Turkey, in many senses, is at a crossroads today. Its close but more complex relation to Europe and America, its elected government that challenges traditions of secularism, security concerns on its border with Iraq, its growing potential as a major transport and energy corridor - all come into play.  How will these and other changes affect the prospects for Turkish policy in the Caucasus and in Central Asia and Afghanistan? Will Turkey cut back its involvement with these regions, leave it about the same, or generate a new activism there?  

Panelists:

Ms. Zeyno Baran, Senior Fellow and Director of the Center for Eurasian Studies, the Hudson Institute

Dr. Svante Cornell, Research director, Central Asia-Caucasus Institute & Silk Road Studies Program Joint Center.

Event audio is available at:

http://www.sais-jhu.edu/media/caci/nov07/TurkeyAndItsFutureinCAandCaucasus11-19-07.mp3

Event Summary:

The event featured Ms. Zeyno Baran, Senior Fellow and Director of the Center for Eurasian Studies at the Hudson Institute; and Dr. Svante Cornell, Research Director at CACI and the Silk Road Studies Program Joint Center.

Amb. R. Grant Smith, Senior Fellow at CACI moderated the Forum and introduced Dr. Cornell and Ms. Baran to the audience.

Ms. Baran, having just returned from a visit to Turkey and Azerbaijan, began her presentation by characterizing Turkey’s current foreign policy approach towards Central Asia and the Caucasus. Due to its location, Turkey has always been a relevant player in the region. However, the country has not been very active in Central Asia over the past years, given its preoccupation with the situation in Iraq and the Middle East.

Ms. Baran noted that things may change under Turkey’s new President Abdullah Gül, who is keen on pursuing a multivectoral foreign policy and warm personal relations with neighboring leaders. Gül recently completed a visit to Azerbaijan and is bound to visit Georgia, Turkmenistan, Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan over the coming weeks and months. According to Ms. Baran, it will be interesting to watch whether Turkey will be able to pay the attention expected from it by its neighbors and to what degree Turkey’s foreign policy apparatus will follow the president’s push to reenergize relations with the country’s immediate neighborhood while also maintaining a focus on the EU.

On Turkish-US relations, Ms. Baran contended that today’s partnership is different from the close bilateral cooperation during the late 1990s. Turkey has shifted some of its attention away from the US and it remains to be seen how much influence Turkey can wield in the future. Regarding Turkey’s foreign policy, it has certainly become more difficult for neighboring countries to discern whether the country is acting on its own accord or on behalf of the US. In Ms. Baran’s view, a Turkey that does not act in close coordination with the US is less interesting for the region.

This is especially true for relations with the Caucasus. Ms. Baran mentioned the special relationship between Turkey and Azerbaijan, which includes each other’s support on the issues of Cyprus and Nagorno-Karabakh, respectively. Turkey is also tightly tied to the European Union accession process. Turkey may therefore not wholeheartedly and actively support the US push for Georgia’s membership to NATO, but instead find itself closer to the more hesitant position of the EU. The desire to maintain good relations with Russia may also play into this decision.

With regard to energy, Ms. Baran pointed to the fact that the EU is now joining the US push for a corridor from the East to the West. Again, it remains to be seen whether Turkey will have anything else to offer besides its “real estate value”, considering that other countries, like Romania, Ukraine and Greece, are also claiming to become a bridge between Europe and Central Asia. Ms. Baran specifically mentioned the South Stream project that would carry natural gas from Russia to Italy and bypass Turkey. Ms. Baran therefore called on Turkey to engage more directly with Turkmenistan, Kazakhstan and even Iraq and Iran. However, relations with the latter could get complicated, given its current tensions with Turkey’s Western allies.

Ms. Baran concluded her presentation by reiterating the need for increased Turkish engagement in the Caucasus and Central Asia. Relations should based on more than ethnic brotherhood and result in true coordination between countries. To that end, Turkey must clearly signal its long-term foreign policy goals to its neighbors.

