Category: Turkey

  • Pres. Trump is About to Damage U.S. Interests Just to Please Erdogan

    Pres. Trump is About to Damage U.S. Interests Just to Please Erdogan

    By Harut Sassounian
    Publisher, The California Courier
    www.TheCaliforniaCourier.com

     Pres. Donald Trump is on the verge of making a serious mistake, jeopardizing the security of the United States and other NATO members if he decides not to sanction Turkey for purchasing Russian S-400 missiles which are incompatible with NATO military systems and expose the operational secrets of the latest F-35 U.S. air force jets.

    The U.S. House of Representatives has passed three resolutions warning Turkey not to purchase the Russian missiles and has threatened to block the sale of F-35 jets to Turkey. In addition, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and national security officials have publicly announced that the United States will impose severe sanctions on Turkey for purchasing the Russian missiles. Pres. Trump, an indecisive man and fond of all dictators and particularly Turkey’s despotic President Rejep Tayyip Erdogan, is on the verge of ignoring all his top advisors and the majority of Congress, allowing Turkey to violate the U.S. sanctions law.

    On June 29, 2019, when the leaders of G-20 countries met in Osaka, Japan, Pres. Erdogan had a final chance to convince Pres. Trump not to punish Turkey for the purchase of the Russian missiles.

    Here are excerpts of the alarming statements Pres. Trump made during his meeting with Pres. Erdogan in the presence of journalists:

    Pres. Trump: “… It’s my honor to be with a friend of mine, somebody I’ve become very close to, in many respects, and he’s doing a very good job: the President of Turkey. And we have a meeting largely to do with trade. We’re doing more and more business, and we expect to be able to quadruple that business with Turkey. We think it will be great. They’re great craftsmen. They have great product. And we’re opening it up. We also do military trading, and they buy a lot of our military equipment. And it’s an honor to be with you, Mr. President.”

    Then pointing to Pres. Erdogan’s entourage in the room, Pres. Trump said: “And look at these people, how nice they are. Look at them. They’re so easy to deal with. Look at them. Central casting. There’s no Hollywood set where you could produce people that look like them.”

    Pres. Erdogan responded: “Mr. President, first, I would like to express that it’s very meaningful for us to come together here at the Osaka Summit. And we are currently going towards fulfilling the goal of a $75 billion trade volume. And there are many steps that we need to take within the defense industry area, but, more importantly, we have a strategic partnership. And the strategic partnership also encourages us to create solidarity across many areas, and I have full belief that our solidarity will continue throughout the strategic partnership.”

    After these introductory remarks, Pres. Trump responded to reporters’ questions:

    Reporter: “Mr. President, what will you do about the S-400s? Is the U.S. going to have to impose sanctions if he takes possession?”

    Pres. Trump: “Well, we’re discussing it. We have a complicated situation because the President was not allowed to buy the Patriot missiles. So when he bought the other ones — the S-200s or 400s — when he bought them, he wanted to do this, but he wasn’t allowed by the Obama administration to buy them until after he made a deal to buy other missiles. So he buys the other missile and then, all of a sudden, they say, ‘Well, you can now buy our missile.’ You don’t — you can’t do business that way. It’s not good. It’s not good.”

    Reporter: “Does that mean is there way — so could you….”

    Pres. Trump: “We’re looking at different solutions. It’s a problem, there’s no question about it. We’re looking at different solutions. But he was prohibited from buying until he said he bought something else. And then, as soon as he buys something else, everybody says, ‘Okay. You can buy it.’ You can’t do business that way. Turkey has been a friend of ours and they’ve done — we’ve done great things together. We’re a big trading partner. We’re going to be much bigger. I think the $75 billion is small. I think it’s going to be well over $100 billion soon. You can’t treat people that way, like the Obama administration did….”

    Reporter: “Will the U.S. impose sanctions against Turkey on S-400 purchase?”

