The ability to manage the "situation" in Afghanistan

At the press conference he held before going to the NATO Leaders Summit in Brussels, President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan used the expression "Turkey is the only reliable country that can manage the situation in Afghanistan properly."

It is very clear that this expression reflects the current situation very well. However one looks at it, there is a situation in Afghanistan that has to be managed, for everyone. Whether NATO stays there or withdraws, whether the US leaves NATO behind and withdraws or wants to stay, there is a situation that has to be managed, and among the existing international actors there is no one closer to handling this situation. Many countries have a border or a relationship with Afghanistan, but it is also a fact that this relationship, established with only one segment of the country, is a matter of tension and disagreement in the eyes of other segments.

Frankly, the clearest, most salient reality of the current situation in Afghanistan at present is the Taliban. No one is putting forward, and no one can put forward, a plan on how to manage Afghanistan's future by ignoring the Taliban. That this reality is being seen so clearly by NATO after 20 years is in fact nothing other than an admission, from NATO's standpoint, that the past 20 years were a fiasco. The Taliban, NATO's reason for being in Afghanistan, its reason for entering, stands there firmly in place at the end of 20 years as a force that has compelled the US to withdraw, and as a movement that has given everyone a lesson or is ready to.

That is why, within the "situation to be managed," there is probably no role or mission for it to take over from NATO the struggle against the Taliban that NATO has lost. Indeed, the emphasis Erdoğan placed on its "reliability" in particular, when pointing to Turkey as the only country that can manage the situation properly, is not random. In Afghanistan, which it entered together with NATO, Turkey has so far in particular never taken on a combatant role. It has not entered into hot conflict with any element of Afghanistan. In return, owing to its cultural and historical closeness, its presence has at times provided protection even for NATO's other elements. Its presence, if not completely, has to some extent provided legitimacy and protection for the NATO elements.

Not even the slightest attack has been experienced against Turkish soldiers on the part of the Afghan people, let alone on the part of the Taliban, NATO's greatest adversary. By always being present there in positive missions, Turkey has further reinforced its existing respect and its historical-cultural bonds. It is a fact that they trust Turkey, believing that it has no destructive goals for their country, that it carries out humanitarian activities for the peace and tranquility of all segments and tribes of Afghanistan and makes efforts for peace. For Turkey, with all its policy so far, has proven itself a country whose attitude toward all the countries involved in Afghan affairs is constructive, impartial and in line with the common interests of the Afghan people. In this way, since its relations with the Turkic states neighboring Afghanistan, most of them, and with Pakistan are very good, it is also very well qualified for a mission that could ensure stability inside the country.

Along with this, one must also see that there are some threats or risks in the new situation standing in the way of sustaining this reliability. First of all, a situation is emerging in which NATO has now withdrawn and the Taliban is moving toward filling the resulting vacuum much more. Already many regions are coming rapidly under the Taliban's administration without any resistance, even willingly. That is, in parallel with the Taliban's growing military weight it is very clear that it will have a political weight as well. One must see that this situation will meet resistance of other kinds and that these forms of resistance will want to call Turkey to the mission vacated by NATO. Many political developments could draw Turkey into the midst of tensions it would never want. Turkey must not forget that its weight and reliability there stem not from being a NATO force but chiefly from being Turkey.

In fact, the wish of some Afghans we have spoken with is that Turkey withdraw completely together with NATO and come on its own, with its own weight, within the framework of a new agreement with the Afghan people. Of course this wish is expressed in awareness of the difficulty in practice of meeting this condition. After all, not only in the eyes of the Afghan people but also in the eyes of the international community, there is a ready explanation for being there as a NATO member.

True, we have not yet heard the same loud voices from those who ask what Turkey's business is in Libya, Syria or Somalia asking what its business is in Afghanistan. This too is an interesting silence in itself. Perhaps Turkey's historical bond with Afghanistan and the present relations in recent history resulting from that bond have become more habitual. But let us also say, on this occasion, that there is a needle to be stuck into ourselves regarding our manner of relationship here. We do in fact have serious humanitarian aid or investments in Afghanistan, with which we have established such a strong relationship of trust. Yet it unfortunately cannot be said that we manage these investments well enough and efficiently.

I will give just one example, with the observations and statements of an Afghan friend who directly experienced the matter:

"When Afghanistan's neighboring countries and other countries in the world give a student a scholarship and invest in him, they support him to the end and, for as long as he lives, regard him as their country's goodwill ambassador. They do not cut their tie with him. But unfortunately Turkey is not like this; Turkey invests in the student. It covers his education expenses until he completes a master's or even a doctorate. After students who graduated from Turkey return to Afghanistan, most of them have their relations with Turkey cut off, and what is more painful, when these graduates want to go to Turkey they have difficulty obtaining a visa. Turkey too needs to pay attention to this issue and to look after the graduates, who are its capital in Afghanistan, by showing them more interest."

In fact there are many other examples like this. What is missing in Turkey's general approach to its operation regions is that the contributions of sociology, of cultural studies and of cultural ambassadors who try to understand are not sufficiently included in the process. That is another subject. If there is an opportunity we will return to it later.