Skip to content

A botched coup and Turkey’s future in western institutions

The EU will fail in anchoring policy reform in Turkey as a result of becoming hostage to inter-governmentalism and the zero-sum-game dynamics associated with it.

Published:
PA-16085331.jpg
PA-16085331.jpg

James Stavridis, NATO supreme allied commander, testifying on Capitol Hill, 2013. Now retired, calls on Obama Administration in Foreign Policy magazine, to be 'nice to Erdogan'.Molly Riley/ Press Association. All rights reserved.Western interpretations of the botched coup in Turkey and its aftermath are varied. Nevertheless, if one draws a vector that represents the divergent arguments a consensus view with two components can be detected: (i) a readiness to accept the Turkish government’s argument that the coup was staged by the Islamic Gülen Movement that infiltrated the Turkish state institutions, including the military; and (ii) expressions of concerns about the future of democracy in Turkey given the announcement of a state of emergency and the extent of the post-coup purges.

In terms of policy recommendations, there is only one recommendation in the market place: the west should try to appease Turkey, a key strategic partner in NATO and in the fight against ISIS.

My argument is that the analyses of the botched coup are largely superficial and the policy implications derived reflect the prevalence of macht over recht in the formation of western policy preferences. First, I will demonstrate why the current AKP should be held responsible for the botched coup as much as the perpetrators of the latter. Then, I will argue for freezing Turkey’s membership in and its negotiations with all western institutions.