    Pres. Trump: “We’re looking at it. But it’s a double — it’s a two-way street. They wouldn’t sell the President — they wouldn’t let him — they wouldn’t let him buy the missile that he wanted to buy, which is the Patriot. And then, after he buys from somebody else, he says ‘Now we’ll sell you the Patriot.’ So, I have to tell you, he’s a NATO member, he’s somebody that I have become friendly with. And you have to treat people fairly. You understand that. You have to treat people fairly. And I don’t think he was treated fairly. I don’t think he was treated fairly.”

    Reporter: “The ball is in your court though now, Mr. President. Will you? You’re the one who makes the decision. Will impose the sanctions?”

    Pres. Trump: “So we’ll see you at the hotel at 3:30….”

    Reporter: “Mr. President, are you going to Turkey in July? Will you be going to Turkey in July, Mr. President? When are you going to Turkey?”

    Pres. Trump: “I will, at some point, be going to Turkey. I’ve been invited, and I will be — I will be going to Turkey, yes.”

    Reporter: “This year, Mr. President? Will you go to Turkey this year? Will you go in July?”

    Pres. Trump: “We haven’t set a date.”

    It is shocking that Pres. Trump is siding with the Turkish leader against former Pres. Obama, the U.S. Congress and his own national security officials. Secondly, it is a lie that Pres. Obama had refused to sell Turkey U.S. Patriot missiles. Turkey did not accept the terms of the sale.

    Just like in many of his decisions, Pres. Trump seems to be putting his personal interests — several million dollars of income for having his name on two Trump buildings in Istanbul — ahead of U.S. national interests. Why would he repeatedly praise Erdogan, a dictator and a major human rights violator?

    At the time of writing this article, the Russian missiles were already on their way to Turkey. What will be Pres. Trump’s final decision on sanctions? Will he damage NATO’s and U.S. national interests just to please Erdogan? If he does, I hope no Armenian-American or anyone else will vote for Trump in 2020!

  • GMIS-2019 will drive the Fourth industrial revolution

    GMIS-2019 will drive the Fourth industrial revolution

    The GMIS-2019 is about to take off on July, 9. The summit is a joint venue of the United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO) and the United Arab Emirates. Russia provides great opportunities for the development of industry and high technology. The UNIDO head Li Yong has repeatedly given positive assessments of the close cooperation of the international organization and Russia. The cooperation includes Russia’s support of participation in large-scale industrialization programs in developing countries in Africa, Asia and Latin America, which contribute to a positive image in these regions. Besides, Russia also provides industrial development and maintenance projects in Armenia, Belarus, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan. The signing of a cooperation agreement with the Eurasian Economic Commission and the provision of platforms for the St. Petersburg International Forum and GMIS-2019 were also noted by the UNIDO head as appositive move. In addition, the approaches of Russia and UNIDO to the solution of the socio-economic problems today are very common. The summit provides an opportunity to use all the necessary potential of the participating countries to expand cooperation with each other. The geographical location of Ekaterinburg on the border of Europe and Asia contributes to the development of economic relations of European entrepreneurs with partners from China, Japan and other Asian countries. The examples of the World Cup games in 2018 and the international industrial exhibition INNOPROM emphasize the availability of infrastructure facilities in the city for hosting major international events and accommodate up to 40,000 tourists per day. The organizer of the summit is preparing an exhibition of 100 startups, which includes the most promising sectors – the drivers of growth of the world economy and the Fourth Industrial Revolution. The willingness of international representatives to take part in the summit testifies their attitude towards Russia as a reliable trade and economic partner, which fulfills its obligations, despite US attempts to isolate Russia from the system of international relations.

