question, we use the expected utility model developed by Bruce Bueno de Mesquita?s (2002). The actors in the negotiations are Turkey, Israel, US, Iran, and Syria. We develop eight different scenarios, and run ten simulations for each scenario, ending up with a total number of eighty simulations. The results of this initial research suggest that in the majority of the simulations Turkish-Israeli alliance holds, and both countries continue to support each other in a severe crisis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]