!�="justify">Turkish-American relations are at a critical turning point because of terrorism and the so-called Armenian genocide.

The crisis that emerged through the Sept. 11 attacks following the disappointments during the post-Cold War period took the relations to a crucial point of development since the March 1 motion. The crisis is so deep that the US and Turkey have no common interests in an area stretching from the Black Sea to Basra, from Iran to Russia. The conflict of interests between the parties forces Turkey to make choices in its foreign policy. Meanwhile, the US seeks to keep Turkey as an ally through a controlled strategy. However, it is not certain how long this strategy will last and whether it will work out. This situation is taken by both sides as a willingness to sustain the partnership between the two countries. This also implies that it is difficult to end a six-decade-old strategic partnership. For a better analysis on the future of Turkish-American relations, the factors that have brought relations to the current point need to be evaluated.

The first crisis in bilateral relations between Turkey and the US was the decision to dismantle the Jupiter missiles based in Turkey following the negotiations between the US and the USSR in relation to the Cuban missile crisis. This was the starting point for the lack of confidence in Turkish-American relations. Similarly, Turkey strongly reacted to the US attitude when US President Lyndon B. Johnson implied that they would block NATO’s involvement in a possible confrontation between Turkey and the USSR if Turkey took action vis-à-vis the Cyprus question.

This was the strongest reaction to the US administration following the Menderes government. For the first time, the reaction revealed that Turkey might change its alignment and take part in the opposition camp. Later, the US attempted to punish Turkey through economic embargos during the 1974 military operation in Cyprus. The intervention made despite the US opposition had important consequences that still affect current affairs. Turkey demonstrated that it had the necessary determination and capability to make up for its past mistakes and stand by the protection and preservation of its inherent rights and interests. This attitude took Turkey to a different category of alliance from Washington’s perspective. The details of this new situation became clear with the arrival of the post-Cold War period.

Attempting to redefine the bilateral relations with accommodation of its national interests during the new era, Washington received an unexpected reaction from Turkey. This national reflex, which became visible in Turkey during the reign of Turgut Özal, remained alive because of internal dynamics. For this reason, the US has been unable to implement joint projects with the participation of Turkey since Sept. 11. As a consequence of this, the US sought to punish Turkey. To this end, it implemented a new strategy to create a de facto Kurdish state in northern Iraq despite Turkey’s objections. Meanwhile, it also initiated an indirect aggression against Turkey by supporting the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK). Consequently, Turkey was left with “a hidden war.” The US administration -- which reminded Turkey of the Armenian genocide card when the latter expressed its strong reaction once more -- attempted to punish Turkey as a country guilty of genocide. Of course, the frequent and strong references to the Armenian genocide at this stage are not related to the Armenian question alone. The US administration carries out psychological operations through which it indirectly implies that Turkey will commit genocide against the Kurds as it did with the Armenians. There is one thing that should not be overlooked -- the US attempts to eliminate the interest in the Pax Ottomana by the people of the region.

But what are the reasons for the US eagerness to put pressure on Turkey through use of the Armenian genocide card and the PKK terrorist organization? Undoubtedly, the major reason is the developing bilateral relations between Iran and Turkey. The initiation of a bilateral process between the two countries which made a few important deals in the field of energy and Turkey’s unwillingness to take part in a possible US operation against Iran created an unnamed crisis in Turkish-American relations. This stance of Turkey despite US demands angered the latter. The anger was visible in the visit by the US delegations and the visit paid by the Turkish prime minister to Washington. The diplomatic attempts of Turkey despite the clear American opposition and the strengthening Syrian-Turkish relations also triggered outrage in Israel and the US. The elevated troubles of Israel in its relations with Turkey and the abortion of the Jewish lobby card in regards to the case of Armenian genocide claims marks Israel’s inability and despair. Turkey’s determination to stand firm against US demands in regards to the Iraqi case and the regional opposition to formation of a Kurdish state placed Turkey at a critical point in regards to the US.

Apparently, Turkey’s slow motion towards becoming the leader of the Turkish-Islamic world in the post-Sept. 11 world bothers the US. In other words, Turkey’s growing importance in the region and its potential role to resolve the regional problems makes it a key actor in the “New Game” staged by the US. Turkey’s new position and potential support for the American project as crystallized in Iraq and Afghanistan is of particular importance for the US. On the other hand, Turkey’s emphasis on a “Strategic Depth Project” in response to the Greater Middle East Project forced the US to employ very different tools vis-à-vis Turkey’s new direction.

Meanwhile, the particular importance and attention paid by Turkey to the US in the current stage seems to be Turkey’s biggest mistake. Unless it abandons its concerns about probable reactions of the US to its actions, Turkey may not become comfortable in its domestic and foreign policies. Turkey should immediately abandon this approach and rely on strong language in speaking to the US authorities. Turkey should follow such a resolute strategy that the US will develop concerns over Turkey’s probable responses to its actions. Turkey has the necessary strength and historical experience to do this. What is missing is confidence. The latest statements by the Turkish Armed Forces (TSK) are noteworthy. The remarks by Commander of Turkish Land Forces Gen. ?lker Ba?bu? noting that Turkey increased the US costs in the region are exemplary. What could be the price for a firm stand against the US for Turkey? Under the current circumstances, the price will be dramatically low in comparison to the US losses.
*Dr. Mehmet Seyfettin Erol is a lecturer at Gazi University’s department of international relations