  • A Game of Turkish Brinksmanship on Missile Defense – STRATFOR

    A Game of Turkish Brinksmanship on Missile Defense – STRATFOR

    This file photo shows an S-400 Triumf surface-to-air missile system belonging to the Russian Southern Military District's missile regiment in Sevastopol in Jan. 13, 2018.
    (SERGEI MALGAVKO/TASS via Getty Images)
    Highlights
    • Despite risks to its economy, Turkey, driven by domestic political imperatives and the need to defend its sovereignty, will not abandon the Russian-made S-400 over U.S. threats of retaliation.
    • The United States will likely follow through on its threat to impose sanctions on Turkey, which could hurt the country’s economy and further sideline it from the multinational F-35 fighter development program.
    • That pressure will slow the development timeline for Turkey’s domestic defense sector, but Ankara is calculating that it can withstand and defuse U.S. pressure over the issue.

    Turkey’s game of chicken with its most important NATO ally, the United States, is coming down to the wire. Turkey continues to insist that it will take delivery of the Russian-made S-400 missile system next month; the United States says it will impose penalties on Turkey if it does so. Whether by employing the provisions of the Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act (CAATSA) or ending Turkey’s involvement in the high-tech F-35 stealth fighter program, the U.S. could invoke retaliatory options that would hurt Turkey’s economy. But even as U.S. President Donald Trump and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan discuss the potential for a last-minute deal on the issue, Turkey’s domestic political considerations are more likely to send the ostensible allies down the road to confrontation, rather than compromise.

    The Big Picture

    Notable policy disputes over the years have tested the relationship between Turkey and the United States. The Turkish invasion of Cyprus in 1974, the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003, and, more recently, U.S. support for the Kurdish-dominated People’s Protection Units in Syria’s civil war have strained ties between the longtime NATO allies. And though the impending delivery of the Russian S-400 missile system to Turkey represents another major potential break, the threat of U.S. retaliation isn’t likely to dissuade Turkey from buying the air defense system — creating new risks to Ankara’s already unstable economy and exposing yet another rift in the two countries’ complicated relationship.

    Turkey Goes Its Own Way

    For both countries, there are deep interests at stake. The immediate reason for the S-400 purchase stems from the earlier failure of Ankara and Washington to reach an agreement on the sale of U.S. Patriot missile systems to Turkey, which began pushing to acquire an air defense system in part to defend itself as it became more involved in Syrian civil war. But after Turkey balked at the terms of a Patriot deal, it invited other offers in a tender process, ultimately choosing the Russian system. The decision has left a lingering sense of mistrust between Turkey and the United States, fueling the former’s desire to diversify its own arms suppliers.

    But in and of itself, the S-400 is only part of the explanation for Turkey’s behavior. For Ankara, the purchase would offer an upgrade on its relationship with Russia, whose cooperation is increasingly important to Ankara. More and more, that relationship matters on a security and strategic level, as Moscow’s assent is crucial if Ankara is to accomplish its goals in Syria. Buying Russian arms also helps Turkey fulfill its long-term strategy to diversify arms supplies and benefit from technology transfers from partners other than the United States, considering their recurrent disagreements over policy and strategy. For Erdogan and his Justice and Development Party (AKP), buying the Russian system over the objections of the Americans also delights the nationalists and ultranationalists who make up a sizeable portion of their political base and who wish to see Turkey act more independently in pursuit of its national interests.

    For the United States, Turkey’s S-400 purchase bears alarming strategic and military implications. A potentially expansive Russo-Turkish defense relationship would complicate America’s alliance with Turkey, a longtime NATO partner. The United States is also worried that Turkey could use the S-400 system to scan the F-35s that are meant to fly Turkish skies — with the resulting intelligence making it into Russian hands. Turkey has argued that the S-400 system already picks up F-35s patrolling near Russia’s Leningrad oblast around St. Petersburg, as well as in Syria, but that has failed to sway the United States. As a result, Washington is considering invoking CAATSA, ending Turkey’s participation in the multinational F-35 development program and/or imposing sanctions through the Protecting NATO’s Skies Act currently working its way through the U.S. Congress.

    While Turkey is well-aware of the economic consequences of its choice, domestic political considerations are propelling Ankara to override economic considerations and choose the Russian system.