Speaking next, Dr. Cornell agreed with Ms. Baran that Turkish foreign policy has gone through many transformations over the past 15 years. Overall, he deemed the Caucasus more important than Central Asia, despite the latter’s ethnic closeness to Turkey. In light of the country’s orientation towards the EU and its preoccupation with Iraq and the PKK, Dr. Cornell reminded the audience that the Caucasus and Central Asia rank only third and fourth, at best, on Turkey’s list of priorities.

According to Dr. Cornell, Turkey has strengthened its ties with the region over recent years, especially on the cultural level. Many students from the region study in Turkey and, due to linguistic similarities, private Turkish television has gained a significant influence in Azerbaijan. Commercial activities are also on the rise, with Turkey ranking among the top five trading partners of the countries in the Caucasus and Western Central Asia. Many small and medium-sized enterprises are involved in both the Turkic and non-Turkic countries of the region. Despite closed borders, many Turkish goods can even be found in Armenia.

Dr. Cornell next pointed the Caucasus’ importance as a transport hub between Central Asia and Europe. The planned railroad between Baku, Tiblisi and Kars (Turkey) will practically connect Europe with China by rail. In addition, oil and natural gas are being transported via the BTC and BTE pipelines from Baku to Turkey. In Dr. Cornell’s view, whether or not Turkey remains a regular transit country or acts similar to Russia’s Gazprom - i.e. buying gas cheap from the east and selling it at double the price to Europe - will largely depend on the EU’s willingness to accept Turkish membership prospects.

With regard to political relations, Dr. Cornell explained why it is difficult for Turkey to move away from close brotherhood with Azerbaijan and open up to Armenia. Given the larger size, prosperity and ethnic closeness of Azerbaijan, such a move would not make sense for Turkey unless there was a significant first step by Armenia. Western urging to that effect, which has been freuqent, is simply a non-starter. Ties with Georgia, on the other hand, have become closer since the early 1990s. Dr. Cornell suggested that Georgia can count on Turkey’s tacit support for its NATO aspirations, even if it may not be a driving force.

In Central Asia, with the exception of Turkmenistan, Turkey’s role is not as strong as in the Caucasus. While some of the countries are linguistically and ethnically very similar, Dr. Cornell stated that Central Asians have difficulties relating to Turkey especially with an Islamist-rooted party in government. The region may thus be of limited interest to Turkey’s ruling party, the AKP. However, Dr. Cornell pointed to the importance of Afghanistan, where Turkey has shown a strong military commitment over recent years. Overall, Dr. Cornell judged the AKP to be leaning more towards the Middle East than Central Asia, but nevertheless expressed hope to be proven wrong.

On Turkey’s relations with the West, Dr. Cornell saw a wide convergence of interests, the only exception being a possible pipeline project carrying Central Asian gas to Turkey and onwards through Iran rather than through the Caspian seabed, should such a prospect materialize. He characterized the Turkish-US relationship as complicated, especially if tensions between the US and Iran keep growing. Historically a status-quo power, Turkey has a tendency to instinctively dislike changes in its neighborhood, such as the revolution in Georgia or repeated US talk about a wider Black Sea area, particularly changes in the Black Sea maritime balance. Dr. Cornell stressed that close cooperation between Turkey, the US and the EU is essential for the planned construction of trans-Caspian pipelines.

Turkey’s relations with Russia have been passing their zenith lately, something Dr. Cornell attributed in part to Russia’s very opportunistic behavior, and the fact that Russia does not treat Turkey as an equal partner, but rather pursues policies that often undermine Turkey's interests. On the whole, Turkey was not realizing its full potential in the region. On Abkhazia, for example, Turkey has so far not been able to utilize its influence, a situation which is unlikely to change over the next couple of years, given the realities of international politics.

The Central Asia-Caucasus Institute was founded in 1996 and has grown to be the primary institution in the Washington area for the study of the Caucasus, Central Asia and the Caspian Region. The Institute forms part of a Joint Center with the Silk Road Studies Program at the Institute for Security and Development, Stockholm. The Institute sponsors impartial research on the region, acts as a forum for policymakers both in Washington and abroad, shares information concerning the region and provides access for its sponsors in business to relevant expertise on the region. Additional information about the Institute is available at www.silkroadstudies.org.