Search

Under President Erdoğan, Turkey’s regional power radius has expanded considerably. Turkey’s influence has visibly grown regionally and internationally. In its foreign and security policy, Erdoğan’s Turkey relies on strategic autonomy, a mix of political and military means, including an increased readiness to use military force, and a fluid alliance policy. Relations with Western allies are secondary. The strategic goal is to advance its ideologically shaped great power ambitions as well as its (geo)political, economic and energy policy interests. Conflicts with the West (USA, NATO, EU) are unavoidable due to the country’s own strategic goals, hegemonic power projections and positioning in the changing global and regional power order, as well as due to the internal Islamist-ultranationalist government constellation. Relations with the West will therefore remain complicated. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article reflects on the influence of the geopolitics in international relations and geopolitical rivalry on the state of Kurdish conflict on contemporary Middle East. It describes the geopolitics of Kurdistan and discusses how geopolitical developments paved the way for peace between Turkey and the Kurds. It looks at the challenge for Kurds and the territory of the Kurdistan in the midst of the regional and international power competition from a geopolitical perspective.

In the power struggle for control and exploitation of energy resources in the Eastern Mediterranean Turkey wants more than mere access to the natural gas fields. By means of an escalation strategy in the Eastern Mediterranean, which is based on the projection of military might and does not exclude a military confrontation, Turkey wants to create facts on the ground and thereby significantly enlarge its influence as a rising naval power. This collision course is an integral component of a neo-Ottoman policy which strives for regional dominance and hegemony by using military means. With its aggressive course and superpower projections, Turkey is increasingly unpredictable, contributing to its self-isolation, while promoting an anti-Turkey polarization and challenging the interests of the alliance partners USA and NATO. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Despite unfair electoral conditions, advantageous use of state and media resources, a hypernationalistic strategy of polarization as well as defamation and marginalization of the opposition, the AKP-led government of President Erdoğan lost the country's big cities in the local elections of 2019. The biggest defeat came in the economic and financial metropolis of Istanbul. This development implies that retaining the monopoly of power through the use of repression and hyper-nationalism has finally reached its limits. It marks a turning point: President Erdoğan and his AKP-government (Party for Justice and Development) as well as the alliance with the ultra-nationalistic MHP (Nationalist Movement Party) have now reached their zenith and are standing at a crossroads. Whether President Erdoğan and the AKP-government will react with even more repression, or a moderate democratic U-turn is still uncertain. Thus - despite this turning point - there is no quiet time in sight in a Turkey still undergoing political turbulences. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Kurds are more visible than ever in regional politics. Through their fight against the IS, they have gained significant political and strategic importance. They have established themselves as security partners of the West. They have become an indispensable factor of stability in regional politics. Nevertheless, they have so far failed to gain support for their historical aspirations for autonomy and independence. Beyond intra-Kurdish factors, the traditional anti-Kurdish attitude and alliance of the regional states (Turkey, Iran, Syria, Iraq) and the reservations of Western states, including the USA, the EU and Germany, play an important role. Current developments imply how vulnerable the situation of the Kurds is, but also how indispensable external support from the state world and internal Kurdish strengthening is in order to resolve the historical conflict over the future of the Kurds and to create more peace. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although the domestic consolidation of power was a major factor for the Turkish military offensive in North-Syrian Afrin at the beginning of 2018, this invasion is embedded in a wider context. It primarily refers to the ideologically guided neo-Ottoman power politics concerning Syria and the Middle East in contemporary Turkey. The Turkish government's major objective is to become a hegemonic power in the Middle East. For this purpose Ankara seeks a panIslamic/Sunni agenda with the main focus on an anti-Kurd military strategy in order to curtail the Kurds in general and the PKK and PYD in particular. With a flexible strategy and the tactical alliance with Russia and Iran Ankara managed to enlarge its room for manoeuvre and to conquer Syrian territory. Thus Ankara creates zones of influence, constrains the Kurds and strengthens its position for post-war negotiations in Syria. However, with such manoeuvring Ankara also risks to be constrained by Russia, thus creating polarisation with its Western allies, especially the USA. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