    These interests have produced a clash between the two allies: Turkey does not want to appear to have backed down from its long-sought deal, while many in the United States beyond just Trump — such as in Congress — wish to pursue a confrontation with Turkey over the S-400.

    Ankara Plays to the Gallery

    Turkey thus finds itself in a position in which it must decide if it will, in some fashion, back away from the S-400 deal, or accept the possible economic damage of sanctions and its eventual ejection from the F-35 program. But while Turkey is well aware of the economic consequences of its choice, domestic political considerations are propelling Ankara to override economics and choose the Russian system.

    Erdogan has accumulated domestic clout by stoking nationalism through his frequent challenges to the ostensible Western imperialist pressure against his country. At present, Erdogan is calculating that the U.S. threats are a bluff, driving him to choose a path that bolsters the government’s popularity. But the fragile state of Turkey’s economy does pose the question of whether such political brinkmanship is worth it for Ankara. The country’s economy dipped into a recession during the last quarter of 2018, while growth also slowed in the second half of last year. During this time, Turkey has earned more revenue from exports — but only because the lira is so weak that the country’s goods are much cheaper. Over the next year, the Turkish private sector must pay back close to $140 billion in debt, while domestic consumption has slowed. But the five-year gap until the next scheduled elections in 2023 also forms part of Ankara’s calculations regarding economic risk, as Erdogan believes he has time to stabilize the economy — even if the United States imposes sanctions that cause foreign investors to flee or further depress the lira’s value.

    In terms of defense, Turkey aims to reach self-sufficiency by 2023 — the centenary of national independence; at present, it classifies itself as 70 percent independent in the sector. The defense industry has posted impressive growth figures in recent years, raising exports by 64 percent year on year this January and surpassing $2 billion in exports for the first time ever in 2018. These figures notwithstanding, Turkey might be willing to sacrifice the success of its arms industry on the grounds that CAATSA sanctions — which would target only the defense sector — won’t otherwise damage the country’s wider economy. After all, the country’s defense sector constitutes less than 1 percent of the Turkish economy and employs just 30,000 people in a labor market of 31 million. And according to the latest leaks on potential CAATSA sanctions, U.S. authorities could deny three Turkish defense companies access to the U.S. financial system — a restriction that would naturally hit the companies in question, but not necessarily hurt the rest of the economy.

    There is, ultimately, no guarantee that even major U.S. economic pressure will force Turkey to make a compromise on the matter.

    Nevertheless, U.S. sanctions would have a real impact on Turkey. For one, such measures would represent a political disappointment for the country’s leaders, who have pinned part of their narrative of a Turkish resurgence on the success of a robust defense industry. Furthermore, it would deal a personal blow to Erdogan, who has promised growth in the sector. And it would also be a setback to Turkey’s own security, as it would slow the country’s drive for self-sufficiency by hindering the formation of a well-developed defense sector through cooperation with the United States. And Turkey’s departure from the F-35 program could cause it to lose out on $10 billion to $30 billion in export revenue from its defense products.

    In the event that the United States retaliates against Turkey, the latter’s economic problems may overwhelm Ankara’s commitment to the S-400 deal and pave the way for more substantial negotiations on the issue. As part of a compromise, for instance, Turkey could mothball the S-400 system or donate it to a regional ally, like Azerbaijan. But there is, ultimately, no guarantee that even major U.S. economic pressure will force a compromise, meaning the S-400 debate may sour U.S.-Turkish relations for years to come.

    globe color

    Connected Content

    Regions & Countries
    United States
    Russia
    Turkey
    Themes
    The U.S. and the Balance of Power
    Echoes of the Cold War
    Topics
    Military
    Turkey’s Resurgence

