{"id":11446,"date":"2022-12-20T13:42:53","date_gmt":"2022-12-20T13:42:53","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.globalpanorama.org\/2022\/12\/ir-2\/"},"modified":"2024-11-20T21:57:36","modified_gmt":"2024-11-20T18:57:36","slug":"geo-economic-challenges-faced-by-turkiye-inan-ruma","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.globalpanorama.org\/en\/2022\/12\/geo-economic-challenges-faced-by-turkiye-inan-ruma\/","title":{"rendered":"Geo-Economic Challenges Faced by T\u00fcrkiye – \u0130nan R\u00fcma"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\"\"<\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n
To download the pdf version of article titled “Geo-Economic Challenges Faced by T\u00fcrkiye” please click the download button.<\/a>Download<\/a><\/div>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n

The Turkish Ministry of Foreign Affairs has\nself-confidently and proudly announced under the impressive title \u201cT\u00fcrkiye\u2019s\nEnterprising And Humanitarian Foreign Policy\u201d that \u201cTurkish Foreign Policy aims\nto protect T\u00fcrkiye\u2019s interests in a volatile regional and global environment\nwhile also shaping conditions for sustainable peace and development in our\nneighborhood and beyond\u201d. A critical analysis of what T\u00fcrkiye\u2019s interests have\nbeen and could be is worthy, particularly on global political economy.   <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The World Economic Forum listed ten points to know\nabout the global economy on 13 October 2022, with reference to geo-economics.\nAmong others, they revealed that they would prefer more globalization. The\nfirst on the list was to hopefully protect the most vulnerable in the new\neconomic reality, with the striking title \u201ccost of living bites\u201d. The rest was;\nrising global interest rates, recession, foreign currency reserves, central\nbank digital currencies, gig economy, measures of growth other than bad old\nGDP, debt default, yield curve, and bearish market. Each of them can be\nanalyzed as a geo-economic challenge indeed.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

In the same manner, a group of writers, including the\nManaging Director of the IMF Kristalina Georgieva, published in the IMF blog a\nconcern and roadmap to \u201cResist Geoeconomic Fragmentation\u201d, with a clear and\nrobust argument: \u201cOnly international cooperation can address urgent global\nissues such as fixing shortages of food and other products, eliminating\nbarriers to growth, and saving our climate.\u201d Each of these is also a\ngeo-economic challenge.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

It seems productive to outline some definitions of\ngeo-economy through the elements to guide this analysis on challenges and\npolicies. As early as 1990, it was noted that geo-economics has always been an\nessential aspect of international life, and its importance relative to\ngeopolitics was discussed. A mainstream understanding poses it \u201cas the\ninterplay of international economics, geopolitics, and strategy\u201d. Similarly, it\nis said to be about the geostrategic use of economic power, such as the\neconomic instruments of foreign policy. There is an implicit or explicit\ntendency in the mainstream to regard geo-economy as a state-centric or economic\nnationalist alternative to the liberal economy. An example has been thereby\npresented as the Belt and Road Initiative as an \u201cambitious Chinese geo-economic\nstrategy\u201d combining economic factors with geopolitical ambitions. Accordingly,\nthe Chinese (single-party regime) elite has been motivated by geopolitical and\ngeo-security concerns to use the geo-economics approach. Within this rather\nstate-centric (and still self-condemning to geopolitical) approaches, a\nsuggestion in the example of Germany is to maintain the international\nproduction chain necessary to the German export economy and the security of the\nsupply of raw materials as a defense strategy of a geo-economic\npower.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

