{"id":11334,"date":"2023-09-08T14:50:20","date_gmt":"2023-09-08T14:50:20","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.globalpanorama.org\/2023\/09\/ho-2\/"},"modified":"2024-11-20T21:04:35","modified_gmt":"2024-11-20T18:04:35","slug":"turkeys-policy-towards-russia-and-turkey-russia-relations-habibe-ozdal","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.globalpanorama.org\/en\/2023\/09\/turkeys-policy-towards-russia-and-turkey-russia-relations-habibe-ozdal\/","title":{"rendered":"Turkey\u2019s Policy towards Russia and Turkey-Russia Relations – Habibe \u00d6zdal"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\"\"<\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n

Turkey\u2019s policy towards Russia has some aspects of historical\ncontinuity, though it has also acquired new dimensions in the 2000s. Turkey and\nRussia prioritized strengthening their relations with Western states for\ndifferent reasons at the beginning of the 20th<\/sup> century. Turkish\npolitical elite wished their country to be included in the Western world\nideologically and identically from the early years of the Republic of Turkey.\nThe Soviet Union was, on the other hand, an important partner when Turkey opted\nfor a balanced foreign policy. While one can find exceptions, Turkey maintained\nits relations with the Soviet Union even during the Cold War and preferred to\nintensify its collaboration, especially after Johnson\u2019s letter created an\nenormous drift between Turkey and the U.S. Yet, Turkey\u2019s relations with the\nSoviet Union were mainly limited with the trade and energy. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

To see cooperation branch out into different areas and\ndevelop a new approach that elaborates Russia not only as a balancing factor\nbut as an actor with whom relations can be strengthened, we needed to wait until\nthe mid-2000s. Throughout the 2000s, Russia was seen as an important regional\nand global actor. In line with that, Turkish foreign policymakers attempted to\ndevelop bilateral relations in many areas. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Current political leaders in both countries came into\npower in the early 2000s. During this period, a cooperation-oriented approach\nin bilateral relations came to the fore as one of the many columns of a\nmultidimensional foreign policy approach. The 2008 global economic crisis\ncaused a shrinkage in Western economies, while countries such as Russia, China,\nBrazil, and Turkey continued to grow economically. In line with their financial\nperformance, emerging economies demanded more say in the international sphere. In\nthe same period, as the Georgian War showed, Russia started to follow a more active\nand aggressive foreign policy in its region and global politics.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

On the other hand, Turkey\u2019s membership negotiations\nwith the European Union were interrupted. Finding common ground on their deteriorating\nrelations with the West, Turkey and Russia intensified their cooperation in\nmany fields, from economy to politics. As a result, questions about whether\nTurkey had changed its axis in foreign policy started to be raised.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

By 2011, for the first time in history, visa\nliberalization started between the two states, mutual official visits of the\nleaders of the two countries with their delegations became routine, relations\ndiversified and intensified not only in the fields of energy and trade but also\nfrom education to culture, and from tourism to art. The momentum gained in\nbilateral relations has been mostly a result of the high level of coherence at the\nleader-to-leader level. However, strong relations between the two leaders also represent\nthe soft belly of bilateral relations. The most obvious example of the problems\ncaused by the lack of institutionalization has been the jet crisis in November\n2015 and its aftermath. The shooting down of a Russian warplane by Turkey,\nwhich was carrying out bombings in Turkmen villages in Syria and violated\nTurkish airspace while doing so, was a significant turning point in the history\nof bilateral relations. During the crisis, institutions could not step in and function.\nEventually, both sides took the most drastic measures, and bilateral relations\nwere hit hard.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

With the warplane incident, all the agreements\/contracts\nsigned between the two sides were suspended, and diplomatic relations were at\ntheir lowest level for eight months. Although the normalization step was taken\nin the end, the current structure of the relations -not surprisingly from the\nperspective of international relations- is not problem free.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Turkish-Russian relations after normalization had\ndifferent characteristics, which made it possible to observe cooperation in\nsome areas and competition in others. While Turkey and Russia, for example, are\ntwo actors working together in the war in Syria, they support opposing parties\nin Libya. Bilateral relations and cooperation between Ankara and Moscow are not\nbased on common interests, common values, and a shared vision regarding the\nstructure and future of the international system. What brings them together is\nthe need to work together. This necessity is based on the fact that the two\ncountries are either the main actors of the problems\/conflicts in their\nrespective regions or regional\/global developments push them for \u201cpartnership\u201d.\n<\/p>\n\n\n\n

For Turkey, Russia is an important regional player and\none of the leading actors of the post-Western global order, which is considered\na key energy supplier and partner in many different areas. Mentioned features\nof Russia will remain in the short and medium term. In this respect, having\ngood neighborly relations with Moscow and managing differences will continue to\nbe important for Turkey.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

On the other hand, increasing the functionality of\ninstitutions in terms of Turkish foreign policy may make it possible to seek\nways to reduce the level of asymmetrical interdependence in Turkish-Russian\nrelations in favor of Ankara by paving the way for pursuing an interest-based\nforeign policy. If one of the most critical weaknesses of Turkish-Russian\nrelations is the lack of institutionalization, the other is the asymmetry in\nthe interdependence mentioned above. Although leader-to-leader dialogue makes\nit possible to develop a solid partnership, the absence of mechanisms to manage\nunexpected crises, as seen in the example of the aircraft crisis, is felt\nintensely.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Asymmetry in bilateral relations is not limited to the\neconomic field. Turkey\u2019s energy supply and resource diversification is essential\nfor long-term energy security. While Russia has been a significant supplier of oil\nand natural gas, with the building of the Mersin Akkuyu nuclear power plant, Turkey\u2019s\nenergy dependence on Russia is being reinforced. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