    A

  • USAID economic cluster in Bishkek to cross with EU and China investments

    USAID economic cluster in Bishkek to cross with EU and China investments

    CufpaseW8AA9EeR
    US Embassy in Bishkek

    A new economic cluster to support Kyrgyzstan’s light industry is to be launched in Bishkek. The project initiated by the USAID aims to enhance the country’s light industry businesses and to provide grant support to entrepreneurs, said the press-office of the US Embassy in Bishkek.
    However, the US initiative confronts the interests of the EU and China in the region. Earlier in April, President of Kyrgyzstan Sooronbay Jeenbekov made his first visit to Germany after becoming President in 2017. The purpose of the visit was to expand trade and economic relations with Germany, to attract EU’s investment in the region and to reform the banking sector of the country. As a result, 11 bilateral contracts were signed between Kyrgyz and German companies. Later in April Jeenbekov met with Chinese President Xi Jinping in purpose to “open a new page of Kyrgyz-Chinese relations” and to take part in the second One Belt One Road Forum.
    Jeenbekov’s aim to have tighter relations with the EU and China is explained by the country’s ambitions to play a solid role in the Eurasia integration and to become a strategic transit zone for the global One Belt One Road initiative. On the other hand, the US economic policy in the country might disturb the EU transparent business approach and will lead to Washington’s control over Kyrgyz enterprises. Stronger positions of the US in Kyrgyzstan will also stall the plans of Beijing to integrate infrastructure projects in Kyrgyzstan . The aggravation of relations with China will have a negative impact on the Kyrgyz economy, given its high dependence on Chinese investment and the Bishkek’s inclusion into One Belt One Road initiative.
    The current situation puts Kyrgyzstan at the crossroads and the way the country will choose will be defining its long-term development for the next decades. According to local politicians, the political and economic compass President Jeenbekov will choose will also play a crucial role during the 2020 Kyrgyz Presidential elections campaign.

  • Istanbul’s Voters Deal Erdogan a Major Blow – STRATFOR

    Istanbul’s Voters Deal Erdogan a Major Blow – STRATFOR

     GettyImages 1157840782
    (BURAK KARA/Getty Images)
    Stratfor’s geopolitical guidance provides insight on what we’re watching out for in the week ahead.

    President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s gamble to retain political control of Istanbul has failed. On June 23, the Republican People’s Party’s (CHP) Ekrem Imamoglu soundly defeated former Prime Minister Binali Yildirim of Erdogan’s Justice and Development Party (AKP) in a rerun of the election to decide the Istanbul mayoralty. Imamoglu captured 54 percent of the vote, 9 percent more than Yildirim. The comfortable margin of more than 800,000 votes out of the 8.7 million cast in the election rerun dwarfed the 13,000-vote margin that separated the two candidates in the initial vote on March 31. Yildrim’s victory in that initial contest had led the AKP to browbeat the country’s electoral board into invalidating the election on the basis of vaguely defined electoral irregularities.

    The Big Picture

    Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s ruling Justice and Development Party has lost Istanbul to the opposition Republican People’s Party — depriving the governing party of an important source of prestige and patronage. Beyond denting its image, however, the loss won’t likely sound the death knell for the AKP, which remains the country’s dominant political force. Nevertheless, the reverse could well initiate a round of soul-searching within the AKP — and ignite political and economic battles behind the scenes.

    At the outset, Imamoglu’s victory is a testament to the strength of the Turkish democratic system. In the wake of the March 31 vote, the AKP opened itself to accusations of authoritarianism by forcing through a rerun based on what it said were unlawful appointments to some ballot box boards. By conceding the June 23 election as quickly as it did, the party has signaled that it is prepared to accept the vote instead of pushing for yet another poll to retain its hold on the city that is Turkey’s economic and cultural heart and a major source of funds for the AKP. After all, Erdogan — who once famously said democracy was a means to an end, rather than the end itself — could have found reasons to justify seeking another election until he secured his desired result, especially considering his philosophy that, as he once said, he who loses Istanbul loses Turkey. In refusing to dispute the clear victory by Imamoglu, Erdogan will improve Turkey’s image in the eyes of foreign partners like the European Union, which has chided the AKP for manipulating elections.

