Paradoxes in Turkey’s Syria policy: Analyzing the critical episode of agenda building

Abstract

This article explores the discursive reasons behind the paradoxes in Turkey’s foreign policy since the onset of the Syria crisis. By looking at representation of Turkey’s Syria policy in two prominent pro-government newspapers, Star and Yeni Şafak, the authors highlight the significance of the February 2012 episode, after which Ankara experienced deep discursive dilemmas for three reasons: the uncertain portrayal of the dyadic context, the ambiguous framing of third-party roles, and ambivalent agenda building. Despite the shadow of imminent civil war, Turkey’s foreign policy elite refrained from framing the real risks arising within Syria. Idealistic-normative calls appealed to massacre rhetoric in order to legitimize humanitarian intervention. However, the geopolitical framing of third-party roles did not assist in the building of diplomatic ground for international intervention. Quite the contrary, it led to the shaping of public opinion toward realistic-utilitarian interference. Swinging between intervention and interference, Ankara pushed itself toward a liminal position. Even though the Turkish government’s rhetorical ambivalence helped to sway anti-war domestic public opinion, it did not help to control the spiraling of Syria into civil war. That is to say, the ambivalent agenda building in the critical February 2012 episode perpetuated paradoxes in Turkey’s Syria policy and left lingering implications for the transformation of the Syrian crisis in the years to come.

Regional Power Role and Intervention: The Turkish Case Over Syria in the 2000s

“…Informal networks and uncontrolled armed groups intending to use the Turkish territory as a sanctuary caused tension between Syria and Turkey and between Ankara and its Western allies. The government was then pursuing covert military intervention in Syria by assisting the FSA (Tür & Kumral, 2016, p. 111).…”

Reading Agamben backwards: Syrian refugees, biopolitics and sovereignty in Turkey

“…This realistic-pragmatic aspect suggests that 'the Turkish government almost welcomed Syrian refugees, hoping that this would enhance the international attention on the crisis in Syria' (Korkut, 2016: 4), especially for the withdrawal of the Bashar Assad regime it despised. The second approach, on the other hand, points to an 'idealist Turkish foreign policy', which shifted toward the Middle East instead of its traditional Western centricity, after Ahmet Davutoğlu was put in charge of shaping foreign policy in the AKP governments between 2009 and 2015 (see Oktav and Çelikaksoy, 2015;Tür and Kumral, 2016). His foreign policy was summed up by the phrase 'zero problems with neighbours', and it aimed at re-empowering the Turkish identity within the discourse of the 'glorious days' of the Ottoman Empire by enhancing its area of influence over the former Ottoman borders through normative means (Davutoğlu, 2013).…”