Search

Begin New Search Topic Diplomacy Publication Year within 10 Years

631. Is Erdoğan Holding Europe Hostage?

Author:
Behlül Özkan
Publication Date:
05-2016
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for American Progress - CAP
Abstract:
In many ways, Turkey is the most important actor shaping the refugee crisis that is currently shaking Europe to its core. Accordingly, predicting the outcome of the drama requires a close study of Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s underlying motives and goals. At present, there are nearly 3 million Syrian refugees in Turkey, which shares a 60-mile border with parts of Syria controlled by the Islamic State, or IS. For both the Syrian refugees and IS, Turkey is the door to the West, and President Erdoğan is the final arbiter of Turkish refugee and border security policy. The Turkish president is well aware of the power he derives from this position. An examination of his public statements and negotiating positions makes clear that Erdoğan seeks to use this leverage to compel the international community to set up safe zones in Syria and to force the European Union to widen access to Turkey while abandoning attempts to hold Turkey to EU standards on democracy and human rights.
Topic:
Diplomacy, Regional Cooperation, Refugee Crisis, Europe Union, and Humanitarian Crisis
Political Geography:
Europe, Turkey, and Asia

632. The Crisis in Turkish-Russian Relations

Author:
Soli Ozel
Publication Date:
05-2016
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for American Progress - CAP
Abstract:
On November 24, 2015, despite multiple warnings from Turkish air patrols, a Russian SU-24 aircraft that violated Turkish airspace for 17 seconds was shot down by a Turkish F-16 fighter jet. The Russians denied that they were ever in Turkish airspace, while NATO corroborated the Turkish version. According to Turkish sources, there were repeated warnings for five minutes—which the Russians claimed they never received—and Turkey’s rules of engagement were well known to the Russians. One pilot was rescued by Russian special forces, but Turkmen rebels—trained and supplied by Turkey—on the ground across the border in Syria shot and killed the other as he was parachuting from the plane.* Turkish authorities immediately approached NATO for support, a move that reportedly infuriated Russian President Vladimir Putin, who called the downing of the plane “a stab in the back.” The Russian military claimed that the Turkish action was preplanned—an accusation the Turkish General Staff denied. After initially reiterating that its rules of engagement were clear, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan expressed sadness at the downing of the plane and his hope that the crisis could be resolved.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, NATO, Diplomacy, International Cooperation, and Military Strategy
Political Geography:
Russia, Europe, Turkey, and Asia

633. Emerging Threats and New Trends in Turkish Foreign Policy

Author:
Galip Dalay
Publication Date:
06-2016
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for American Progress - CAP
Abstract:
Turkey’s foreign policy during most of the republican era was informed by the security imperatives of the Cold War and the crises that ensued from the collapse of the Soviet Union in the early 1990s. These influences were coupled with the country’s republican elites crafting Turkey’s identity along the lines of strict secularism, militant nationalism, and a western orientation. As a status quo power, Turkey looked at its neighborhood through the lens of security, becoming highly sensitive to threats of all varieties and seeing itself in a hostile environment—if not surrounded by outright enemies. Upon coming to power in 2002, successive Justice and Development Party, or AKP, governments tried to change this understanding and minimize areas of friction with Turkey’s neighbors. During the early years, they adopted a utilitarian approach, attempting to develop mutual interests and opportunities and to create a degree of interdependency, particularly through economic exchange. This was expressed through then-Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu’s “zero problems with the neighbors” principle, which provided the intellectual architecture for much of Turkey’s foreign policy. The AKP sought to build an “economy first” approach, which it would later hope to leverage for political purposes. From the beginning of the AKP’s second term in 2007 to the early days of the Arab uprisings in late 2010 and into 2011, the party gradually expanded its ambitions and policy toward the Middle East through attempts to achieve regional integration and, later, to build an order centered on Turkey. All of these attempts sought to build on economic relations toward economic integration and political cooperation and were very much in line with the neofunctionalist approach to regional integration theories.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, NATO, Diplomacy, Military Affairs, European Union, and Arab Spring
Political Geography:
Europe, Turkey, and Asia

