Turkish-American Relations-English

KONA, Gamze Güngörmüş (2008). “Turkish-American Relations : Destined To Eternal Continuity”. The paper presented at the International Symposium on Democratization, Globalization and Turkey, Akdeniz University, 27-30 March 2008, Antalya.

TURKISH-AMERICAN RELATIONS : DESTINED TO ETERNAL CONTINUITY

TÜRK-AMERİKAN İLİŞKİLERİ : SÜREKLİLİĞE YAZGILI BİR İLİŞKİ BİÇİMİ

Dr. Gamze Güngörmüş Kona

ABSTRACT

The relations between the Turks and Americans dates back to the Ottoman Empire period. Familiarity with the Americans rose through the mass immigrations of the Ottoman Turks to the newly discovered world began in 1860s and also through the extension of the missionaries headed American colleges in Anatolia since the begining of 1870. In the Constitutional Era II, some Turkish students went to America for education. Moreover, the military staff and the Ottoman diplomats in America also accelerated this familiarity. Turkish interest in the U.S. grew more depending on U.S. determination not to wage war against the Ottoman Empire in the World War I and quite humanitarian 14 Points of Woodrow Wilson declared by the U.S. after the war. In line with this, even some Turkish intellectuals expressed their view that the sole solution was to accept the U.S. hegomony. After the War of Independence and the establishment of Turkish Republic, political, cultural and economic relations with the U.S. augmented gradually. In fact, the reason or reasons of two states’ relationship initiated after the World War II and intensified in time between a super power like U.S. and a medium power like Turkey has always aroused wonder. However, when we examine foreign policy patterns that these states adopt and opportunities that they present for each other we would realise that the relations between these two states are based on mutual benefits and common ideals. From the end of World War II to the begining of post-Cold War period the U.S. and Turkey shared approximately the same ideals related to security perception, defence policies, foreign policy principles through supporting each other in international platforms. Although there has been some disagreements regarding some foreign policy matters between these two states in the end they succeeded to find a solution. During the Cold War period while Turkey did its best to side with the U.S. in order to survive economically and politically U.S. did its utmost to benefit from its geopolitically important ally, Turkey, to reinforce its position and compansate its geopolitical deficiencies in the Middle East region against the Soviet Union. Following the demise of the Soviet Union the mentioned reciprocal advantages continued. The structural changes in the Balkans and Central Asian region and the plasticity appeared after the Gulf War II still necessitate both states’ cooperation in every field. In the first part of this article, Turkish-American relations will be explained through historical perspective, in the second part, in order to grasp the nature of those relations common foreign policy preferences that make those two states closer will be detailed and this close relationship will be identified along with examples. In the last part of the article, the problems faced by Turkey as the result of the mentioned close relationship between Turkey and the U.S. will be highlightened but it will also be mentioned that those problems were unable to detoriatate the continuity between Turkey and the U.S. In other words, in the article, it will be proved that the relationship between Turkey and the U.S. represents “strategic partnership” rather than “ordinary” and “temporary” through explaining the factors which necessitate “continuity” between those two states.

Key Words:Turkey, U.S., relations, problems, continuity, strategic partnership

ÖZET

Türk ve Amerikan halkları arasındaki ilişkilerin geçmişi Osmanlı İmparatorluğu dönemine kadar uzanmaktadır. Osmanlı Türklerinin Amerikalılara yönelik ilgisi, 1860’larda yeni keşfedilen bu dünyaya yapılan toplu göçlerle ve 1870’lerden itibaren misyonerliğin Amerikan kolejlerinin önderliğinde Anadolu’da yayılmasıyla artmaya başladı. II. Meşrutiyet Döneminde bazı Türk öğrenciler tahsil için Amerika’ya gitti. Amerika’daki askeri kadro ve Osmanlı diplomatları da bu yakınlaşmayı hızlandırdı. Türklerin ABD’ye ilgisi, ABD’nin I. Dünya Savaşı’nda Osmanlı İmparatorluğu’na karşı savaş açmama kararı alması ve savaştan sonra Wilson barış prensiplerini açıklaması üzerine daha da arttı. Hatta bir kısım Osmanlı aydını tek çözümün ABD egemenliğini kabul etmek olduğu görüşünü bile dile getirir oldu. Türkiye Cumhuriyeti’nin kurulmasından sonra, ABD ile siyasal, kültürel ve ekonomik ilişkiler giderek gelişme gösterdi. Öte yandan, iki devletin II. Dünya Savaşı’ndan sonra başlayan ve ABD gibi bir süper güçle Türkiye gibi orta büyüklükte bir ülke arasında zamanla artan ilişkinin nedenleri hep hayretle karşılanmıştır. Ancak, bu devletlerin benimsemiş olduğu dış politika davranış modellerini ve birbirlerine sundukları fırsatları incelediğimizde, bu iki devlet arasındaki ilişkilerin karşılıklı çıkarlara ve ortak ideallere dayandığını görürüz. II. Dünya Savaşı’nın sona ermesinden Soğuk Savaş sonrası dönemin başlangıcına kadar ABD ve Türkiye, uluslararası platformlarda birbirlerini destekleyerek güvenlik anlayışı, savunma politikaları, dış politika ilkeleriyle ilgili olarak hemen hemen aynı idealleri paylaşmışlardır. Bu iki devlet arasında bazı dış politika konularında anlaşmazlıklar çıkmış olsa da sonunda bir çözüm bulmayı başarmışlardır. Türkiye, Soğuk Savaş döneminde, ekonomik ve siyasal olarak ayakta kalabilmek amacıyla ABD’nin tarafında olmak için elinden gelen çabayı gösterirken, ABD de, Orta Doğu bölgesinde Sovyetler Birliği karşısındaki durumunu kuvvetlendirmek ve jeopolitik yetersizliklerini telafi etmek üzere jeopolitik önemi bulunan bu müttefikinden, Türkiye’den yararlanmak için büyük çaba harcamıştır. Bu karşılıklı avantajlar Sovyetler Birliği’nin sona ermesinden sonra da devam etmiştir. Balkanlar ve Orta Asya bölgesindeki yapısal değişiklikler, II. Irak operasyonundan sonra ortaya çıkan belirsizlik, günümüzde de her iki devletin her alanda işbirliğini gerektirmektedir. Yıllardır benimsedikleri ortak politikaların yanısıra, ABD ve Türkiye, birçok konuda birbirleri için önem taşımaktadır. Bu makale kapsamında, birinci bölümde Türkiye ve Amerika Birleşik Devletleri arasındaki ilişkiler tarihsel perspektif kapsamında incelendikten sonra ikinci bölümde bu yakın ilişkinin tabiatını anlamak için bu devletleri yakınlaştıran ortak dış politika tercihleri açıklanacak, Türkiye’nin ABD için taşıdığı önem ve ABD’nin de Türkiye için arz ettiği önem örneklerle ifade edilecektir. Son bölümde ise Türkiye’nin ABD ile 1950’li yıllardan itibaren geliştirdiği yoğun ikili ilişkilerin Türkiye nezdinde yarattığı sorunsal örneklerle açıklanacak fakat bu sorunsalın ikili ilişkilerde sürekliliği engelleyici bir niteliğe sahip olmadığı belirtilecektir. Bir başka deyişle, Türk-Amerikan ilişkilerinde “sürekliliği” gerektiren faktörler açıklanmak suretiyle Türk-ABD ilişkilerinin sıradan ve geçici nitelik taşıyan bir ilişkiden çok öte, bir stratejik ortaklık olduğu ispatlanmaya çalışılacaktır.