A critical perspective, preferably rather global than\nthe state-centric mainstream, defined geo-economics through \u201ceconomic remaking\nof territory, and to the market imperatives and cross-border geographical\nimaginations of contemporary globalization in particular\u201d. Within this\nframework, some elements apt to a critical understanding can also be cited in\nthe mainstream approaches, such as the correlation between economic development\nand security objectives and the argument that geo-economics is to provide the\nbest possible employment for the most significant proportion of the population.\nWe can now discuss Turkish foreign policy within this framework.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The peace and development that Turkish foreign policy\nhas officially aspired to shape in its neighborhood and beyond are bound to\ngeo-economy. The salient question is what the Turkish approach is. One can\nobserve it, for instance, through the Turkish Ministry of Trade\u2019s presentation\nof the economic outlook as of 10 October 2022: Increasing exports in terms of\nvolume, markets, and value-added. T\u00fcrkiye\u2019s average export distance remains\nbelow the world average since about two-thirds of T\u00fcrkiye\u2019s exports are to\ngeographically closer countries; leading export partners in the top 5 are\nGermany, USA, Britain, Italy, and Iraq in 2021 (Russia was added in 2022, most\nprobably due to sanctions it was imposed); insistent invitation to high\nvalue-added innovation and technology-focused investments; all these are\nmanifest to balance the current account deficit that the country has\ndesperately suffered from. All in all, the elephant in the room is clear to\nmany; increasing deficiencies of Turkish state capacity prevents effective\npolicy-making from institutionalizing the developmental mentality, such as in\nthe research and development sector that is so ardently desired. After all, it\nis concluded that there can be no successful geo-economic action without\ndetermined industrialists and effective bureaucracy.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Turkish capital has been on the same page: They want\nto increase exports through diversification, particularly by increasing the\nvolume with Asia, in addition to and for decreasing the dependence on the\nEuropean market. That is also to reduce the capital deficit and provide its\nin-flow. For example, the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership countries\nof Asia-Pacific constitute 18% of Turkish imports and only 4 % of its exports.\nMoreover, Turkish capital conceives that problems\/dynamics of the global\neconomy can be constructive for the Turkish economy to become a hub of\nproduction due to proximity to Europe, geopolitical position, better industry\nthan counterparts around, robust banking system, etc. They indeed underline the\ncritical reforms of the glorious and happy liberal days in the 2000s with the\nclear data that the Turkish economy has risen from 0,6% of the world economy in\n2002 to %1,2 in 2013 while retreating to 0,8% recently. One geo-economic\nchallenge to be noted here, which has been underestimated, is that the Chinese\nBelt and Road Initiative is likely to threaten Turkish exports in the European\nmarkets by decreasing the advantage of proximity and continuity.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Considering labor\u2019s position to Turkish political\neconomy and geo-economy, it was observed that some have consistently and\ninsistently defended the nation-state for a welfare regime against the\nneo-liberal political economy and that -controversially enough- the European\nUnion seemed plausible in this respect. Turkish capital wants profit\nmaximization through increasing the volume and diversity of exports, while\nTurkish labor wants social security at home, similar to European\nstandards.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

To observe thus the overall approaches in society, a\nstudy earlier to the recent wave of nationalism has exposed that the Turkish\npublic has generally been optimistic about the gradual opening of the Turkish\neconomy on the grounds of the growing availability of foreign products,\nincluding culture and travel opportunities, certainly depending on education\nand income levels, gender, and economic self-interest. Turkish society has not\nbeen any less fragmented than many others, and political-economic standpoint\nand thus approach towards geo-economy succumbs to social class, identity, and\npersonal preferences. Considering that the Turkish mainstream and middle class\nhave been seriously eroded, the question remains as to whom the foreign policy\nhas become more burning.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u00dcmit Boyner has put forward the crux of the matter,\nthe then chairperson of the Turkish Industry and Business Association at the\nbeginning of 2010s: how shall T\u00fcrkiye continue its reform process and take\nplace in global economic architecture; become like a bigger Finland with more\ninvestments to education, innovation, and research and development [and\npalpably, social security in the democratic rule of law], or like a more\ndiminutive -centralist and authoritarian- China with a political economy of\nlower living standards, particularly on human capital, product diversification,\nand regional development? Recent years could not deliver well on these. The\nresult has been an oscillation of Turkish foreign policy between the West (read\nUSA and EU since the world is round) and Russia-China, which ended up with the\nworst of two worlds. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

