Cem Uzan - Genç Parti

Bu sayfa Cem Uzan`ın haklılığını ispatlamak , kanıtlamak , gözler önüne sermek ve
Genç Parti`nin büyük kitlelere ulaşmasını sağlamak için yapılmıştır. (cem-uzan.org 2007)
Genç Parti Cem Uzan Davalar Genel Gençlik Kollari Kadın Kolları İlçe Teşkilatları İl Teşkilatları Eserler Söylemler Basın Projeler - Taahhütler Duyurular İmar Bankası Star Çeaş Kepez TMSF Telsim Adabank Petkim 4969 - 5020 Nolu Kanunlar Askerlik Siyasi Linç Geziler Mitingler Atatürk Videolar Ürdün Vatandaşlığı Fabrikalar - Ocaklar Milletvekili Adaylarımız Fransa

Turkey and the World: A Time for Leadership

GENÇ PARTİ DIŞ SİYASET BELGESİ Genç Parti Genel Başkanı Cem Uzan’ın, Genç Parti iktidara geldiği zaman uygulayacağı dış politikasını anlatan, Genç Parti’nin Dış Siyaset Belgesi olarak tarihe geçecek bu makalesi, tüm dünyada dış politikada etkili olan çevrelere de yollanmıştır. Haber Tarih: 15.06.2006 16:00:40 Turkey and the World: A Time for Leadership When Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice left Ankara recently following talks with senior Turkish officials, she announced that the United Sates and Turkey shared “a common strategic vision. If only this were true.  What the Bush Administration actually confronts in Ankara is a government still struggling after four years to come to agreement with itself on its proper role in the region and in the world.  Is Turkey a Western power, tied strategically and politically to NATO and the European Union?  Or is it an Islamic power, destined to participate in the process of political radicalization that is now sweeping the greater Middle East? If our Prime Minister knows the answer he is keeping it very close to his vest. One day we Turks are told by the government that we are a quasi-European power, negotiating access and association with the European Union.  The next day we seem to be an increasingly fundamentalist state, inviting Hamas leaders to meet with our highest officials and seeking closer ties with Sudan, Syria and Iran.  What little direction there is appears troubling, because existing trends seem to be pushing Turkey toward becoming more radicalized and thus less of a reliable Western ally.  At this critical moment I believe that Turkey’s genuine national interest remains conceptually the same as it was in the time of Ataturk – Turkey is a Gateway Power, with solid interests in serving as a bridge between the liberal, democratic West and the resource-rich regions of the Middle East and Central Asia. To be sure, the concept of a Gateway Power requires a delicate balancing act, and its successful pursuit involves clearly understanding where our interests lie, and in being consistent and forthright in pursuing those interests. But Turkey’s foreign policy under Erdogan, has given us confusion and drift rather than a thoughtful and prudent effort to pursue Turkish interests in our dynamic but very dangerous neighborhood. The Turkish decision not to support the US invasion of Iraq is but one example.  No one should suggest that this was an easy issue for Turkey, but then, no one ever promises that leadership is easy.  The options were clearly drawn:  Join the coalition in the liberation of Iraq, with major costs to Turkish interests in the region; or oppose the invasion at serious risk to relations with Washington. The Erdogan government’s version of leadership was to get the worst of both options.  By vacillating and acting as if he wanted to help Washington, Erdogan damaged Turkey’s standing in the Islamic world. But when the government then orchestrated the defeat of legislation in the Turkish parliament which would have permitted Ankara to join the coalition, Erdogan badly undermined Turkey’s ties with the Bush Administration. My own party at the time stated that joining the coalition would be a mistake; that Turkey had too much to lose in its own neighborhood and that it would take years to repair the damage caused by our participation in an invasion of a neighboring country.  I stand by that view today.  But this could have been made clearer to America at the outset and I would have insisted that Washington respect our position (as the Administration did with many other nations that refused to join) while, at the same time, recognizing that ultimately Turkey would have to be a major partner in post-conflict reform and reconstruction.  There was - and is - no way to “sit out" a major issue like Iraq, although our government keeps trying. Turkey’s “accession? to the European Union is yet another example of a failure to develop a clear sense of our national interest. Erdogan has committed Turkey to a seemingly endless negotiation in which much is demanded by Brussels – but little is offered in return. Turkey needs a new path toward association with the EU which pays meaningful and tangible economic dividends now – not fifteen years in the future when it might become a member.  Several European nations, Germany and Austria among them, have offered alternatives which would be more appropriate to our role as a Gateway Power, and which would also keep us closely tied to Europe with near-term trade and investment benefits, while also preserving Turkey’s options for future membership.  I think we owe it to ourselves to discuss the idea of German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s for a “privileged partnership" with Europe seriously and to take potentially difficult decisions on the basis of what our national interests are today. Turkey’s overall relations with Washington seem to be combination of frustration and hope:  Frustration that we are not taken as seriously by the Administration as we would wish; and hope that things will improve.  Our leaders seem to believe that since we have opposed the United States on Iraq we can have no meaningful dialogue elsewhere. However, I have argued it is not the fact that we opposed Washington that has created difficulty – the problems in the relationship have grown from how we opposed the action -- through double talk and even deception. This is not the Turkish way and it has resulted in a breakdown in the trust and confidence that is essential for good relations. We best need urgently to re-open our strategic dialogue with Washington.  One place to start is to enhance our strategic cooperation, which has always served as a cornerstone of our relationship.  Cooperation between the Turkish and US military establishments has dropped off dramatically, and joint training, officer exchange and strategic planning efforts have grown stale. Finally, a crisis with Iran is looming over Tehran’s nuclear plans but it is amazing that there is no in-depth, serious discussion of the issue between Ankara and Washington. Before it finalizes its policy, the Administration needs to understand the Turkish point-of-view. Whether we like it or not, Turkey will be on the front lines of this problem.  We cannot hope to “sit out" a confrontation with Iran as we have tried to do with Iraq. Turkey’s true position as a Gateway Power requires a steady hand in leadership, a more accurate calculation of our own national interests, and the courage to pursue those interests. Our current relations with the West, with the United States, in particular, and with our closest neighbors are in disarray.  It is time now to develop a coherent approach to Turkish foreign policy, one based on our true position in the world and in our region, and one which is neither ashamed of disagreeing when we need to, nor of joining our natural allies when circumstances clearly requires it. Cem Uzan, Chairman, Genc Parti, Turkey

09 01 2007