Anahtar Kelimeler:Türkiye, ABD, ilişki, sorunlar, süreklilik, stratejik ortaklık

INTRODUCTION
The Cold War concept put forward an entire and continuous clash between the sides. The establishment of the blocks employed the credibility of that concept. The Cold War motto 'allied or enemy' in a way helped the foundation of the blocks. In other words, the founding concept of the blocks urged their supporters (the states) to adopt the way of life, different in the Eastern and Western blocks. By doing so, the block leaders could reinforce the values which provide the continuity of the blocks and solidarity among block supporters (Langlois et.al., 2000:277) Depending on the mentioned threat perception concept and block structures in the Cold War realities, Turkish officials developed security policies shaped by the newly-emerged security concerns at the very begining of 1950s. First of all, Turkey prefered to be a member of the Nato to preserve its territorial integrity and the right to self-determination against the Soviet Union. In the following years of the Cold War period, Turkish officials, in order to cover Turkey's economic and security needs, and to realise Westernization ideals, did their utmost to integrate with the security, military and economic organizations of the West, particularly the U.S. The period after the Cold War brought about both international and regional chaos and Turkey, suddenly and unexpectedly, found herself in this political mess. Along with the nationalist, religious and ethnic confrontations in the Balkan, Caucasus and Central Asian regions and with the changes in the Gulf, Turkey had to recall its security concerns and security policy in the new international environment (Fuller, 1992:30) Unlike the Cold War period, Turkey has to determine its security and foreign policy from a wider perspective. Since the begining of the post-Cold War period, far from being a ‘defensive’ process, the conceptualization of Turkish foreign policy orientation has involved political, economic and cultural factors all together. So, since 1990s Turkey has to make its security and foreign policy arrangements not only according to Russian threat, defence of its borders and attempts of Greece as in the Cold War period but also according to multi-dimentional changes in the balance of power in international system, and the mentioned political environment also necessitates Turkish-U.S. close cooperation in 21st century.
1.HISTORICAL BACKGROUND OF THE RELATIONS BETWEEN TURKEY AND THE U.S.

The relations between the Turks and Americans dates back to the Ottoman Empire period. Since the Americans had given importance to trade they concluded treaties with Algeria, Tripoli and Tunisia which were under Ottoman domination then. The basic goal of America was to initiate trade with some Ottoman provinces. On May 7, 1831, Treaty of Commerce was signed by the Ottoman Empire and America. Following this treaty, both the number of American commercial ship visiting Izmir and the exportation rate grew largely. Along with the mentioned developments, America set up its consulate in İstanbul in 1831. Despite these efforts, the Ottoman society, except for the ones in state administration, had no detailed information about Americans. Familiarity with the Americans rose through the mass immigrations of the Ottoman Turks to the newly discovered world began in 1860s and also through the extension of the missionaries headed American colleges in Anatolia since the begining of 1870. In the Constitutional Era II, some Turkish students went to America for education. Moreover, the military staff and the Ottoman diplomats in America also accelerated this familiarity. (Kuran, 1994:39-43) Turkish interest in the U.S. grew more depending on U.S. determination not to wage war against the Ottoman Empire in the World War I and quite humanitarian 14 Points of Woodrow Wilson declared by the U.S. after the war. In line with this, even some Turkish intellectuals expressed their view that the sole solution was to accept the U.S. hegomony. After the War of Independence and the establishment of Turkish Republic, political, cultural and economic relations with the U.S. augmented gradually. It has been customary to view Turkish-American relations in four different periods. In an analytical setting, Truman Doctrine (1947) is regarded as the first step in bilateral relationship. In the first period (1945-1960), the relations between these two states represents full cooperation in every field from military to politics. In the second period (1960-1980), the relations have had some defects due to the changes in international system and some negaive changes in American policy toward Turkey. In the third period (1980-1990) Turkish-American relations turned out to be normal following the Islamic revolution in Iran and Soviet occupation of Afghanistan. The fourth period still continues. In this period the relations between U.S. and Turkey necessitate full cooperation again. So as to explain the features of the relations between these two states we will draw an outline of the periods roughly.

