Ankara bombing part of growing, dangerous development for Turkey
Tensions have mounted over the past half-decade surrounding Europe and the United States’ inability to consistently rely on Turkey to work together in attempts to strengthen its border with Syria and to fight the Islamic State (ISIS). ‘Is Turkey really at the table?’ – is the question many, myself included, had been asking as Turkey has seemingly pursued its own foreign policy agenda, oftentimes in disregard of the greater goals of its allies.
Over the past few months, it has grown increasingly evident, however, that Turkey is in fact in trouble. The recent Ankara bombing Mar. 13 that killed 37 is the latest in a series of attacks within Turkey’s borders that have been the most evident marker of increasing instability. The attack is the third of such nature and of such high magnitude in only the last five months in the Turkish capital, prompting many experts to point out that, in tandem with the increasingly authoritarian nature of President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, Turkey is no longer the anchor of stability it once was.
This has prompted mixed reactions from the experts and actors in the international community. Some have continued to hound Turkey, arguing that Turkey has been part of the problem in the region, not the solution. This, as recently as last week, was more or less my view.Steven A. Cook of Newsweek argues that we in large part “have come to understand that while Ankara can play a constructive role in combatting extremism and resolving the Syrian conflict, it has chosen not to.”
Turkey’s borders have been one source of friction, as they’ve served as a virtual “open door for extremists, terrorist finance and weapons,” both to ISIS and to extremist rebel groups in Syria. Turkey has also been criticized for not taking enough action to combat ISIS, as their priority has remained stemming both the strength and the violence of the Kurdish opposition within Turkey and nearby areas. This has amounted to heavy criticism from many angles that see Turkey’s foreign policy as “in ruins.”
Contrary to the view that Turkey must do more to help the West, it is my view, and the view of many experts in light of recent events, that the West must do more to work with Turkey.
This is not, of course, to absolve Turkey, particularly President Erdogan, of all responsibility in the region, nor of Erdogan’s increasing authoritarianism. It is merely to say that, as the West’s longstanding ally in the region and the “bridge between Western and Muslim nations” – the West cannot afford to lose Turkey.
“Don’t sacrifice Syria to save Turkey,” says Jean-Marie Guehenno of the Guardian, as despite its troubles, the country “remains an anchor of stability for many of today’s stressed geopolitical faultlines.” Guehenno criticizes an approach from Europe and the US that posits ISIS as the principal threat in the region, and the number one priority, without exceptions. But far more important is the need for a stable, prosperous Turkey. As the anchor between such faultlines – the turmoil of Syria and Europe, the West and the Middle East, for example, Turkey plays a much greater role in future stability of the region as a whole than does ISIS.
But Turkey at present stands completely isolated at a moment of its greatest instability. “The country faces a toxic combination of political polarization, government instability, economic slowdown, and threats of violence—from both inside and outside Turkey—that could soon add up to a catastrophe” – all while facing mounting pressure from its allies in the US and Europe.
In addition to some sort of intervention, either diplomatic or of another nature, key to helping stabilize Turkey is establishing a ceasefire between Turkey and the PKK, the armed militia of the Kurdish opposition. As Mustafa Akyol of Al-Jazeera points out, “Had (previous) peace talks worked, everything would be much better for all of us. Turkey would have secured its peace, the PKK could have given all its energy to fighting ISIL within Syria (and even Iraq), and Western capitals would not be pressed to choose between their longtime NATO ally and their new-found friends in Syria.” Recent events, however, prove that the threat of the PKK within Turkey is not unfounded. To ignore this would only further risk destabilizing Turkey.
As a whole, the West must recognize that Turkey, despite Erdogan’s policy miscalculations, is in a dangerous position not entirely of its own creation. Ignoring this and emphasizing a policy driven by ISIS, risks losing Turkey as the anchor of stability that the West must pivot on for ensuring a realistic security for itself, and for other actors in the region.