All this posed some observations and suggestions that\ncan be simply cited. First, the Turkish economic and political elite wants to\ncontinue export-led economic growth and decrease the exhausting current account\nbalance problem that was only aggravated by this economic growth in the recent\ndecade. This continuation requires the diversification of both exports and\nmarkets. Therefore, a domestic environment conducive to the improvement of\nhuman resources and the (foreign) investment in high technology is\nindispensable. Both certainly require a democratic rule of law. In the\ninternational environment, regionalism in Turkish foreign policy must be\nsubstantiated. This seems more plausible with a peaceful discourse than\nostensibly aggressive ones: cooperation, not conflict, in the international\nmainstream words. To respond to the challenges mentioned regarding World\nEconomic Forum above, improvement of human resources and investment in high\ntechnology within the democratic rule of law and peaceful regionalism seem\ncrucial.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Second, principles are needed instead of transactions,\nno matter international or regional cooperation. Transactional foreign policy\nmay seem impressive as short-term gains, particularly for politicians\nself-fascinated by them, yet fail to deliver structural improvements such as\ndiversifying exports and markets and decreasing the current account deficit.\nInvestment is needed rather than profiteering. Foreign policy, as well as life\nitself, is a matter of principles, not transactional gains. This means\nmultilateralism instead of controversial combinations of bilateralism. There is\nno realistic alternative to the high continuous and precious European market in\nthe Turkish export destination structure. Hence, T\u00fcrkiye must always have a\nfruitful place in European cooperation and even integration, whatever the form\nis for this contentious latter. One can say that Europe has no better\ncandidates for Turkish exports in its market.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Third, the \u201ccost of living bites\u201d as even the World\nEconomic Forum elite is compelled to state, and Turkish labor seems not any\ndifferent than others in succumbing to nation-state for the search of social\nsecurity. Suppose nationalism is an obstacle to international cooperation. In\nthat case, as the IMF elite desired to stress, even threatening the very elite\ninstrumentalizing it, social security must also be a priority of world\npolitical and foreign policy. In other words, the well-being of the laboring masses\nmust be aimed at instead of mere economic growth, as the International Labor\nOrganization clearly and firmly put forward a century ago: \u201cuniversal and\nlasting peace can be accomplished only if it is based on social\njustice.\u201d  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Ecological problems ranging from food shortages to\nclimate can be added as a fourth related observation, encouraging the\nsuggestion of investment in sustainability such as renewable energy and clean\nagriculture and industry, also to provide \u201csustainable peace and development in\nour neighborhood and beyond\u201d in foreign policy. Moreover, the European Green\nDeal to diminish the ecological problems has become a challenge to Turkish\nexports because the industry has not been ecologically improved. However, some\nparts of the Turkish capital have started.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

inally, the Turkish political elite\u2019s much beloved\nnational interest seems like the maintenance of the nationalist state. It would\nseem better to maintain the well-being of Turkish society coupled with a\npeaceful and multilateral foreign policy. If \u201cEnterprising Foreign Policy\u201d is\nfor export markets, \u201cHumanitarian Foreign Policy\u201d should start at home. \u201cPeace\nat home, peace abroad\u201d, which has been the official motto of Turkish foreign\npolicy since it was put forward by the founding President of the Republic,\nMustafa Kemal Atat\u00fcrk, in the Interwar Years, and which is gradually but\nincreasingly restored following the oscillations of 2010s, is urgently needed\nboth at home and abroad. This time in more substantial and thus credible ways.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>
\n

Dr.Inan Ruma<\/strong> works at the Department of International Relations at Istanbul Bilgi University. He earned his academic degrees at METU and Paris-1 Panth\u00e9on-Sorbonne University. He worked for various periods in OSCE missions in Bosnia and Herzegovina and Kosovo. He works on Political Economy, Balkans, Russia, Eurasia and Turkish Foreign Policy which has become inevitable. He thinks that life in harmony with nature, labor and freedom are essential.<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div>\n\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n

To cite this work: <\/strong> Inan R\u00fcma, ” Geo-Economic Challenges Faced by T\u00fcrkiye\u201d, Panorama, Online, 20 December 2022, https:\/\/www.globalpanorama.org\/blog\/2022\/12\/20\/ir\/<\/a><\/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

Copyright@UIKPanorama. All on-line and print rights reserved. Opinions expressed in works published by the Panorama belongs to the authors alone unless otherwise stated, and do not imply endorsement by the IRCT, Global Academy, or the Editors\/Editorial Board of Panorama.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The Turkish Ministry of Foreign Affairs has self-confidently and proudly announced under the impressive title \u201cT\u00fcrkiye\u2019s Enterprising And Humanitarian Foreign Policy\u201d that \u201cTurkish Foreign Policy aims to protect T\u00fcrkiye\u2019s interests in a volatile regional and global environment while also shaping conditions for sustainable peace and development in our neighborhood and beyond\u201d. A critical analysis of […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":16,"featured_media":9743,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[510,486,508],"tags":[656,563,566,713,650],"class_list":["post-11446","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-100-years-of-the-republic","category-opinion","category-turkey","tag-english","tag-foreign-policy-and-diplomacy","tag-geo-economic-challenges","tag-heinrich-boll-foundation","tag-turkiye"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.globalpanorama.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/11446","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\/16"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.globalpanorama.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=11446"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.globalpanorama.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/11446\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.globalpanorama.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/9743"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.globalpanorama.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=11446"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.globalpanorama.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=11446"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.globalpanorama.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=11446"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}