Soft balancing in Turkish foreing policy: The case of the 2003 Iraq war

yesiltas, murat

Soft balancing in Turkish foreing policy: The case of the 2003 Iraq war

Murat YEŞİLTAŞ (Sakarya Üniversitesi, İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi, Uluslararası İlişkiler Bölümü, Sakarya, Türkiye)

Perceptions: Journal of International Affairs

3 1

Yıl: 2009 Cilt: 14 Sayı: 1-2 Sayfa Aralığı: 25 - 51 Metin Dili: Türkçe İndeks Tarihi: 29-07-2022

Soft balancing in Turkish foreing policy: The case of the 2003 Iraq war

Öz:

This paper argues that soft balancing theory provides the best framework to understand Turkey’s foreign policy towards the US in terms of its unilateral policy on the issue of Iraq in the post 9/11 era. To put the matter bluntly, Turkish foreign policy regarding the Iraqi crisis can be examined through the lens of soft balancing - in order to prevent the war and minimize its negative effect on the region as well as its own interests. I argue that Turkey’s soft balancing policy is a strategic effort in overall structural terms to increase influence vis-a-vis the US via non-military means. In this respect, this article is divided into two sections. The first section will give an overall explanation about the theory of soft balancing. The second section will examine Turkish foreign policy regarding the Iraqi crisis as soft balancing against the US before the 2003 Iraq war. This being said, the second section will treat Turkish foreign policy as three soft balancing strategies which are composed of diplomatic soft balancing at the regional level, institutional soft balancing at the international level, and territorial denial as an instrument of soft balancing at the national level

