Turkey and global transformation: 'work in progress' in a multi-polar world
by Brad Staples, chief executive officer, Europe, Middle East and Africa & Mehmet Öğütçü, former Turkish diplomat and Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development executive
Two recent events - one tragic, one hopeful - have shown us the importance of Turkey in a modern, interdependent world.
The events aboard the Mavi Marmaris will be remembered as a terrible period in Turkey's history, but it demonstrated the importance of the country in the wider Middle East. And the way in which Turkey has taken a lead in negotiating a possible settlement of the nuclear standoff with Iran has demonstrated the ability of Turkey to navigate an increasingly polarized, unpredictable world.
No one could have predicted last year's financial crisis, but in retrospect it will no doubt be viewed by historians as significant a watershed in international politics as the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. The global economic meltdown demonstrated two important qualities - it showed the vulnerability not just of our financial systems, but of our international architecture. A fiscal crisis in one country cannot be contained any more than an oil spill can.
But the challenges of an interdependent world have changed as well. The questions of climate change, nuclear non-proliferation and international terrorism are far more prescient in 2010 than they were a decade ago.
Turkey has a significant role to play in addressing these interdependent challenges and must be central in multi-polar institutions that reflect them. As a European country with a majority Muslim population, with membership in NATO, and as an EU accession candidate, Turkey has a unique insight into many global challenges. The modern Turkey is no longer "the sick man of Europe" but a transformed nation with a GDP of $750 billion and the largest military power in the region.
The traditional Western policy of regarding Turkey as an "anchor" of the West is no longer applicable. It is necessary to get beyond this stereotype and recognize Turkey as a regional power to reckon with. Simply because Turkey's policies no longer automatically track with those of the West does not imply that Turkey is turning its back on the West. It is taking a lead to engage with Greece, increasing trade and cooperation. It has construction projects in Iraq and is trying to prevent Iran becoming a nuclear-weapons state. The more sensible analysis is to understand that Turkey has been more conscious of its own responsibilities in regional affairs.
The question for the rest of the world is how do we respond to these emerging powers, and do we have the institutional structures to meet the challenges of an interdependent and multi-polar world?
Much has been said of the shift from G8 to G20 and the rise of the BRICs, a term coined nearly a decade ago. We will need to answer serious questions about whether the G20 can prove to be the most efficient system for resolving global issues though it is more inclusive and diverse than ever. But the danger today is that we enter a world of the "G2," where the United States and China seek not only to make decisions on a bipolar basis, but are in danger of dividing the world into spheres of influence. No one is suggesting that we are returning to the Cold War era, but many of the elements are there - such as China's resource grab in Africa or NATO's expansion into Eastern Europe.
The need for reform of our international architecture is urgent. We have a global structure that represents the post-World War II settlement, rather than the world post-Sept. 11. Is it really justified that we have a United Nations Security Council that includes as permanent members China but not Japan, France but not Germany, and Russia but not India, and has no permanent representation from Africa, Middle East and Latin America? Change will require painful decisions, too, from the keepers of the old order - from France, Britain and others.
The last year has been one of firefighting – responding to the unprecedented global economic crisis. But now we have the chance in 2010 to reflect and rebuild, to create the institutions and mechanisms which can ensure not just a global recovery, but also address many of the long term challenges we face.
The difficulty in any approach to international affairs is to balance short-term expediency with long-term success. The benefit of hindsight shows us how misguided we were to support the Taliban against the Soviet Union, or to back Saddam against Iran. Many of those mistakes were the product of a Cold War ideology - we can no longer have a bipolar approach to an interdependent world.
In an interdependent world where traditional "bloc" power is less effective, Turkey's combination of ''hard'' and ''soft'' power makes it one of the most interesting case studies in global politics and economics.