a. Period I (1945-1960)
Political polarization of the international system, possible expansion of communist ideology and the Soviet threat have been the factors which provided U.S.-Turkish close-up. The U.S., in order to take the security of the Middle East under guarantee against Soviet Union and to prevent Soviet Union from enlarging its influence through the Meditarenean, began to reinforce relations with Turkey. The first concrete example of this warm relationship showed itself in financial assistance given by the U.S. to Turkey as the result of Truman Doctrine and Marshall Plan, and following Turkey’s Nato membership, strategic and political cooperation expanded the content of Turkish-U.S. relations. Turkey remained one of the most important and trustable ally of the U.S. between 1945 and 1960. During that period while Turkey was extremely contented to have integrated herself with the west and western institutions U.S. was totaly satisfied about Turkey since she was able to surround Soviet Union partly through Turkey by intensifying relations. So, we might say that neither Turkey nor U.S. have had such a nice experience in terms of bilateral relations after that period.

b. Period II (1960-1980)
It can be argued that between 1960 and 1980 Turkish-American relations could not keep their intensified level as between 1945 and 1960. The reasons of this downgrade were various. First of all, the detente occured in international system led both the U.S. and Turkey to initiate political relations with the Soviet Union. Deployment of the Jupiter missiles in Turkey for the exchange of removal of Russian missiles in Cuba in 1962, which caused discomfort in Turkey (Sander, 1979:209-225) and some other attempts to soften tight relations with the Soviet Union all affected Turkish-American relations negatively. In addition to this, the positive changes in Soviet political behaviour had also an impact on softening the tight bipolar system. However, apart from the changes in international system, the relations with the U.S. were heavily shaped by the American attitude toward Cyprus issue after 1960s. The U.S. has always regarded Cyprus problems as a serious handicap between two important Nato members and claimed that any problem that would possibly cause severe conflict between Turkey and Greece would give harm to Nato’s security responsibilities in the Balkans and Middle East particularly regarding the Soviet Union. For this reason, the U.S. opposed any attempt to solve the Cyprus issue through clash or war except for bilateral agreements. In addition to the U.S. security interests, the activities of the Greek Lobby also affected the U.S. policy toward Cyprus since the mid-1950s. While the Greek Lobby was influential over the President (the then President Johnson) in 1963-64 Cyprus crisis, Greek Americans successfully lobbied the U.S. Congress during 1974 Cyprus crisis. (Bölükbaşı, 1992:66) In 1964, when Turkish authorities decided to send troops to Cyprus, U.S. openly represented her opposition against Turkey within the letter sent by the U.S. president Lyndon Johnson on June 1964. In president Johnson’s letter U.S. supported the idea that the military attack to be realised by Turkey would result with direct Soviet interference with the issue and expressed that she would hinder Turkey to use the military device supplied by the U.S. for Turkey in this attack.

Following the Johnson letter the relations between Turkey and U.S. began to lessen and even became negative. In 1965, Turkey rejected MLF (Multi Lateral Force) Project. In the same year, Turkey refused to augment its military force within Nato complaining about the insufficiency of military assistance given to her by Nato. Moreover, Turkey criticised U.S. in relation with the Vietnam War declaring that she is not infavour of using force in Vietnam. In addition to these, use of American bases and joint defence installations in Turkey was rearranged by Turkey in 1968 and 1969. The mentioned rearrangement restricted the unlimited activities of the U.S. in Turkey through these bases and installations. Turkey also forced U.S. to decrease the number of the American personnel in Turkey. Furthermore, the coalition government headed by Premier Bulent Ecevit resumed the poppy growing ban in 1974. The gradual reduction in the amount of financial assistance given to Turkey by the U.S. appeared unexpectedly as a kind of punishment after 1968. So, we can argue that both the changes in international political system and Cyprus crisis in 1964 had been the determinants of Turkish-American relations between 1964 and 1974. (See Sönmezoğlu, 1995:29-84) The second phase after 1974 respresented more complexity in terms of Turkish-American relations. Following the second peace attack of Turkey in Cyprus, the U.S. cancelled the military assistance to Turkey and on 5 February 1975 U.S. arms ambargo on Turkey began. Just after the ambargo decision was put into force Turkey began to show opposition. On 13 February 1975 Turkey declared the establishment of Cyprus Turkish Federative state and on 26 February she expressed that she will not join the Nato Winter Practices to be realised in February-March. In addition to these, on 25 July 1975 Turkish government cancelled the 1969 U.S.-Turkish Treaty and banned the activities of all American bases/installations in Turkey. (see Campany, 1986) Although the U.S. government softened the conditions of the ambargo in late 1975, during the period in which the ambargo kept its relevance, Turkey was badly affected economically. From the begining of ambargo decision to the removal of it, Turkey felt the necessity to reevaluate her relations and position in Western alliance. The idea that Turkey should give more importance to her own national benefits than devoting herself fully to the U.S. began to be widely pronounced.

c. Period III (1980-1990)
Following the lifting of the U.S. ambargo on Turkey, the relations between two states turned to normality. However, it should be taken into consideration that removal of the U.S. ambargo on Turkey was not only and the most important reason which made the relations better. In this context, the changes in international system consisted the other side of the coin. Since the changes directly affected American attitude toward Turkey we will mention these changes roughly.

