A recipe to overcome US-Turkish hurdles

Problems in bilateral relations were also touched upon, albeit nicely and carefully. At the closing dinner on Tuesday, former ATC Chairman Lt. Gen. Brent Scowcroft, one of the prominent wise men in Washington who has advised various American administrations at the highest levels, put it very eloquently when he said, “A lot of those problems come from the fact that our relationship is becoming more complex as we get further away from the more single-minded days of the Cold War when there was one single objective.” Lt. Gen. Scowcroft’s recipe for overcoming hurdles: “We need to deepen our understanding of each other.”

Platforms like the ATC certainly help mutual understanding, at least at the elite level. Outreach to relatively under-represented segments of society is also key for further deepening it. And there are signs of such diversification. For example, at the ATC conferences, representatives of the conservative Anatolian Tigers are slowly joining the scene, complementing more secularist big business actors. The military component of US-Turkish relations, which has long dominated these conferences, seems to be becoming less prominent. There were no four-star Turkish generals at the ATC this year. And the Pentagon was mostly represented by civilian defense counterparts. As US Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs Alexander Vershbow also acknowledged, the civilian-military relationship is changing in Turkey. It’s good to see US-Turkish relations gradually adjusting.

As part of an effort to improve the non-militaristic aspect of relations, two members of the Cabinet from each country led the first inaugural meeting of the US-Turkey Framework for Strategic Economic and Commercial Cooperation on Tuesday in Washington. US Secretary of Commerce Gary Locke and Turkish Deputy Prime Minister Ali Babacan concurred that prospects of improving the $11 billion of trade between the two countries is a “win-win” situation. Turkey is on the short priority list of fast-growing “next-tier” markets that will be the focus of the Obama administration’s export-promotion efforts. On the other hand, Turkey wants a much bigger share than 0.2 percent in the US import market. At a press briefing held at the Turkish Embassy in Washington, Babacan said the meeting was especially helpful in showing the “big picture” in economic relations because more than 60 experts representing various agencies from both governments were represented.

Speaking of the need to see the big picture, it wouldn’t be such a bad idea to have a similar kind of broad-based inaugural official meetings on foreign policy as well. Both Turkey and the US have big governments. There are different agencies that are directly or indirectly involved in the formation of foreign policy. That often comes with institutional disconnect, and sometimes even rivalry among them. They usually work with their counterparts in other governments, having little or no knowledge about the rest of the picture. Hence, it would be useful for all the players to see individual institutional perspectives. Such a meeting could be spearheaded by both foreign and defense ministers and secretaries, since foreign and defense affairs are often intermingled.

Even if a grand meeting on all of bilateral relations cannot be pulled off, a broader dialogue mechanism must be put into effect on at least the Middle East alone. Most of the problems in US-Turkish relations pertain to the Middle East. Both Turkey’s image problems in America as of late and America’s in Turkey are due to some aspects of their policy in the region. In such a meeting, all relevant agencies, such as the National Security Council (NSC), the Department of State, the Pentagon and the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), should be represented, including various stakeholders within those agencies. For example at State, the European and Eurasian Affairs people, who are normally responsible for overseeing relations with Turkey, should be joined by the Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs. Likewise, at the Pentagon, the European Command should be accompanied by Central Command, which is in charge of operations in the broader Middle East. The same goes for the Turkish side.

Dialogue is certainly crucial in enhancing communication between governments, and that would lead to more mutual understanding. Communication problems can only fade away with the sort of dialogue that is not only horizontally wide, but also vertically deep. The depth of any dialogue depends on the depth of the participants. That calls for better acquaintance with the culture of the respective countries, which would best improve with multi-faceted and intense exposure.

Given the increasing role of public opinion in foreign policy in both the US and Turkey, government experts need to find ways to be more engaged with ordinary people in addition to members of the elite. That is especially true for diplomatic personnel who mostly work in the big cities. Wouldn’t it be nice if it was possible to open new and modest diplomatic missions in relatively smaller heartland cities or towns in the US and Turkey?

I am aware of the financial constraints and issues of functionality, but I would argue that the educational value added of such an initiative in the long run would surpass its additional costs. Diplomats could at least be posted for a few months on a rotating basis. Away from the usually demanding technical tasks, they might get a better taste of the culture, first and foremost the local food! Had I been a diplomat, I would have loved to have spent some time on such a “field” mission. How about you?