Consolidating the New Turkey paradigm in foreign policy

It is plainly and clearly seen that the picture that emerged in the 1 November elections has brought relief to Turkey as a society. Among the tradesmen we visited before the elections, even those who had not voted for the AK Parti before, there was a statement we heard often: "If a single-party AK Parti government does not come out of this election, there are hundreds of tradesmen who will shut their shutters." Those statements were in fact signaling what a great surprise the election results held in favor of the AK Parti, but, as it happens, the polls were saying other things.

Undoubtedly the election results have also brought great relief in the field of foreign policy. They have also made a not insignificant impact on many circles that follow the results more closely than the people of Turkey. The foreign policy concept in whose construction Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu has played an important role from the start in fact signifies, in the true sense of the word, a paradigm revolution. I had earlier tried to describe this revolution as a return to politics in Turkey's foreign policy, and the situation has now gone beyond even that. Once politics has been returned to, we can speak of a serious impact of Turkey on world politics, through the positive or negative results of the politics pursued. For precisely this reason the results of elections in Turkey carry great importance not only for Turkey but for the whole world.

During the AK Parti governments, the standard molds of the previous paradigm regarding Turkey's regional and global position were broken to a significant degree, opening the way for Turkey to become a global power.

The outcome that emerged in the 1 November elections was, after the deepening of the crisis in Syria and Iraq, a confirmation that the Turkish people trust the AK Parti's foreign policy mind in this critical period. In any case, on foreign policy the opposition parties had no promise other than repeating a polished version of the previous paradigm. The policies proposed for foreign policy problems seemed to be lined up along a spectrum ranging from turning one's back on the Middle East's problems to somehow deporting the Syrian refugees.

With the AK Parti, which has renewed trust by obtaining its people's approval, it can be said that there is also an important warning and brake against the lawless and unscrupulous practices of the coup regimes in the Middle East.

The statements of Egypt's coup-installed President General Abdel Fattah el-Sisi that "the Muslim Brotherhood is a part of Egypt" can be assessed as a result of the cooperation developing among Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Qatar as well as a result of the electoral victory won by the AK Parti government in Turkey.

In the period when the Arab revolutions were progressing in the region in the form of democratic transfers of power and the toppling of coup regimes, and excited the entire world, there was a debate about whether Turkey could be a role model for the countries of the region. This was followed with interest not as an imposition by Turkey on the countries of the region of the form "I will be a role model for you," but as a situation that emerged as a result of its own sociological and political processes.

The 1 November elections showed that the Turkish model is still a source of lively interest, especially for Muslim countries in the process of democratization. The people who rejoiced at the AK Parti's electoral victory not only in the streets of Turkey but in many places in the Arab geography show that the Turkish experience is still a highly valuable experience that should be taken seriously by everyone.

The foreign policy agenda of the AK Parti, which came to power strongly with the 1 November elections, will be quite heavy in the coming period. Of course one of the topics at the top of this foreign policy agenda is Syria.

We have passed through a period in which diplomatic processes for an international solution to the Syrian crisis have intensified. It seems that 2016 will be one of the critical turning points for Syria. Although Russia and Iran propose a transition process in which Assad is strong, the declaration by the countries led by Turkey and the US that they are against every formula in which Assad is strong and could institutionalize his rule shows that establishing peace and stability in Syria will take time.

Another crisis area very close by, Iraq: the risk that developments there could lead Iraq to a Syria-like civil war in the coming period is being emphasized. The initiatives that have long been continuing to restart peace negotiations between Palestine and Israel seem to have moved to another phase with the statements of Fatah leader Mahmoud Abbas, "We may consider withdrawing from the Oslo Accords."

In the problem areas in the Balkans, which appear calm for now with the settling of the events in Kumanovo, the EU and the US will also need Turkey's support. It therefore appears that in the coming period Turkey's Transatlantic allies must observe the law of alliance more.

In this framework, regarding terrorist organizations such as the YPG, which are observed to be seizing weapons and ammunition under the appearance of fighting the DAESH terrorist organization, particularly in northern Syria, the US and the EU countries need to come to a line, consistent with the law of alliance, that takes Turkey's concerns into account between Turkey and the US. For the historical process and multidimensionality of relations between Turkey and the Transatlantic world make this necessary.