As we pointed out before one of the reasons which helped Turkish-American relations be less intimate had been the improvement in Soviet-American relations. During the detente period in which the Soviet threat had been softened as the result of bilateral agreements reached by two parties, Turkey’s importance before the U.S. diminished. Following the upgrading relations with the Soviet Union, American security perception in the Middle East had lost its severeness and parallel to this development American policy on Turkey, which was believed to be the most important state against any Soviet expansion in the Middle East region, had changed profoundly and unexpectedly. From then on, U.S. concentrated its attention on Cyprus matter between Greece and Turkey and disappointed Turkey several times through taking negative decisions in the Congress. However, two important developments in 1979, Islamic Revolution in Iran and Soviet occupation of Afghanistan, resulted with total satisfaction in terms of Turkey. Along with the regime change in Iran, U.S. lost one of the two important pillars in the Middle East. Following the dismantlement of pro-American Shah Rıza Pehlevi, the new leader Ayetollah Homeyni declared the U.S. as the Great Satan and adopted rather hostile policy toward American supporters. Furthermore, Soviet Union, in order to fill the gap emerged as the result of the regime change in Iran and to have advantages in the Middle East region, began to increase relations with Iran. The Soviet Union was also intensifying relations, particularly economic relations, with Turkey. In addition to the developments mentioned above, Soviet Union occupied Afghanistan in 1979, which severely affected promising Soviet-American relations. These all gave the signals of a possible radical change in Soviet foreign policy behaviour and forced U.S. to rearrange its policies related to the Soviet Union. Along with revival of Soviet interest in the Middle East region Turkey regained its importance before the U.S. regarding its role in the Middle East, eastern Mediterranean and Balkans against Soviet Union. Under these circumstances, vital importance of Adana-Incirlik Air Base began to be more emphasized by the U.S. (see Sezer, 1981) Besides the decreasing level of oppression by the U.S. on Turkey related to the Cyprus matter, U.S. also increased the amount of assistance given to Turkey. While the reason of less strict American attitude towards Turkey related to the Cyprus matter was that Cyprus matter began to consist only a small part of American foreign policy agenda since she had to focus on the changes occured in late 1970s, the reason of an increase in American assistance to Turkey was to make Turkey be better off in order to guarantee the security of the Middle East, eastern Mediterranean and Balkans against Soviet Union.

d. Period IV (1991- )
The post-Cold War realities of international political system necessitated both the U.S. and Turkey to forget misconceptions, bad experiences felt in the Cold War period. The changes in international system did not loose the ties with the U.S.. On the contrary, along with the development, Turkey became more indispensable for U.S. and vice versa. Gulf Crisis and Gulf War in 1990-1991, the new order in Central Asian region and disorder in the Balkans, terrorist attack on World Trade Center all proved the necessity and reinforced the mentioned Turkish-U.S. relationship. However, the most critical factor that rises coflict in regard to Turkish-U.S. relations presently has been the different political approaches of Turkish and American sides to the developments in Iraq following the second U.S. operation in Iraq. Turkish decision-makers strongly believe that the prevailing chaos in Iraq would lead to the establishment of an independent Kurdish state in Iraq and this would result in the threat of that state against Turkish national security. Despite the guarantees and promises given by the American political elite related with the preservation of Turkish national security, Turkish side still feels a profound hesitation on the issue and that makes the relations rather tense recently.
2. THE FACTORS LEADING TURKEY AND THE U.S. TO BECOME ALLIES
In fact, the reason or reasons of two states’ relationship initiated after the World War II and intensified in time between a super power like U.S. and a medium power like Turkey has always aroused wonder. However, when we examine foreign policy patterns that these states adopt and opportunities that they present for each other we would realise that the relations between these two states are based on mutual benefits and common ideals. So, in order to understand the nature of this intimate relationship, we would emphasize common foreign policy preferences that lead these states to become closer and importance of Turkey for the U.S. and importance of U.S. for Turkey. In other words we would mention the factors which necessitate “continuity” in Turkish-American relations.
a. Common Foreign Policy Preferences
Although American foreign policy is much more diversified and complex compared to Turkish foreign policy the similarities between these two states’ foreign policy behaviour have been astonishingly high. From the end of World War II to the begining of post-Cold War period the U.S. and Turkey shared approximately the same ideals related to security perception, defence policies, foreign policy principles through supporting each other in international platforms.