Anahtar Kelime: Türk dış politikası Irak irak savaşı

Konular: Uluslararası İlişkiler

Belge Türü: Makale Makale Türü: Araştırma Makalesi Erişim Türü: Erişime Açık

1 There are two obviously related definitions of unipolarity. The first one is a system in which one state has significantly more capabilities than any other. The second one is a system in which the unipole’s security and perhaps other values cannot be threatened by others at all. On the significance of unipolarity see, William C. Wohlforth, “The Stability of a Unipolar World”, International Security, Vol. 21 (Summer 1999).
2 Stephen G. Brook and William C. Wohlforth, “Hard Times for Soft Balancing”, International Security, Vol. 30, No. 1 (Summer 2005), p. 72; Robert A. Pape, “Soft Balancing against the United States”, International Security, Vol. 30, No. 1 (Summer 2005);T. V. Paul, “Soft Balancing in the Age of U.S. Primacy”, International Security, Vol. 30,No. 1 (Summer 2005).
3 Pape, “Soft Balancing against the United States”, pp. 10-17.
4 On the significance of balance of power, see Hans J. Morgenthau, Politics among Nations,New York, Alfred A. Knopf, 1967; Kenneth N. Waltz, Theory of International Politics,McGraw-Hill Higher Education, 1979; L. Claude Jr., Power and International Relations,New York, Random House, 1962.
5 T. V. Paul, “Introduction: The Enduring Axioms of Balance of Power Theory and Their Contemporary Relevance”, in T. V. Paul, James J. Wirtz, and Michel Forrtmann, (ed.)Balance of Power; Theory and Practice in the 21st Century, Stanford, California, Stanford University Press, 2004, p. 3.
6 Franz Owald, “Soft Balancing Between Friends: Transformation Transatlantic Relations”,Debatte: Journal of Contemporary Central and Eastern Europe, Vol. 14, No. 2 (August 2006), p. 146.
7 On the significiance of the second-tier states see K.R. Adams, “New Great Powers: Who Will They Be, and How and When Will They Rise?”, Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Studies Association, Hilton Hawaiian Village, Honolulu,Hawai, 25 May 2009.
8 G. John Ikenberry, “Institutions, Strategic Restraint, and the Persistence of the American Postwar Order”, International Security, Vol. 23, No. 3 (Winter 1998/99), pp. 43–78; Charles A. Kupchan, “After Pax Americana: Benign Power, Regional Integration, and the Sources of a Stable Multipolarity”, International Security, Vol. 23, No. 2 (Fall 1998), pp. 40–79; Michael Mastanduno, “Preserving the Unipolar Moment: Realist Theories and U.S. Grand Strategy after the Cold War”, International Security, Vol. 21, No. 4 (Spring 1997), pp. 49–88; William C. Wohlforth, “The Stability of a Unipolar World”, International Security, Vol.24, No. 1 (Summer 1999), pp. 5–41; Stephen G. Brooks and William C. Wohlforth,“American Primacy in Perspective”, Foreign Affairs, Vol. 81, No. 4 (July/August 2002), pp.20–33; Ethan B. Kapstein, and Michael Mastanduno (ed.), Unipolar Politics: Realism and State Strategies after the Cold War, New York, Columbia University Press, 1999; G. John Ikenberry (ed.), America Unrivalled: The Future of the Balance of Power, Ithaca, N.Y.Cornell University Press, 2002.
9 Christopher Layne, “The Unipolar Illusion: Why New Great Powers Will Rise”, International Security, Vol. 17, No. 4 (Spring 1993), pp. 5–51.
10 Samual P. Huntington, “The Lonely Superpower”, Foreign Affairs, Vol. 78 No. 2 (1999),pp. 35-49.
11 Paul, “Introduction: The Enduring Axioms of Balance of Power Theory and Their Contemporary Relevance”, p. 3.
12 Paul, “Soft Balancing in the Age of U.S. Primacy”, p. 47; Pape, “Soft Balancing Against the United States”.
13 Judith Kelley, “Strategic Non-cooperation as Soft Balancing: Why Iraq was not Just about Iraq”, International Politics, Vol. 42 (2005), p. 154.
14 William C. Wohlforth, “Revisiting Balance of Power Theory in Central Eurasia”, in Paul,Wirtz, and Forrtmann (ed.), Balance of Power; Theory and Practice in the 21st Century, pp.214-238.
15 G. John Ikenberry, “Liberal Hegemony andthe Future of American Postwar Order”, in T.V. Paul and John A. Hall, International Order and the Future of World Politics, Cambridge,Cambridge University Press, 1999, pp. 123-140.
16 Paul, “Soft Balancing in the Age of U.S. Primacy”, p. 48.
17 Pape, “Soft Balancing against the United States”, p. 9.
18 Paul, “Soft Balancing in the Age of U.S. Primacy”, p. 59.
19 Pape, “Soft Balancing against the United States”, p. 10.
20 Ibid, pp. 36-37.
21 Ibid.