634. Turkey-Iran Relations

Author:
Bülent Aras and Emirhan Yorulmazlar
Publication Date:
07-2016
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for American Progress - CAP
Abstract:
Simplistic binary readings generally fail to explain the trajectory of Turkish-Iranian relations. The geostrategic rivalry between these two regional powers has deep historical roots, is subject to long-term patterns, and is amenable to realignments as a result of shifts in regional and international balances of power. For these reasons, assessing Turkish-Iranian relations requires a broader understanding than the prevalent narrow topical analysis provides.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, International Cooperation, and Military Strategy
Political Geography:
Europe, Iran, Turkey, Middle East, and Asia

635. Charting a New Course for the U.S.-China Relationship

Author:
Melanie Hart
Publication Date:
08-2016
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Center for American Progress - CAP
Abstract:
The relationship between the United States and China is at a critical juncture. On the Chinese side, Beijing is shifting toward a more proactive foreign policy stance that aims to expand China’s influence in the Asia-Pacific region and around the world. This proactive approach is opening up new opportunities for U.S.-China cooperation in some areas but creating new tension in others. On the U.S. side, Washington is trying to figure out how to deal with a new, more confident and engaged China at a time when U.S. leaders are also realizing that some of the assumptions that guided U.S. policy toward China for decades may no longer apply. It is increasingly unclear whether past U.S.-China interactions can be used as a blueprint for the future, and that is creating a new nervousness. At a time of rising uncertainty, one resource both nations can draw on is a strong cohort of U.S. and Chinese foreign policy experts who have dedicated their careers to understanding and guiding this critical bilateral relationship. Exchanges at the mid-career level are becoming particularly interesting. Today’s mid-career U.S.-China experts have had more opportunities to travel between the United States and China to live, work, and study than any generation before them. Many of these experts are bilingual: The Americans speak Mandarin, the Chinese speak English, and they can communicate in a mix of the two languages to get their points across as clearly as possible. Because they began their careers in an era of unprecedented openness on both sides, many have known one another for years and can debate sensitive issues with a frankness that can be harder to achieve at senior leadership levels.
Topic:
Security, Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Energy Policy, and International Cooperation
Political Geography:
China, Asia, North America, and United States of America

636. Policy Recommendations for Israel-Turkey Reconciliation

Author:
GPoT Center and Mitvim
Publication Date:
07-2016
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Global Political Trends Center
Abstract:
Engaged in a series of policy dialogues since 2012, Mitvim – the Israeli Institute for Regional Foreign Policies and the Global Political Trends (GPoT) Center believe that after the signing of the Israel-Turkey agreement and the restoration of full diplomatic relations, both countries should consider the following policy recommendations in order to ensure successful reconciliation.
Topic:
Diplomacy, Treaties and Agreements, Bilateral Relations, and Reconciliation
Political Geography:
Turkey, Middle East, Palestine, and Israel

637. Turkish-Israeli Relations: Crises and Cooperation

Author:
Oğuz Çelikkol
Publication Date:
11-2016
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Global Political Trends Center
Abstract:
Several factors have always played an important role in Turkish-Israeli relaons since the two countries established diplomac relaons in 1949. First of all, both countries have been in the Western camp and have a special relaonship with the United States. Turkey's recognion of the importance of the Jewish lobby in US polics and Turkey's contacts with this powerful lobby predated its diplomac contacts with the State of Israel. When Turkey faced the expansionist threat of the Soviet Union just aer the Second World War and wished to establish close military es with the United States, it also iniated contacts with the American Jewish lobby, and recognized the newly established State of Israel. Although Turkey voted against the Palesne paron plan of the United Naons and the division of Palesnian territories into Arab and Jewish states in 1947, it became the first regional power to recognize the Israeli State, just a few weeks before the Turkish foreign minister's first official visit to Washington in 1949. Turkey joined the US-led North Atlanc Treaty Organizaon (NATO) in 1952 and formed special diplomac and military es with the US during the 1950s.
Topic:
Diplomacy, International Cooperation, Bilateral Relations, History, and Crisis Management
Political Geography:
Turkey, Middle East, Israel, and Palestine