So, it would be ideal to give some examples which would make it clear that Turkey and U.S. have had some common foreign policy preferences during the Cold War years and in post-Cold War period: 1. During the Cold War years both U.S. and Turkey were determined to take precautions against communist ideology and Soviet Union’s expansionist threat. While U.S. developed policies to make Soviet expansionist threat ineffective (see MFA Working Group Paper, pp.200-207) and “determined to rescue the world from Stalin as they did from Hitler” (Ambrose, 1992:xi), Turkey, in order to defend its territorial unity, not only adopted these policies also actively involved in structures developed for the containment of the Soviet Union. Nato and Baghdad Pact were among these structures; 2. Both the U.S. and Turkey were in favour of maintaining international political order established after the World War II. As the American strategist John Spkyman indicated, the main notion that the U.S. strategy is based on during the World War II and after this war has been to hinder the emergence of any states’ hegemony over other states in Europe and Asia. For this reason, U.S. has found it evitable that she has to continue her existence in these regions. (Elekdağ, 1999) After the World War II, Turkey shared the same idea with the U.S.. She speculated that Soviet political and economic influence or hegemony particularly in the Middle East and Eastern Mediterranean would create catastrophic results which would threaten her independence; 3. Following the demise of the Soviet Union this mentioned policy remained unchanged. American attitude in the Gulf Crisis II has been the first example which proved the continuation of U.S.’ policy. Saddam Hussein who started the war with Kuwait in order to enlarge Iraq’s sphere of influence in the Middle East region came accross with U.S. objection. The attempts of the Russian Federation to fill the political, military and economic vacuum in the Central Asian region occured as the result of the break up of the Soviet Union led the reinforcement of the U.S. interest in the region. In this newly- shaped world order Turkey does not approve any states’ hegemony especially nearby. The most important reason of the U.S., according to Buzan “undoubtedly greatest of the great powers” (Buzan, 1991:434) after 1990s, to continue this policy in the new world order is to emphasize its super power position in international arena. One of the most important issue disscussed among foreign policy decision makers in Washington after the Cold War period was how to prepare the conditions that would lead the U.S. to last its global hegemony. (Gürses, 1999) However, the idea of Turkey in regard to following this policy in this new world order is much less sophisticated compared to the U.S.. Turkey only wishes to gain advantages through using cultural, linguistic, ethnic and religious ties with the Central Asian republics in the Central Asian region, be the most powerful regional state in Middle East and the Balkans. Turkey believes that as long as the status quo is kept in these regions she would be advantageous; 4. In the new world order both U.S. and Turkey, as in the Cold War period, have been tightly sticked with the existence and reinforcement of Nato. Although Nato connotates different meanings for the U.S. and Turkey, these two states develop policies which support Nato fully. The following two quotations by two Turkish journalists explain the importance of the Nato both for Turkey and the U.S. “Turkey, through its Nato membership, could maintain its territorial unity and security, survive despite Moscow’s expansionist ideals. By the help of Nato membership Turkey could modernise and strengthten its military forces; provide foreign support necessary for economic development and have an important position in the West...” (Kohen, 1999) “According to Washington, the most important function of Nato has been to last U.S.’ military and political existence in Europe and to provide a legal basis for the mentioned existence”. (Elekdağ, 1999); 5. Different from the Cold War period, ethnic and religious conflicts and economic inequality began to be uttered more often in stead of inter-state ideological, political and military wars. While the solution to East-West conflict was mainly based on “deterence” in the Cold War period, the solution to ethnic and religious conflict is based on “peace operations” in the post-Cold War period. As seen in the Gulf War II, Somalia, Bosnia-Herzegovina and Kosova these peace operations have become widely spread. While the U.S., as the leader of Nato, directs these operations, Turkey is directly involved in the mentioned operations either by providing logistic and military support, financial assistance or humanitarian aid. Since peace operations bear importance for both the U.S. and Turkey, they prefer acting together. Although the reason of the U.S. and Turkey’s participation in peace operations is completely different, their cooperation in these make them more intimate. It is obvious that U.S. plays primarily important role in peace operations in order to prevent any state’s attempt to gain influence as the result of power vacuum occured by religious or ethnic conflicts in some regions; Turkey, through siding with the U.S., intends to gain political, economic and military support of the U.S. and to augment its prestige with in the Nato; 6. Turkey and the U.S. share the same ideas about the necessity of democratic government systems and market economy. While U.S. emphasises her proud regarding her initiatives to establish institutions and norms of democracy and market economy in the newly independent states which lack these and also her attemps to help the countries to preserve their democratic structures and market economies, Turkey does not hesitate to point out its uniqueness particularly in the Middle East region since she is the only democratic and laic country which represents unique example in the region. In the post-Cold War order, the U.S. as the global super power supports attempts of democratization and transition to market economy. The U.S. believes that as long as democratic institutions are established and economic wellfare is maintained the world would be less chaotic. As for Turkey’s support to the establishment of democracy and market economy, Turkey’s policy is quite clear, Turkey assumes that the newly-independent Central Asian republics would be able to last their independence and refrain from going under the influence of any regional or global power, such as Russian Federation, through adopting norms of democracy and market economy.

However, the wildcard scenario in regard to those common foreign policy preferences appeared following the Iraqi operation of the U.S. after 9/11. Kurdish groups in northern Iraq, inspired by the ongoing chaos in Iraq, very often points out their determination to establish an independent Kurdish state in northern Iraq through intensifying their anti-Turkish political discourse and propaganda. And the PKK, reinforced indirectly by those negative developments, has increased its attacks against Turkey. American neutral stand toward the activities of Kurdish groups in northern Iraq and the attacks of the PKK against Turkey rises and intensifies negative concern among Turkish political elite.