    Imamoglu finds himself in a hole before he has even taken office — a fact that will complicate his efforts to fulfill campaign promises to economically rejuvenate the city.

    Nevertheless, the AKP remains Turkey’s strongest political power, exerting influence in institutions and among all branches of government throughout the country. AKP-led institutions, including the presidency (which acquired sweeping powers when the country switched to an executive presidential system last year), can obstruct the work of Imamoglu’s administration if they wish. In short, the election hardly means that the fight for political control over Turkey is over; in fact, it could grow even more intense as the AKP fights to retain its domestic strength against the secular opposition and as the country confronts several pressing issues, including:

    Debt and Municipal Finances

    During the 17 days that Imamoglu occupied the mayor’s post between the March 31 elections and their cancellation ahead of the June 23 rerun, he glimpsed the severity of Istanbul’s debt: The city has a budget of 20 billion liras ($3.4 billion) but annual debts of 26 billion liras ($4.5 billion). In essence, Imamoglu finds himself in a hole before he has even taken office — a fact that will complicate his efforts to fulfill campaign promises to economically rejuvenate the city. The AKP-controlled national government could interfere in the municipality’s operations in other ways. In other municipalities in which opposition parties have taken control, the AKP has transferred ownership of municipal buildings, vehicles and administrative funds to other institutions. Only time will tell if Imamoglu is inheriting a mess that limits his ability to lead — and thus build his appeal.

    The Broader Appeal of New Political Blood

    Imamoglu’s appeal as an alternative to Erdogan reverberated well beyond Istanbul (it was even reported that some Turks from outside of Istanbul showed up to vote in the mayoral contest, only to learn the election was only for those who lived in Istanbul). His victory catapults him to the front of the race to challenge Erdogan in 2023, when Turkey will conduct presidential and general elections. The June 23 result, therefore, could prompt the AKP to moderate its policies to retain legitimacy and popularity as Turkish voters are showing a willingness to vote for opposition candidates, even in former AKP strongholds.

    In recent years, the AKP has depicted itself as the sole guardian of Turkish stability, pursuing nationalist and pro-security policies as part of an alliance with the far-right Nationalist Movement Party (MHP). While the AKP is unlikely to abandon that rhetoric anytime soon — particularly as it continues military operations against Kurdish militants at home and abroad in Iraq and Syria — the election results could convince the party that it must shake up how it relates to the populace, perhaps by making overtures to groups such as the Kurds, who voted for Imamoglu en masse in a rebuke to the AKP-MHP alliance. Accordingly, the government could engage in more pragmatic outreach to Kurdish leaders, including imprisoned Kurdistan Workers’ Party leader Abdullah Ocalan, as well as the main legal Kurdish party in the country, the Peoples’ Democratic Party.

    Managing the Overall Turkish Economy

    One of the reasons Imamoglu’s campaign attracted broad appeal is Turkey’s fragile economy. Among other economic promises, Imamoglu promised to create 200,000 jobs for Istanbulites in the coming years (a more realistic promise than Yildirim’s pre-election promise of 500,000). Turks, who face significant inflation and a volatile currency, are hungry for economic stability, while foreign and domestic businesses are desperate for signs of regulatory continuity.

    The Turkish lira rallied on the news of Imamoglu’s victory as foreign and domestic investors saw the electoral system work as intended. But there are bumps in the road ahead that will test the staying power of the rally. If the United States decides to move forward with sanctions linked to Turkey’s impending purchase of the Russian S-400 air defense missile system, it could deal a blow to the Turkish economy, which is rife with structural and systemic weaknesses. A key meeting this week will come between U.S. President Donald Trump and Erdogan on the sidelines of the Group of 20 summit in Japan. While Erdogan has expressed confidence that he and Trump can come to an agreement over the issue, U.S. congressional opinion is another matter.