In addition, from a security perspective, the Russian\nmilitary presence has increased in the region since it annexed Crimea. Moreover,\nTurkey\u2019s purchase of a Russian-made S400s missile defense system may, in the longer\nterm, create a security gap in the country’s defense in case of a possible\ncrisis with Russia. Considering all these factors, it is imperative for Ankara\nto overcome the confidence crisis with Western states in foreign policy and\nsecurity and to re-establish its traditional diplomatic presence in\ninternational organizations. This will not only enlarge the room for maneuvering\nin Turkish foreign policy but also increase Turkey\u2019s political power during\nnegotiations in different fields vis-a-vis Russia.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In conclusion, Turkey\u2019s policy towards Russia is essential\nregarding regional security, stability, and maintaining global order. Although\nhistorically, bilateral relations are mostly known for their competitive nature,\nthe Soviets have always been considered a balancing actor in foreign policy\nsince the establishment of the Republic of Turkey. Nevertheless, the 2000s\nrepresent a critical period in the history of bilateral relations. The relations\nhave been developed in many areas, remarkable momentum has been gained, and the\nresults of cooperation in regional security and foreign policy developments\nhave been observed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Still, bilateral relations have certain limits primarily due to the lack of shared values and joined perception of the future of the international system. However, Russia will continue to be an essential actor for Turkey regionally and globally. In this respect, taking advantage of multidimensional cooperation and partnerships to manage conflicts between Ankara and Moscow while aiming to change the asymmetrical interdependence from economy to foreign policy in favor of Ankara stands out as a strategy that should be prioritized in terms of Turkish foreign policy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n
\"\"<\/figure>
\n

Asst. Prof. Habibe \u00d6zdal, Istanbul Okan University<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Asst. Prof. Habibe \u00d6zdal, works at Istanbul Okan University, Faculty of Business and Management Sciences, Department of International Relations. She received her undergraduate degree from the Department of International Relations at \u00c7anakkale Onsekiz Mart University, her master’s degree from the Department of Human Rights and Social Justice at London Metropolitan University, and her doctorate degree from the Department of International Relations at Ankara University SBE. \u00d6zdal, whose doctoral thesis was published as a book in 2016 with the title “Ukraine in Russian Foreign Policy”, has studies on Russian foreign policy, Turkey-Russia relations, and Eurasian politics. \u00d6zdal is also a member of the Women in Foreign Policy (D\u0131\u015f Politikada Kad\u0131nlar -DPK) Initiative.<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div>\n\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n

To cite this work:<\/strong>  Habibe \u00d6zdal, \u201cTurkey\u2019s Policy towards Russia and Turkey-Russia Relations\u201d Panorama, 08 September 2023, urkey\u2019s policy towards Russia has some aspects of historical continuity, though it has also acquired new dimensions in the 2000s. Turkey and Russia prioritized strengthening their relations with Western states for different reasons at the beginning of the 20th<\/sup> century. Turkish political elite wished their country to be included in the Western world ideologically and identically from the early years of the Republic of Turkey. The Soviet Union was, on the other hand, an important partner when Turkey opted for a balanced foreign policy. While one can find exceptions, Turkey maintained its relations with the Soviet Union even during the Cold War and preferred to intensify its collaboration, especially after Johnson\u2019s letter created an enormous drift between Turkey and the U.S. Yet, Turkey\u2019s relations with the Soviet Union were mainly limited with the trade and energy. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>
\n
\n

This article has been prepared with the support provided to the International Relations Council<\/a> and the Global Academy<\/a> by the Heinrich B\u00f6ll Stiftung Association Turkey Representative within the scope of the project titled ‘Foreign Policy for the 21st Century; Peaceful, Equitable, and Dynamic Turkey’.<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div>\n<\/div><\/div>\n\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n

Telif@UIKPanorama<\/em>. \u00c7evrimi\u00e7i olarak yay\u0131mlanan yaz\u0131lar\u0131n t\u00fcm telif haklar\u0131 Panorama dergisine aittir. Aksi belirtilmedi\u011fi s\u00fcrece, yay\u0131mlanan yaz\u0131larda belirtilen g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fler yaln\u0131zca yazar\u0131na\/yazarlar\u0131na aittir. U\u0130K, Global Akademi, Panorama Yay\u0131n Kurulu ile edit\u00f6rleri ve di\u011fer yazarlar\u0131 ba\u011flamaz. <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Turkey\u2019s policy towards Russia has some aspects of historical continuity, though it has also acquired new dimensions in the 2000s. Turkey and Russia prioritized strengthening their relations with Western states for different reasons at the beginning of the 20th century. Turkish political elite wished their country to be included in the Western world ideologically and […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":180,"featured_media":10191,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[510,486,507,508,505],"tags":[656,713,621,650],"class_list":["post-11334","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-100-years-of-the-republic","category-opinion","category-russia","category-turkey","category-world","tag-english","tag-heinrich-boll-foundation","tag-russia","tag-turkiye"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.globalpanorama.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/11334","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.globalpanorama.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.globalpanorama.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.globalpanorama.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/180"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.globalpanorama.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=11334"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.globalpanorama.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/11334\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.globalpanorama.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/10191"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.globalpanorama.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=11334"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.globalpanorama.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=11334"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.globalpanorama.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=11334"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}