b. Importance of Turkey and U.S. for each other
In addition to the common policies that these two states have adopted for years, both U.S. and Turkey represent importance for each other in many issues. Firstly we will mention the importance of Turkey for the U.S. then importance of the U.S. for Turkey.
What Does Turkey Mean For The U.S.
It might sound rather ego-centric to other states that Turkish foreign-policy makers overemphasize the geo-strategic and geo-economic importance of Turkey before some other regional or international powers particularly before the U.S. However, along with the begining of the post-Cold War period the explanations in regard to the strategic importance of Turkey made by the U.S. officials back this widely held view strongly even they make it clear that geo-strategic importance of Turkey taking its functions in various regions in the post-Cold War period compared to the functions she had in certain regions in the Cold War period increased immensely. The following explanations of Arthur Cry, the former vice-president and programme director of the Chicago Council on Foreign Relations, resumes the reasons why Turkey has represented importance since the Cold War and why this importance is getting more remarkable since the begining of the post-Cold War period for the U.S. According to Cry, “Turkey remains distinctive in several respects from the perspective of American foreign policy. First, the nation is one of the most faithful and reliable allies. The large number of Turkish as well as American graves at the special United Nations cemetery at Pusan at South Corea, a moving legacy of fighting together to defend that nation during the 1950-1953 Korean War, are among the most dramatic testimonies available for that fact. More recently, Turkey stood with the U.S. and other UN forces in the coalition which drove Iraq out of Kuwait in early 1991. Secondly, Turkey is at geopolitical crossroads, now as it was in the past. Turkey, rightly, is both a traditional great power and one with a pivotal role in the contemporary fluid international system; she holds control of the straits linking the Black and Mediterranean seas, is located at the southern end of a region which has known almost constant tension and strife since the Crimean War of the mid-nineteen century and has a powerful national military tradition. At the same time, the end of the Cold War provides an incentive to move beyond the Western tendency to view Turkey, at times in an off-hand manner, as simply a buffer and barrier against possible expansion by the Soviet Union. Thirdly, Turkey is at religious and cultural crossroads as well, blending Christian and Muslim populations, at the border of the Judaeo, Christian West and Muslim East. Turkey is confronted with a changing national population pattern at the same time that the rise of Islamic fundamentalism and associated movements and immigration from Islamic nations to Europe is generating political concern and social tension in the West”. (Cry, 1996:108) In addition to the explanations above the following items will also help us understand the importance of Turkey for the U.S. better:

Nato’s Milestone: During the Cold War period and in the new world order Turkey has played an important role with in the Nato. Kuniholm explains the mentioned crucial role that Turkey holds in the following words; “...as the strongest anti-Communist country on the periphery of the Soviet Union, only country in the eastern Mediterranean capable of substantial resistance to the Soviets; it constituted a deterrent to Soviet aggression and provided something of a protective screen for the region”. (Kuniholm, 1983:422) According to the U.S., Nato’s realisation of its defence role and reinforcement of this role is regarded as the primarily important for global security. Turkey, being a Nato member, showed a great performance in the Middle East region and against the Soviet Union during the Cold War years. In the post-Cold War period Turkey’s importance with in Nato increased in relation with its geographical capabilities in the Balkans, Middle East and Central Asia. Arık expresses this upgrading importance and influence of Turkey in these words “Turkey has moved on from its marginal position of merely being a southern flank country of Nato, to become a common center and platform where what we can briefly call rings of Eurasian regional security are emerging. Central and eastern Europe, the Balkans, the Black Sea region and the Caucasus, Eastern Mediterranean, the Middle East and Central Asia, all of these Circles of Security, are clamped together and intersect where Turkey is located”. (Arık, 1995/96:8) So, we can argue that from the U.S. point of view, Turkey will remain one of the most important Nato ally of the U.S. through assisting the well-being of global security.
Trustable Ally: History of Turkish-American relations proved the fact that although the U.S. caused threat to Turkey’s defence and security (Cuba missile crisis in 1962); directly interfered with Turkey’s own security issues (1965 Johnson Letter); cancelled military and economic assistance (1975 U.S. arms ambargo); gave harm to Turkish economy (Turkey’s economic loss in the end of Gulf War II) and realised policies which affected Turkey’s internal stability negatively (security zone above 36 parallel emerged along with the Gulf War II in the northern Iraq), Turkey did not give up siding with the U.S. and remained as the most faithful ally of her.
An Important State against the Soviet Union/Russian Federation: During the Cold War period, Turkey actively took part in containment policy designed to keep the Soviet Union under pressure militarily and politically in order to prevent it from causing military and political threat in the regions geographically close to it and also against the Western block. Turkey’s activities within the containment policy gave practical results against the Soviet Union particularly in the Middle East region. Although the communist threat removed in the post-Cold War order, Russian Federation, the successor of the Soviet Union, still causes discomfort in Nato and Central Asian region. Nationalist attitude of some of the leaders, the policies adopted against Nato enlargement, near abroad policy based on keeping formerly Soviet states under its own political and economic authority are the sources of threat in the Russian Federation. In this new structure, Turkey also has an important mission in the region. She both helps the U.S. be closer to political and economic developments in the Central Asian republics and control the Russian policies related to these republics. In other words, Turkey provides suitable environment for the U.S. to realise its own policies in the Central Asian region.
Geopolitically well-situated State: Fortunately, this faithful ally of the U.S. represents a geopolitical miracle for her. She is located on the passing routes of the regions which bear vital importance for the U.S. In this light, it would be a must to evaluate Turkey’s geopolitical importance for the U.S., say, what does Turkey represent for the U.S. in terms of geopolitics? The answer to be given would also enlighten Turkey’s credibility before the U.S. According to Oral Sander, geographic location of Turkey which has influenced U.S. geostrategic perception about Turkey should be assessed on two levels. Firstly, Turkey’s importance regarding the Middle East region and secondly Turkey’s geographic proximity to the Soviet Union/Russian Federation. (Sander, 1980:112) Turkey has been one of the most important regional actors in the Middle East region. During the Cold War years and also at present U.S. did strongly need and still needs the existence and prosperity of Turkey taking its economic and political interests into consideration. Maintaining free flow of oil into world markets, safeguarding the security of transportation routes in the Mediterranean; providing continuity of the status quo in the Middle East region, supporting Israel state’s independence and deterring any Soviet military attack will remain primarily important issues for the U.S. Turkey’s remarkable geographic location in the Middle East directly affects capability of the U.S. to realise military attack or counterattack in the eastern Mediterranean. In addition to this, U.S. via Turkey can have the chance of interfering in regional wars in the Middle East region as experienced in the Gulf War II. Furthermore, Turkey has been the most suitable state to eliminate any Soviet military adventure in the region. (Sander, p.113) Besides the importance of Turkey in the Middle East region, Turkey’s geographic proximity to the Soviet Union/Russian Federation is also significant for the U.S. global defence requirements. During the Cold War period, U.S. installed several military bases to be used in case of any Soviet military attack. Although the Soviet threat lost its priority in U.S. defence perception following its disintegration, Turkey’s geographic proximity to the Russian Federation is still important considering political, economic and military ideals of the Russian Federation, the successor to the Soviet Union. In the post-Cold War period Turkey would possibly play an important role in the conflicts to occure in the Central Asian region and Balkans which would necessitate U.S. involvement.

