Is Turkey Operating in a Post-Western World?

C

laims that the liberal order emerging after the Second World War had achieved absolute victory in parallel with the end of the Cold War have given way to debates regarding the serious problems associated with the international system, alongside the rapid pace of history and recent developments. When we link the continuity of systems to their ability to find solutions to problems that exist or arise outside the parameters of power, it will be universally acknowledged that a serious systemic crisis exists. The system, which has progressed through international organisations and economic parameters centred on liberal values, has clearly lost its legitimacy due to power struggles, the lawless behaviour of actors described as the system’s guardians, the pandemic, and its failure to produce solutions to the injustices suffered by innocent people, particularly in Palestine.

In parallel with the crises experienced and developments in international politics, various views have emerged regarding the future of the international system. In this context, shifting power dynamics in international politics and new organisational structures have brought with them expectations of a new global hegemony or order outside the West. It must be noted here that, militarily, the international system remains unipolar under US leadership; however, in political and economic terms, it possesses a structure that is either multipolar or progresses within the context of regional cooperation.

The essence of the debates surrounding the international system stems from this very point. The system we define as Western liberal hegemony essentially progresses on the basis of economic and political integration and the application of legal principles; military superiority has been viewed as a power element deployed only when the order it is assumed to uphold is threatened or damaged. Consequently, with the emergence of power centres outside the West in economic terms, the validity of the current international system has begun to be questioned.

The issue of the International System

The concept of ‘post-Western’ (post-Western or beyond the West) emerged in this context and signifies that the West no longer holds absolute dominance in global politics, economics and culture. Alongside rising powers in Asia, particularly China, the fact that regional powers such as India, Russia, the Gulf states, or Brazil, Indonesia and Turkey do not perceive the West as the sole centre of power and instead exhibit autonomous behaviour is seen as a sign of the post-Western world.

In this context, the fact that Europe and the US are no longer viewed as the sole centers of power, that liberal values are being questioned in the context of power shifts, and that a normative pluralism is being centralised—leading to the creation of new institutions that are, for the time being, purely economic in nature and a shift in the understanding of economic development—are defined as the hallmarks of the Post-Western world.

European Commission President Von der Leyen, in a recent statement regarding the need to maintain momentum in the European Union’s enlargement process, also made a significant remark concerning Turkey. According to Von der Leyen, the necessity of fully integrating the European continent is linked to the risk of Europe falling under Turkish, Russian or Chinese influence. Although negotiations do not currently indicate any active depth, Turkey remains a country with an ongoing EU accession process. It is not a new development on the EU side for the head of the EU’s executive body to imply a perception of threat regarding a potential member state. Throughout Turkey’s long history of having applied for membership, it is a common occurrence for similar implications or statements to suggest that its place is not in Europe. This statement alone warrants the question of the direction in which Turkey’s foreign policy is heading.

Beyond this recent example, it is possible to identify numerous instances where Turkey has been left in the lurch by Western actors, where cooperation has been shelved, and where the country has been exposed to serious security threats. In parallel with this, it has led to questions being raised as to the extent to which Turkey’s foreign policy practices—as demonstrated since the beginning of the AK Party’s rule—have diverged from the ‘Western-oriented’ aspect of the traditional foreign policy paradigm, or whether they have instead demonstrated continuity. Perhaps it is precisely here that one might ask whether the concept of ‘Post-Western’—in the context of the waning influence of the West and the consolidation of the position of ‘the others’—is viewed as a viable path for Turkey.

Turkey’s strategy

Foreign policy decision-makers have long held the view that the international system is in crisis and that states which fail to pay attention to shifts in power and shape their position accordingly—or fulfill the necessary requirements—will face serious vulnerabilities. Consequently, the characteristics defined by the ‘Post-Western’ concept are not a new development for Turkey. Ankara has adopted a stance that recognizes the situation where the post-Western state of the international system creates a greater need for security, and acts accordingly.

Turkey’s response to a world where the rule-of-law-based functioning of the international system, which was based on liberal values, has been replaced by a more aggressive world where states prioritize their national interests, has been to prioritize its domestic defene industry to ensure the necessity of defense. It is fair to say that, as of today, Turkey is not only meeting a significant portion of its defense needs domestically but has also established itself as a key player in the international system through its exports and modernization efforts. Consequently, it can be argued that Turkey’s security framework has seen a reduction in its dependent relationship with the West; this shift has enabled it to adopt autonomous behavior, thereby redefining its position within the international system.

Furthermore, in the energy sector—where Turkey is not self-sufficient and may face supply chain issues—it has diversified its partnerships. At the same time, economically, it has begun to avoid limiting itself to a narrow geopolitical framework regarding trade areas. This has naturally led to a proportional increase in the share of non-Western regions in its foreign trade volumes, raising the question of whether Turkey’s political approach is also undergoing a shift in the economic dimension.

Change noticed

The question of whether a Turkey that is independent in terms of security parameters, visionary regarding economic integration, and capable of resolving international crises and issues by asserting its weight on a theoretical and organizational basis is operating within a post-Western framework also offers insights into predicting the possible future of foreign policy.

Turkey has altered its approach to foreign policy with the advent of the AK Party era. Whilst the approach to foreign policy is shaped by what the country possesses and lacks, elements that are possessed but not considered valuable have been brought to the fore, whilst weaknesses that are not possessed—and which, in this respect, perpetuate a relationship of dependency—have been eliminated. Consequently, Turkey has begun to shape its foreign policy not around how it is perceived, but around how it perceives itself. Whereas it was previously perceived as an unwavering ally of the West or a strategic partner defined by shifting concepts, with the change in approach and the evolution of its self-definition, it now positions itself as an equal actor, aware of its own strengths and capable of even treating these as a bargaining chip.

Although this could be illustrated by dozens of examples, President Erdoğan’s message on the occasion of Europe Day stands out as the finest response to the changing methods and perceptions, and in this respect, to von der Leyen’s remarks. Erdoğan stated that Turkey has not deviated from its goal of full EU membership and continues to conduct relations without deviating from the principle of good faith, whilst asserting that the EU needs Turkey more than Turkey needs the EU. The assertion that an EU that does not admit Turkey would be left vulnerable both in meeting its security needs and in managing crises highlights how Turkey perceives the issue of membership through a strong narrative.

So, is Turkey operating within a post-Western framework? It is difficult to give a definitive ‘yes’ to this question. Indeed, one could even argue that Turkey has no agenda to problematise the West. Alongside statements from government officials indicating that they do not approach the possibility of Turkey’s membership of the EU or its potential participation in new security formations with a logic of substitution, the fact that Ankara has no intention of undergoing an identity shift in economic or political terms demonstrates that it does not have a Post-Western world objective.

However, in parallel with the shift in its perception of foreign policy, it is also a fact that Turkey has long been acting in a post-Western manner as a result of the narrow geopolitical understanding and logic of interests inherent in the historical Western paradigm. Consequently, Turkey shapes its foreign policy by correctly perceiving the West and acting in accordance with the system’s requirements; in this respect, it treats the West as it does other actors within the equation of national interests and cooperation.

(Originally published in Turkish by Kriter)