Turkey’s Middle East Policies: Between Neo-Ottomanism and Kemalism

Taspinar, Omer

Paper

Turkey’s Middle East Policies: Between Neo-Ottomanism and Kemalism

Turkey’s increased engagement in the Middle East reflects its desire to become a self-confident regional superpower. Yet, Ankara’s fraught handling of the Kurdish issue has been reactive, alarmist, and insecure. Unless Turkey learns to balance its opposing priorities, the country will witness an increase in ultra-nationalism and isolationism.

By Omer Taspinar

Published on Oct 7, 2008

Turkey’s increased engagement in the Middle East reflects its desire to become a self-confident regional superpower. Yet, Ankara’s fraught handling of the Kurdish issue has been reactive, alarmist, and insecure. Unless Turkey learns to balance its opposing priorities, the country will witness an increase in ultra-nationalism and isolationism, concludes a new paper from the Carnegie Endowment.

Ömer Taspinar explains the two conflicting drivers of Turkey’s new activism in the Middle East: “Neo-Ottomanism,” which encourages engagement and projection of influence recalling Turkey’s multicultural, Muslim, and imperial past, and “Kemalism,” which aims to eliminate the perceived threat of Kurdish nationalism and protect Turkey’s secular, nationalist identity. He examines the impact of recent political developments, the re-emergence of the Kurdish challenge for Turkey’s foreign policy, and explores Ankara’s relations with the West and the Middle East, including its close ties with Syria and Iran.

Key conclusions

Neo-Ottomanism motivates the foreign policy of Turkey’s ruling party, the AKP. Critics of the AKP, including the military and national security establishment, view neo-Ottomanism and its use of soft power in the Middle East as a threat to Turkey’s Kemalist secular identity.
Turkey’s secular, nationalist establishment resents the West for supporting the Kurds and “moderate Islam” in Turkey, while the AKP’s neo-Ottomanism favors good relations with Washington and Brussels—an important realignment of Turkish foreign policy.
Both groups favor improved relations between Ankara, Tehran, and Damascus. Neo-Ottomans view engagement with Iran and Syria as part of Turkey’s growing regional influence, while Kemalists see a shared interest in containing Kurdish nationalism and preventing the emergence of an independent Kurdish nation on their borders.
Should a military or judicial coup overthrow the AKP—as almost happened in April 2007 and July 2008—a radical form of Kemalism could dominate Turkey’s domestic and foreign policy, leading to a more confrontational position on the Kurdish challenge, notably in Iraq.

Taspinar concludes:

“The stakes for Turkey and the future of the Middle East are high. Home to more than 70 million Muslims, Turkey is the most advanced democracy in the Islamic world. A stable, western-oriented, liberal Turkey on a clear path toward the EU would serve as a growing market for western goods, a contributor to the labor force Europe will desperately need in the coming decades, a democratic example for the rest of the Muslim world, a stabilizing influence on Iraq, and a partner in Afghanistan.

An authoritarian, resentful, and isolated Turkey, on the other hand, would be the opposite in every case. If its domestic politics were to go wrong, Turkey would not only cease being a democratic success story but also could become a destabilizing factor in the Middle East.”

Click on icon above for the full text of this Carnegie Paper.

A limites number of print copies of this Carnegie Paper (in English) are available.

Request a copy.

About the Author

Ömer Taspinar is professor of National Security Strategy at the U.S. National War College and the director of the Turkey Program at the Brookings Institution. Taspinar was previously assistant professor in the European Studies Department of the Johns Hopkins University, School of Advanced International Studies (SAIS), where he remains an adjunct professor. He has held consulting positions at the Robert F. Kennedy Center for Human Rights in Washington, and at the Strategic Planning Department of TOFAS–FIAT in Istanbul.

About the Author

Omer Taspinar

Middle East Iran Türkiye Syria Political Reform Security

Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.

More Work from Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center

Commentary
Carnegie Politika
Belarus Is a Test Case for Ukraine’s New Role in the Region
Ukraine’s increasingly confrontational posture on Belarus reflects Kyiv’s effort to shape the emerging regional order in Eastern Europe. Kyiv wants to limit European normalization with Minsk—and any future rapprochement with Russia.
Balázs Jarábik
Paper
Loyal but Powerless: The Downgrading of Russia’s Elite
The ruling elites in contemporary Russia are not a political class, but a community of managers who are not subject to competition or public accountability. The state is becoming an operating apparatus without any internal autonomy.
Alexandra Prokopenko
Commentary
Carnegie Politika
What Does Pashinyan’s Parliamentary Victory Mean for Armenia’s Future?
Pashinyan’s pro-European party has been re-elected with a decisive victory. But the pro-Russian opposition could still slow Armenia’s progress toward peace with Azerbaijan and rapprochement with Europe.
Mikayel Zolyan
Book
From Sovereigns to Servants. How the War Against Ukraine Reshaped Russia’s Elite
How did Putin co-opt Russia’s political and economic elites, ensuring no more than fitful resistance to the regime’s war on Ukraine?
Alexandra Prokopenko
Commentary
Carnegie Politika
Will Russia–Armenia Relations Improve Following Pashinyan’s Re-Election?
For all the menacing rhetoric, the Armenian prime minister remains a leader with whom Putin is prepared to interact: not as an ally, but as a partner, albeit a problematic one.
Alexander Atasuntsev

Turkey’s Middle East Policies: Between Neo-Ottomanism and Kemalism

More Work from Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center

Commentary

Carnegie Politika

Belarus Is a Test Case for Ukraine’s New Role in the Region

Ukraine’s increasingly confrontational posture on Belarus reflects Kyiv’s effort to shape the emerging regional order in Eastern Europe. Kyiv wants to limit European normalization with Minsk—and any future rapprochement with Russia.

Balázs Jarábik

Paper

Loyal but Powerless: The Downgrading of Russia’s Elite

The ruling elites in contemporary Russia are not a political class, but a community of managers who are not subject to competition or public accountability. The state is becoming an operating apparatus without any internal autonomy.

Alexandra Prokopenko

Commentary

Carnegie Politika

What Does Pashinyan’s Parliamentary Victory Mean for Armenia’s Future?

Pashinyan’s pro-European party has been re-elected with a decisive victory. But the pro-Russian opposition could still slow Armenia’s progress toward peace with Azerbaijan and rapprochement with Europe.

Mikayel Zolyan

Book

From Sovereigns to Servants. How the War Against Ukraine Reshaped Russia’s Elite

How did Putin co-opt Russia’s political and economic elites, ensuring no more than fitful resistance to the regime’s war on Ukraine?

Alexandra Prokopenko

Commentary

Carnegie Politika

Will Russia–Armenia Relations Improve Following Pashinyan’s Re-Election?

For all the menacing rhetoric, the Armenian prime minister remains a leader with whom Putin is prepared to interact: not as an ally, but as a partner, albeit a problematic one.

Alexander Atasuntsev