    The AKP has promised populist policies for years, while Imamoglu and the CHP have espoused a more pragmatic policy course. The national government is now caught between a rock and a hard place, as it must embark on painful structural economic reforms — even though the accompanying austerity measures could cause voters to abandon the AKP to the degree that the party’s loss on June 23 would pale in comparison to a potential reverse in 2023.

    globe color

    Connected Content

    Turkey
    Turkey’s Resurgence
  • The AKP’s Thirst for Power Risks Leaving Turkey High and Dry

    The AKP’s Thirst for Power Risks Leaving Turkey High and Dry

    Opposition supporters in Turkey await the arrival of their candidate for mayor of Istanbul on May 30, 2019.
    (Chris McGrath/Getty Images)
    • Turkey’s ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) will embrace more populist foreign and domestic policies following the controversial rerun of the Istanbul mayoral election on June 23, regardless of whether or not it wins. 
    • In a bid to consolidate power and drum up support, this renewed patriotic push will include asserting national interests above those of Turkey’s foreign allies’, which will stir diplomatic conflict with the United States and Europe. 
    • However, the AKP’s nationalist policies will ultimately fail to reverse its apparently waning popularity and will make improving Turkey’s economic picture more difficult.

    Editor’s Note: This assessment is part of a series of analyses supporting Stratfor’s upcoming 2019 Third-Quarter Forecast. These assessments are designed to provide more context and in-depth analysis on key developments over the next quarter.

    On March 31, it looked as if the Republican People’s Party (CHP) had successfully wrenched Istanbul’s mayorship from Turkey’s ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) party, which has held the economically and politically powerful position for nearly two decades. But despite securing nearly 14,000 more votes than its rival, the CHP’s victory was short-lived. After the results were announced, the AKP was quick to allege election fraud, resulting in the decision to rerun the election. Should it face another loss in the June 23 revote, the party is likely to repeat the tactic — laying bare just how far the AKP will go to secure control over the city.

    The Big Picture

    Turkey is a key power in the Middle East and North Africa with an influence that permeates well beyond its borders. In the coming quarter, Turkey’s government will be reconciling with a dramatic election do-over for Istanbul’s mayorship that will highlight the ruling party’s willingness to retain control over the country’s capital at all costs, even if it means harming the country’s already shaky economy and its relationships with outside powers.

    See Turkey’s Resurgence

    Though perhaps more importantly, the AKP’s loss of the March 31 mayoral race might eventually serve as a “canary in the coal mine” for the party’s waning national popularity and increasingly tenuous place in power, with the CHP’s candidate even capturing the attention of electorates once considered AKP strongholds. Thus, there is no doubt that the AKP is looking at the June 23 race with the 2023 presidential race in mind, as well as the threat that the CHP presents to its continued political dominance. Facing this existential predicament, the AKP will serve up more helpings of the nationalist rhetoric and populist policies that have historically served it well. And while this approach may temporarily stave off the party’s exit in the coming months, it carries with it the risk of causing more permanent damage to Turkey’s already fragile economy and foreign relations.

    The Issues Behind the AKP’s Predicament

    The AKP’s promise of a new approach to Turkey’s economy, which had endured a decade of financial fragility in the 1990s, is what initially vaulted the party to power nearly 20 years ago. Thus, the country’s current precarious economic picture is a problem for the party now. Steep corporate debt, combined with stubbornly low consumption, has cooled business activity in the country. And while it’s dropped from a 2018 peak, inflation remains high at over 18 percent, as does national unemployment at 11 percent. In May, Turkey reported record exports, though this seemingly positive data is tempered by the fact that the spike was due to the low value of the Turkish lira. Some voters, frustrated with the country’s slowing economy, have unsurprisingly blamed the ruling party. And this sentiment was a large reason why the AKP lost several key local government posts in recent months, including the Istanbul mayorship.