22 Henrik Bergfeldt, Is Soft Balancing the Driving Force Behind Sino-Russian Cooperation in Central Asia? An Empirical Test of the Soft Balancing Theory, Master Thesis, Lund University, Spring 2008.
23 Pape, “Soft Balancing against the United States”, p. 36.
24Ibid, pp. 36-37.
25 Kelley, “Strategic Non-cooperation as Soft Balancing: Why Iraq was not Just about Iraq”,p. 156.
26 Ibid, p. 157.
27 Robert Jervis, “Unipolarity: A Structural Perspective”, World Politics, Vol. 61, No. 1(January 2009), p. 208.
28 Stephen M. Walt, “Alliances in a Unipolar World”, World Politics, Vol. 61, No. 1(January 2009), pp. 103-104.
29 “Meclis ‘Savaş’ı Reddetti”, Radikal, 4 March 2003.
30 Şaban Kardaş, “Turkey and the Iraq Crisis: JDP Between Identity and Interest”, in Hakan Yavuz (ed), Emergency of New Turkey, Salt Lake City, The University of Utah Press, 2006,pp. 306-330.
31 Hasan B. Yalçın, “Alliance Formation under the Unipolarity: The Case of Turkish-US Relationship,” Unpublished MA Thesis, Chapter 3, Koç University, 2006, p. 92.
32 Raphael F. Perl, “Terrorism, The Future, and U.S. Foreign Policy”, CRS Issue Brief for Congress, 2 (November 2001), p. 1-2.
33 Meliha Benli Altunışık, “Turkey’s Iraq Policy: The War and Beyond”, Journal of Contemporary European Studies, Vol. 14, No. 2, pp. 183–185.
34 “ABD Irak Savasindan Kacinmali”, at http://www.voanews.com/turkish/archive/2002- 11/a-2002-11-06-6-1.cfm?moddate=2002-11-06.
35UN Security Council Resolution 1441, 8 November 2002, at http://www.un.int/usa/sresiraq.htm.
36 Kardaş, “Turkey and the Iraq Crisis: JDP Between Identity and Interest”, p. 306.
37 Deniz Bölükbaşi, I Mart Vakası; Irak Tezkeresi ve Sonrası, Doğan Kitap, İstanbul, 2008,pp. 29-31.
38 Republic of Turkey, Office of the Prime Minister, Directorate General of Press and Information, at http://www.byegm.gov.tr/YAYINLARIMIZ/AyinTarihi/2003/ocak2003.htm [last visited 2 January 2003].
39 Ali Balci and Murat Yesiltas, , “Turkey’s New Middle East Policy: The Case of the Meeting of the Foreign Ministers of Iraq’s Neighboring Countries”, Journal of South Asian and Middle Eastern Studies, Vol. XXIX, No. 4 (Summer 2006), pp. 18-38; Jon Gorvett,“Turkey Finds Itself on Seismic Fault Between Peace, Pressure for Iraq Conflict”,Washington Report on the Middle East Reports (March 2003), p. 36.
40 Kardaş, “Turkey and the Iraq Crisis: JDP Between Identity and Interest”, pp. 310-312.
41 Mesut Ozcan, Harmonizing Foreign Policy; Tukey, the EU and the Middle East, Ashgate,London, 2008, pp.131-133.
42 Ahmet Davutoğlu, “Turkey’s Foreign Policy Vision: An Assesment of 2007”, Insight Turkey, Vo. 10, No. 1 (2008); Ahmet Davutoğlu, “Türkiye Küresel Güçtür”, Interview by M. İbrahim Turhan, Anlayış, Mart 2004; Ahmet Davutoğlu, “Türkiye Merkez Ülke Olmalı”, Radikal, 26 February 2004; Ahmet Davutoğlu, “Türkiye Küresel Güçtür”,(Interview), Türkiye Söyleşileri I Avrupa, Küre Yayınları, İstanbul, 2007.
43 Karl Vick, “After Calls on Turkey, U.S. Put on Hold”, Washington Post, 8 January 2003.
44 Pew Research Center, at http://pewglobal.org/reports/display.php?PageID=825.
45 Interview with Ahmet Davutoğlu, Turkishtime, April-May 2004.
46 Ahmet Davutoğlu, Stratejik Derinlik; Türkiye’nin Uluslararası Konumu, Küre Press,İstanbul, 2001; Davutoğlu, “Turkey’s Foreign Policy Vision: An Assesment of 2007”,Insight Turkey, Vo. 10, No. 1 (2008), p. 78.
47 “Gül: Demokratik Yollar Denenmeli”, Hürriyet, 5 Ocak 2002.
48 Republic of Turkey, Office of the Prime Minister, Directorate General of Press and Information, at http://www.byegm.gov.tr/YAYINLARIMIZ/AyinTarihi/2003/ocak2003. htm [last visited 4 January 2003].
49 “Savassiz Cözüm icin Yapilacak Cok Sey Var”, Yeni Safak, 6 January 2003.
50 Dina Ezzat, “Very Daring Ideas” Al Ahram Weekly, 9-15 January 2003, Issue No: 620.
51 “Gül: Barış için çaba”, Radikal, 13 January 2003.
52 Republic of Turkey, Office of the Prime Minister, Directorate General of Press and Information, at http://www.byegm.gov.tr/YAYINLARIMIZ/AyinTarihi/2003/ocak2003 .htm, [last visited 12 January 2003].
53 On the significiance of this meeting and its transformative affect on Turkish foreign policy, see Balci and Yesiltas, “Turkey’s New Middle East Policy: The Case of the Meeting of the Foreign Ministers of Iraq’s Neighboring Countries”, pp. 18-38.