From Turkey's point of view the strengthening of the Kurds in general and the PKK in particular plays a major role as regards the fight against the IS in Syria and Iraq. This perception is key in order to understand the collapse of the peace process with the PKK. While the Kurdish party HDP gained support and developed into an important opposition party in Turkey, the PKK achieved military successes in the fight against the IS in Northern Syria with its Syrian-Kurdish offshoot PYD beyond the boarder. This resulted in gaining a consolidation of its three selfadministrated cantons in Syria (in Kurdish: Rojava). With an all out war and containment strategy the AKP government forcibly pushed back the HDP and the PKK/PYD since 2015. However, this strategy hasn't been able to solve the conflict about the political future of the Kurds. For this purpose alternative forms of political distribution of power are required - in terms of more autonomy and self-administration in Turkey. Simultan eously a new peace process could be supported constructively by monitoring mechanisms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The ambitious Turkish policy in North Africa and the Middle East has come to a standstill in the course of the "Arab Spring". One major reason is that the policy of the AKP government in the region is primarily guided by ideological principles focused on a pan-Islamic-Sunni agenda. The increased regional security dilemma accompanied by unforeseeable developments and rapidly changing alliances requires a practical political incentive in order to avoid far-reaching consequences. However, the unilateral ideological course of Turkish policy mirrored the consequences - among others - in the problematic relations to the neighbouring countries Syria and Egypt. The relations have hit rock bottom along with an increasing isolation of the region as concerns foreign policy making. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As far as policy towards the Kurds is concerned, the Turkish AKP government has come under increasing pressure. A key reason lies in the growing political importance of the Kurds in the broader region, and especially of the PKK in the context of Kurdish opposition against the advance of ISIS in Syria and Iraq as well as the regional expansion of the cycle of violence. Both processes have developed contrary to AKP's political strategy of containment towards the Kurds and represent an increasing challenge. All the same the AKP government has to face both national and international criticism - above all because of its ambivalent policy against the ISIS, which it pursues as a containment of the Kurds in Syria on the one hand, and, on the other hand regarding the overthrow of the Assad regime. A strategic realignment to the developing processes on the ground thus seems inevitable. The AKP government will succeed best with a political strategy towards the Kurds that is guided by cooperation, which considers further autonomy arrangements for the Kurds both internally as well as regionally. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Syria played a key role in the "strategic depth" foreign policy pursued by the Turkish AKP government and was considered a model example of "zero problem policy" with the neighboring states. The civil war in Syria, however, shattered not only the "zero problem policy" and turned the "old friend" to the "new foe": It above all affected strategic calculations and the Turkish claim to become regional and global leader. Moreover, the Syrian civil war has both economic as well as domestic implications concerning Turkey's unsolved Kurdish conflict and the PKK question, thus increasing the already existing domestic polarization. Finally the civil war influences the power structure in the region and the relations to the neighboring states, above all to Iran, Russia and Iraq. The AKP government so far responded flexibly to the challenges of adjustment with a policy mix of pragmatism and commitment. Nevertheless, its influence is limited, requiring a stronger cooperation with the regional allies, the USA and the EU. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The victory of the ruling Turkish Party for Justice and Development (AKP) in the parliamentary elections of 12 June 2011 was a historic one: For the first time in the history of the modern Turkish Republic one party won the parliamentary elections for three times in a row, constantly increased its share of votes and constitutes the government. That historic victory brings about a significant consolidation of AKP's power. Nevertheless, the re-elected AKP is confronted with explosive internal and external challenges that won't be easy to cope with. The formulation of a new civil constitution, the political solution of the Kurd conflict, the further democratization of Turkey as well as the effects of the protest movements in Northern Africa and the Middle East are a crucial test for AKP's political performance. If and in how far AKP will succeed in creating both its domestic policy under the framework of a strongly fragmented and polarized system without adopting an authoritarian trait itself as well as pursuing far-reaching external aims guided by economic profit under the paradigms of practical politics remains to be seen. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Turkish foreign policy under AKP government is guided by the concept of "strategic depth" developed by Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu. Its aim is to turn Turkey into a leading regional power via an active and multidimensional foreign policy. In spite of controversial discussions at home and abroad this foreign policy actually doesn't represent innovation or substantial reorientation. It lives up Turkey's external activism after 1990 under the Özal era and refines it. The activism regarding foreign policy in a regional environment is complementary to the traditional alliances with the USA and NATO. It doesn't question the full membership in the European Union in principle, even if the aim of accession to the EU has obtained a minor political priority and is now one aim among many others. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]