638. Time to Seal the Israel-Turkey Deal

Author:
Mensur Akgün, Muhammed Ammash, Nimrod Goren, Gabriel Mitchell, and Sylvia Tiryaki
Publication Date:
01-2016
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Global Political Trends Center
Abstract:
Turkey and Israel face a unique opportunity: to reconcile after five years of stagnant bilateral relations. We, leaders of Israeli and Turkish think tanks that have been working together since 2012 to support the mending of Israel-Turkey relations, welcome this development and call on the leaders of both countries to seize this opportunity. In mid-December, officials from both countries met in Switzerland in order to finalize principles for an eventual agreement to normalize ties. Reports confirm that an outline and framework for the reconciliation agreement has indeed been reached, although some important issues – such as the blockade on the Gaza Strip – are still unresolved. Israel and Turkey came close to sealing a reconciliation deal on several occasions since the 2010 Mavi Marmara incident, most recently in the spring of 2014. However, while diplomats managed to find formulas that would overcome the differences between the countries, political leadership in Ankara and Jerusalem was hesitant to put the agreement into practice. This time around, there seems to be a convergence of economic and geostrategic interests, as well as political will on both sides.
Topic:
Development, Diplomacy, Treaties and Agreements, and Bilateral Relations
Political Geography:
Turkey, Middle East, Israel, and Palestine

639. Exercising or Evading International Public Authority? The Many Faces of Environmental Post-Treaty Rules

Author:
Tim Staal
Publication Date:
06-2016
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
The Goettingen Journal of International Law
Institution:
The Goettingen Journal of International Law
Abstract:
Post-treaty instruments (PTIs) are informal instruments adopted by consensus of the treaty parties as follow-up decision to a particular provision in a treaty. PTIs are potentially significant instruments for advancing environmental global governance, as the treaty parties may use them to transform indeterminate treaty provisions into more specific environmental rules and decisions. While a number of PTIs are rightly characterized as exercises of authority, this article seeks to demonstrate how certain environmental PTIs with rule-setting character (‘PTRs’) amount to evasions of authority by reducing international authority over States’ environmental policies, or alleviate rather than tighten the treaty parties’ obligations, through their content or legal status. First, some PTRs avoid authoritative language, requiring little or no concrete action by the treaty parties. Some treaty-based assignments to adopt PTRs are never even acted upon. Other PTRs simply water down the obligations of the treaty parties compared to the underlying treaty provisions. Second, PTRs possess an ambiguous legal status both in legal doctrine and in the practice of domestic and EU courts. The article further argues that consensual decision-making may well be at the root of this ambivalent practice. As a broader contribution to the debate about International Public Authority (IPA), the proposition is advanced that we need to scrutinize more carefully what kind and degree of authority an instrument exercises exactly – or not. Evasions of authority and alleviations of obligations – which can be conceived as a special type of exercising authority through inaction – have important implications for what future legal frameworks of international public law must deliver in terms of effective and legitimate procedural design.
Topic:
Diplomacy, Environment, International Cooperation, Treaties and Agreements, Governance, and European Union
Political Geography:
Europe

640. The Evolution of Arms Control Instruments and the Potential of the Arms Trade Treaty

Author:
Tom Coppen
Publication Date:
11-2016
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
The Goettingen Journal of International Law
Institution:
The Goettingen Journal of International Law
Abstract:
Although the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) has the potential to create an effective international legal framework for controlling the international arms trade, much depends on the subsequent development of its legal framework. This article therefore analyzes how the ATT, as a multilateral arms control treaty, can develop its own legal framework in accordance with international law and what role the organs established by it can play in that process. It will be shown that in its current form the ATT has significant shortcomings that may prevent it from achieving this goal, but there certainly is room for the lawful development of its norms, which will depend on amassing political will and the establishment of practice.
Topic:
Arms Control and Proliferation, Diplomacy, International Law, Treaties and Agreements, and Military Affairs
Political Geography:
Global Focus