54 Gülden Ayman, “Bir Güvenlik Sorunsalı Olarak Türk Amerikan İlişkilerinde Irak Çıkmazı”, in Gülden Ayman, Irak Çıkmazı: Türkiye Açısından Temel Parametreler, Bügart,İstanbul, 2008, pp. 51-85; Gülden Ayman, “Turkish-American Relations and Future of Iraq”, Private View (Autumn 2007), No 12.
55 Salih Boztas, “Bicak Sirtinda Baris Arayisi”, Aksiyon, 27 January 2003, Year: 8, Number:425; Gareth Jenkins, “Keeping the Peace,” Al Ahram Weekly, 30 January- 5 February 2003, Issue No. 623; Salih Boztas, “Bicak Sirtinda Baris Arayisi,” Aksiyon, 27 January 2003, Year: 8, Number: 425; Zaman, 24 January 2003; Cumhuriyet, 24 January 2003.
56 Balci and Yesiltas, “Turkey’s New Middle East Policy: The Case of the Meeting of the Foreign Ministers of Iraq’s Neighboring Countries”, pp. 18-38.
57 “Turkey: Erdogan, In China For Trade Talks, Likely To Be Sounded Out On Uyghur, Iraq Issues”, AM Central Standart Time, 15 January 2003.
58 Republic of Turkey, Office of the Prime Minister, Directorate General of Press and Information, at http://www.byegm.gov.tr/YAYINLARIMIZ/AyinTarihi/2003/subat2003.htm.
59 Yalçın, “Alliance Formation under the Unipolarity: The Case of Turkish-US Relationship”, p. 117.
60 Balbay, Irak Bataklığında, p. 63; Republic of Turkey, Office of the Prime Minister,Directorate General of Press and Information, at http://www.byegm.gov.tr/YAYINLARIMIZ/AyinTarihi/2003/ocak2003.htm., 17 Ocak 2003.
61 “NATO Rift Countries Ahead of Security Council Meeting”, at http://www.pbs.org/ news hour/updates/nato_02-13-03.html, 13 February , 2003.
62 Murat Yetkin, Tezkere; Irak Krizinin Gerçek Öyküsü, Remzi Kitapevi, Istanbul, 2004, p.133.
63 Yalçın, “Alliance Formation under the Unipolarity: The Case of Turkish-US Relationship”, p. 119.
64 “ABD’li yetkililer Türkiye’de”, Hürriyet, 13 January 2003.
65 Murat Yetkin, “Kuzey Cephesi: yeni bir şey yok”, Radikal, 21 January 2003; “ABD’den nazik mesajlar”, Radikal, 21 January 2003.
66 “Asker pazarlığının iç yüzü”, Radikal, 25 January 2003.
67 Stephen F. Hayes, “Wolfowitz Talks Turkey, The Serious War Planning is under Way,” Weekly Standard, 16 December, 2002.
68 Kardaş, “Turkey and the Iraq Crisis: JDP Between Identity and Interest”, p. 316.
69 Murat Yetkin, Tezkere; Irak Krizinin Gerçek Öyküsü, Remzi Kitabevi, İstanbul, 2003, s.
147; Republic of Turkey, Office of the Prime Minister, Directorate General of Press and Information, http://www.byegm.gov.tr/YAYINLARIMIZ/AyinTarihi/2003/subat2003.htm, 4 February 2003.
70 Republic of Turkey, Office of the Prime Minister, Directorate General of Press and Information, http://www.byegm.gov.tr/YAYINLARIMIZ/AyinTarihi/2003/subat2003.htm, 6 February 2003; Mesut Taştekin, “Türk Dış Politikasında 2003 Irak Savaşı”, (ed.) Mesut Taştekin and Mehmet Şahin, II. Körfez Savaşı, Platin Publication, İstanbul, 2006, p. 269.
71 TBMM Tutanak Dergisi, 32. Birleşim, 6 February 2003, at http://www.belgenet.com/yasa/ tbmm_759.html, [last visited 02 June 2008].
72 Bölükbaşı, I Mart Vakası; Irak Tezkeresi ve Sonrası, pp. 39-42.
73 Yalçın, “Alliance Formation under the Unipolarity: The Case of Turkish-US Relationship”, p. 128.
74 William Hale, Turkey, the US and Iraq, London: SAQI and the London Middle East Institute at SOAS, 2007, p. 172; Cagaptay, Soner, ”Where Goes the US-Turkish Relationship?”, Middle East Quarterly, Vol. 11, No. 4 (2004), pp. 43-52.
75 James E. Kapsis, “The Failure of US-Turkish Pre-War Negotiations: An Overconfident United States, Political Mismanegement, and a Conflicted Military”, The Middle East Review of International Affairs, Vol. 10, No. 3 (September 2006), p. 1.
76 M. Hakan Yavuz, Secularism and Muslim Democracy in Turkey, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p. 232.
77 Kardaş, “Turkey and the Iraq Crisis: JDP Between Identity and Interest”, pp. 306-328.
78 Şaban Kardas, “Türk Amerikan İlişkilerine Teorik Bir Bakış: Neo-Klasik Realist Bir Açıklama, Demokrasi Platformu, Vol. 4, No. 13 (Winter 2008), pp. 9-12.
79 Baris Kesgin, “Not so much of a Straightforward Task: Finding the Decision- Maker in Foreign Policy.” Paper presented at the annual meeting of International Studies Association-Midwest in St. Louis, MO, 7-9 November, 2008; Baris Kesgin and Juliet Kaarbo, “When and How Parliaments Influence Foreign Policy: The Case of Turkey’s Iraq Decision”, International Studies Perspective, Vol. 11, No. 1 (2010), pp. 19-36.
80 Republic of Turkey, Office of the Prime Minister, Directorate General of Press and Information, at http://www.byegm.gov.tr/YAYINLARIMIZ/AyinTarihi/ 2003/ mart 2003.htm, 20 March 2003.