    Back to Square One

    Facing the threat of waning support and the difficult mayoral contest in Istanbul, the AKP is now clinging to nationalist politics and populist economic policy — both of which have proved popular with the AKP’s electoral base. In doing so, the party will continue to rely on its long-held message that only the AKP can secure Turkey’s national interests at home and abroad, helping it to maintain control over the government directly following the June 23 election, regardless of its outcome. However, in the long term, the “Turkey-first” rhetoric and actions risk further complicating the country’s financial situation and foreign relations.

    Defending Ankara’s national interests among stronger powers like the European Union and the United States will help the AKP-led government shore up its domestic political power by playing up its patriotic appeal. In July, U.S. President Donald Trump could possibly visit Turkey to discuss the two countries’ divergent national policies over issues such as Russia’s global influence and the Syrian conflict. But under the AKP’s renewed nationalist bent, Turkey is bound to prioritize its national interests over any compromise, and will instead insist on its preferred positions — no matter how unpalatable to Washington. However, stoking any kind of diplomatic conflict with the United States risks harming the economy by placing Turkey at risk of facing U.S. sanctions and tariffs — as it did last year.

    Turkey’s ruling party has shown it will do almost anything to remain in power — whether it’s calling for do-overs to win elections, or pursuing risky economic policies to win voters’ support.

    In its push for power, the AKP will also continue to promote its traditionally harsh policies against Turkish Kurds. With an eye to preserving Turkey’s national security in the face of Kurdish militancy inside and outside Turkey’s borders, this hard-line stance, which has worked in the party’s favor in past elections, could yield some electoral wins in the short term by rallying the AKP’s base. However, a hard push against pro-Kurdish political parties, such as the Peoples’ Democratic Party (HDP), will alienate new voters, Kurdish voters, or disillusioned AKP supporters who are losing faith in the party’s domestic policies. As a result, the ruling party may be forced to recalibrate its approach to its relationship with Turkish Kurds. And indeed, there are signs it may already be doing so, with reports that the AKP is considering pragmatic talks with Abdullah Ocalan, the long-imprisoned leader of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party militant group, for the first time in nearly a decade.

    The AKP will also continue to deepen Turkish anti-Kurdish militant operations in Iraq and Syria, despite Europe’s concerns about the encroachment of Turkish influence in the Levant at the expense of Kurdish determinism, as well as U.S. support of Kurdish troops to fight the Islamic State. Thus, such an emboldened anti-Kurdish approach to fan the nationalist flames at home risks of harming Turkey’s reputation abroad.

    Similarly, the AKP will play up Turkey’s oil and natural gas exploration activity in the Eastern Mediterranean to promote nationalism as well. But this too will no doubt ruffle the feathers of the West. In the coming months, Turkish exploration will take place in the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus’ claimed economic exclusion zone (EEZ), which overlaps with Cyprus’ own EEZ. Brussels, meanwhile, supports Cyprus’ claim to the area, as does the United States.

    Long-Term Pain for Short-Term Gains

    To garner support among Turks, the AKP will also pursue short-term populist policies to help weather a tough summer of recession-like conditions. This will likely include food subsidies that will further depress what Turkish farmers can expect for their goods, as well as strong-arming retailers and businesses into using the lira for their transactions instead of U.S. dollars.

    However, getting the Turkish economy up and running again will likely require a period of painful structural reforms and austerity measures — not quick-fix solutions. A more secure electoral position would give the government more leeway to embark on such sweeping reforms. But facing the potential loss of the Istanbul mayoral position come June 23, the AKP knows it has to weather the political blowback of pursuing unpopular measures such an overhaul would entail. Thus, the AKP will instead opt to zero in on its tried-and-true playbook of nationalist policies in the coming months, as it grasps to retain what power it has left to stave off electoral challenges in 2023. Yet this short-term strategy will ultimately be short-sighted by creating even worse conditions for the economy, and more problems for the government to fix.

    globe color