The points mentioned above only consist half of the reasons which provide continuity in Turkish-American relations. The panorama will be complete when we indicate reasons of indispensibility of the U.S. for Turkey since 1945.
What Does The U.S. Mean For Turkey
Since the end of the World War II and the begining of East-West confrontation, the U.S. has meant several meanings for Turkey in terms of Turkey’s defense requirements, economic needs, political and economic support in international organizations and security. In the following items we will try to explain the reasons of Turkey’s close relationship with the U.S. for years.

Military and Economic Assistance: Parallel to the Cold War period Nato security concept, Turkey was obliged to fulfill tasks in the regions in which the U.S. interests are important. For the realisation of these duties Turkey was supported militarily and economically by the U.S. Although the Soviet threat was removed U.S. government finds it necessary to continue to give military and economic assistance to Turkey. As mentioned before, although Turkey’s mission to play the role imposed by the U.S. against the Soviet Union’s expansionist policy was reduced due to the changes in international system at the begining of the post-Cold period, some other developments which urged the West and U.S. to reevaluate Turkey’s position in the region made the global powers to direct their attention to Turkey again. According to the Nato members, particularly the U.S., despite the fact that Turkey’s responsibility as the southern flank ally of Nato in the Cold War period was eliminated Turkey has suddenly become more important regarding the ethnic, religious and political conflicts and also economic problems in the formerly Russian communities. Turkey started to be viewed as a state which can make a crucial contribution to integrating these newly emerging states into a broader Euro-Atlantic structure of security and cooperation and also which can serve as a model and guide for those states which aspire to follow the path of secular democracy. (Solana, 1996:17) For the reasons mentioned above Turkey’s downgrading importance at the very begining of the post-Cold War period was replaced and increased regarding international changes. So, in this new system, the U.S. is in favour of assisting Turkey militarily, politically and economically. Turkey, taking the fact that she could realise her economic and military development after the World War II largely by the U.S. assistance into consideration, has always been in need of U.S. financial support. Due to this reason, Turkey’s one of the most important concerns in the context of Turkish-American relations has been the continuation of American financial assistance during the Cold War period and in the post-Cold War order. Turkey shows great attention to her relationship with the U.S. for the continuation and increase of this financial assistance.
Security: It can be argued that Turkey has always felt discomfort about sharing 600 kilometres border with such a big neighbour like Soviet Union during the Cold War years. The Ottoman Turks had enough experience about Soviet Empire for 400 years due to the long and often wars. Along with the establishment of the Soviet Union, following the Bolshevik revolution in 1917, except for the first few decades, Turkey began to experience direct threat from the Soviet Union. Soviet demand to have bases on the straits and to annex Kars and Ardahan prepared a suitable milieu for Turkish agitatation against the Soviet Union. From then on, Turkey began to look for the ways to take its security and defence under guarantee. Although the U.S. refused Turkey’s proposal to side with her against the Soviet Union for several times, in the end she adopted pro-Turkish policy against the common threat, the Soviet Union. Especially after Nato membership, Turkey found a strong ally, like the U.S. and provided Western support for its security needs against the Soviet Union. Since the begining of 1945, for Turkey the U.S. refered to a kind of partner which can eliminate Turkey’s security worries. Although the Soviet threat was removed, new threats emerged and Turkey still requires the U.S. back in the pot-Cold War order. So, it is obvious that security concerns of Turkey constitutes a large part of its intimate relationship with the U.S.
Integration with the Western Institution: The desire of the founder of Turkish Republic was to reach the level of Western states, in other words Westernisation was a kind of state policy. Adaptation of western law and tradition were among the first attempts that new Turkish Republic realised. After the World War II, Turkey accelerated this process due to its security, defence and economic concerns. Regarding the changes in the balance of power and polarization, Turkey deeply involved itself in joining Western institutions. In connection with this involvement U.S. played an important role. U.S. facilitated Turkey’s integration process with the western institutions through providing political support in international platforms.