APA	yesiltas m (2009). Soft balancing in Turkish foreing policy: The case of the 2003 Iraq war. , 25 - 51.
Chicago	yesiltas murat Soft balancing in Turkish foreing policy: The case of the 2003 Iraq war. (2009): 25 - 51.
MLA	yesiltas murat Soft balancing in Turkish foreing policy: The case of the 2003 Iraq war. , 2009, ss.25 - 51.
AMA	yesiltas m Soft balancing in Turkish foreing policy: The case of the 2003 Iraq war. . 2009; 25 - 51.
Vancouver	yesiltas m Soft balancing in Turkish foreing policy: The case of the 2003 Iraq war. . 2009; 25 - 51.
IEEE	yesiltas m "Soft balancing in Turkish foreing policy: The case of the 2003 Iraq war." , ss.25 - 51, 2009.
ISNAD	yesiltas, murat. "Soft balancing in Turkish foreing policy: The case of the 2003 Iraq war". (2009), 25-51.

APA	yesiltas m (2009). Soft balancing in Turkish foreing policy: The case of the 2003 Iraq war. Perceptions: Journal of International Affairs, 14(1-2), 25 - 51.
Chicago	yesiltas murat Soft balancing in Turkish foreing policy: The case of the 2003 Iraq war. Perceptions: Journal of International Affairs 14, no.1-2 (2009): 25 - 51.
MLA	yesiltas murat Soft balancing in Turkish foreing policy: The case of the 2003 Iraq war. Perceptions: Journal of International Affairs, vol.14, no.1-2, 2009, ss.25 - 51.
AMA	yesiltas m Soft balancing in Turkish foreing policy: The case of the 2003 Iraq war. Perceptions: Journal of International Affairs. 2009; 14(1-2): 25 - 51.
Vancouver	yesiltas m Soft balancing in Turkish foreing policy: The case of the 2003 Iraq war. Perceptions: Journal of International Affairs. 2009; 14(1-2): 25 - 51.
IEEE	yesiltas m "Soft balancing in Turkish foreing policy: The case of the 2003 Iraq war." Perceptions: Journal of International Affairs, 14, ss.25 - 51, 2009.
ISNAD	yesiltas, murat. "Soft balancing in Turkish foreing policy: The case of the 2003 Iraq war". Perceptions: Journal of International Affairs 14/1-2 (2009), 25-51.