3. THE PROBLEMS FACED BY TURKEY AS THE RESULT OF THE CLOSE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN TURKEY AND THE U.S.
According to the explanations given above we can prove the fact that Turkish-American foreign policy preferences coincide with eachother and there have been many factors which make these two states set up close relationship. When we overview the period during which Turkey and U.S. have been the closest allies, it would become obvious that Turkey in order to benefit from the U.S. support had to make several concessions and experience some disadvantages while the U.S. stood more powerfully before Soviet Union in some regions such as Middle East and eastern Mediterranean by the help of Turkey. In order to explain the mentioned concessions and disadvantages that Turkey has had in regard to this close relationship with the U.S., we would give some examples. First of all, Turkey made the Middle East Arab states alienated for the sake of U.S.. Turkey while intensifying relations with the U.S. and the West developed anti-Arab policies. So, this caused both the increase in Arab hatred against Turkey and resulted with the elimination of Middle East states’ political and economic support that Turkey planned to have under the conditions that she strongly needed. Secondly, from time to time Turkish authorities had to tackle with domestic policy chaos caused by Turkey’s long standing dependency on the U.S. and rather permissive attitude toward this state. Anti-Americanism, which emerged in late 1960 and became virulent in 1970s, provoked rightists and leftists in Turkey and shared the responsibility of destabilising domestic policy order. Thirdly, Turkey, taking her security and economic needs and also Mustafa Kemal Ataturk’s goals based on westernization and economic development into account, had to be dependent on the U.S. fully. This complete dependence on the U.S. refrained Turkey from determining her foreign policy strategies related to the regions in which Turkey is geographically situated, from adopting multi-dimensional foreign policy and diversifying its foreign policy agenda. This also resulted in isolation of Turkey in international political arena. Turkey felt the need of other states’ political and economic support particularly whenever its relations became worse with the U.S. but could not obtain she expected. Fourthly, Turkey’s determination to cooperate only with the U.S. after the World War II made her incapable of emphasising its economic and military power before the U.S.’ immense military and economic power. But, if Turkey had developed cooperation particularly with the regional states, the political and military potential she had would have given her the chance of being a regional power. Lastly, Turkish decision-makers had clearly declared its stand as regard the northern Iraq, an independent Kurdish state in the region just before the second U.S. operation in Iraq and warned the sides against the probable establishment of an independent Kurdish state. Kurdish groups attempted to enlarge their sphere of influence in Iraq following the U.S. disappointment as the result of negative decision given by Turkish Grand National Assembly in March. From then on, almost every political attempt of Turkey related with Northern Iraq faced both the U.S. and the Kurdish groups. Moreover, the attempts to establish federal Kurdish region in northern Iraq resulted in favour of the Kurds. In this process, the U.S. anti-Turkish approach might be evaluated as the negative result of that mentioned disappointment.
CONCLUSION
Despite the disadvantages Turkey had to experience and also considering Turkey’s economic and military development partly supported by the U.S., we can support the idea that “Turkey’s foreign policy, in the foreseeable conjunctures of the late twentieth century, can not be conceived in terms of whether one takes one’s coffee with milk or not-that is, whether one takes Turkish foreign policy with the U.S. or without the U.S.. The parameters of Turkish foreign policy are such that Turkey is almost destined to take its coffee with milk particularly given the proven strategic antics of our European friends and the vast uncertainties of an apres Yeltsin situation in Russia”. (Borovalı, 1996:74)

KAYNAKÇA

Ambrose, Stephen E. (1993) Dünyaya Açılım-1938’den Günümüze Amerikan Dış Politikası (U.S. Foreign Policy Since 1938), (Tr.Ruhican Tul), Dış Politika Enstitüsü, Ankara, p.xi.

Arık, Umut (1995/96) “Turkey and the International Security System in the 21th Century”, Eurasian Studies, 4,
p.8.

Borovalı, Ali Fuat (1996) “Turkish American Relations in Recent Conjuncture”, Foreign Policy, 1-2, p.74.

Bolukbası, Suha (1992) “The Greek Lobby and Cyprus: The 1964 and 1974 Campaigns”, Foreign Policy,
3-4, p.66.

Buzan, Barry (1991) “New Patterns of Global Security in the twenty-first century”, International Affairs, 3,
p.434.

Campany, Richard C. (1986) Turkey and the United States, The Arms Embargo Period, Praeger Publishers,
Westport.

Cry, Arthur (1996) “Turkey and the West”, Perceptions-Journal of International Affairs, 3, p.108.

Elekdag, Sukru (1999) “Nato, ABD, AB ve Türkiye” (“Nato, U.S., EU and Turkey”), Milliyet Daily, 26 April 1999.

Fuller, Graham, (1992) “Turkey in the New International Security Environment” Foreign Policy (Ankara), vol.XVI, nos.3-4, p.30.

Gurses, Emin (1999) “ABD Dış Politikası ve Balkanlar” (“U.S. Foreign Policy and the Balkans”), Cumhuriyet Daily, 19 April 1999.

Kohen, Sami (1999) “Nato’ya ’evet’ ”(“ ‘yes’ to Nato”), Milliyet Daily, 27 April 1999.

Kuniholm, Bruce R. (1983) “Turkey and Nato: Past, Present, and Future”, Orbis (Summer 1983), p.422.

Kuran, Ercument (1994) “XIX. Yüzyılda Osmanlı Türklerinin Amerika’yı Tanıması”(“Recognizing America by the Ottoman Turks in 19th Century”), Recep Erturk ve Hayatı Tufekçioglu (Eds), 500. Yılında Amerika(America in its 500. Anniversary), Bağlam Press, Istanbul, pp.39-43.

Langlois, George, Jean Boismenu, Luc Lefebvre, Partice Regimbald (2000) 20. Yüzyýl Tarihi (20th Century History), Nehir Medya Press, p.277.

Ministry of Foreign Affairs Working Group Paper (1995) Geçmişten Günümüze Amerika(America-From Past To Present), Dış Politika Enstitüsü, Ankara, pp.200-207.

Sander, Oral (1979) Türk-Amerikan Ilişkileri 1947-1964 (Turkish-American Relations 1947-1964), Siyasal Bilgiler Fakültesi Press, Ankara.

Sezer, Duygu Bazoglu (1981) “Turkey’s Security Policies”, Adelphi Papers, 164.

Solana, Javier (1996) “Nato in Transition”, Perceptions-Journal of International Affairs, 1, p.17.

Sönmezoglu, Faruk (1995) ABD’nin Türkiye Politikası (1964-1980)(American Policy on Turkey 1964-1980), Der Press., İstanbul, pp.29-84.