The Role of Republican and AKP Elites in the Construction and Reconstruction of Turkiye’s Foreign Policy Identity: A Critical Narrative Analysis

ABSTRACT

Building on the argument that foreign policy identities are discursively constructed by the dominant elite, this study analyzes the construction and reconstruction of Turkiye’s foreign policy identity during the Early Republican and AKP periods in a comparative way, focusing on political narratives as discursive practices. Adopting a critical narrative analysis method, the study first distinguishes the linguistic construction of a common past, a common geopolitical imagination and a common perception of the international environment as substantive contents of foreign policy identity. It then addresses different strategies used within these three thematic areas. Finally, narrative analysis is adopted to extract the repeated themes and storylines used in the narratives of the Republican and AKP elites about history, geopolitical location, and the international environment as means of linguistic realizations.

KEYWORDS:

• Discursive strategies
• foreign policy identity
• narrative
• Turkiye

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Notes

[1] A. Bloomfıeld, ‘Time to move on: Reconceptualizing the strategic culture debate’, Contemporary Security Policy, 33(3), 2012, p. 437.

[2] Z. Öniş, ‘Multiple face of the new Turkish foreign policy: Underlying dynamics and a critique’, Insight Turkey, 13(1), 2011, 47–65, p. 50.

[3] See T. Oğuzlu, ‘Middle Easternization of Turkey’s foreign policy: does Turkey dissociate from the West?’, Turkish Studies, 9(1), 2008, pp. 3–20; M. B. Altunışık, ‘Worldviews and Turkish foreign policy in the Middle East’, New Perspectives on Turkey, (40), 2009, pp. 171–194; B. Aras and A. Görener, ‘National role conceptions and foreign policy orientation: the ideational bases of the Justice and Development Party’s foreign policy activism in the Middle East’, Journal of Balkans and Near East Studies, 12(1), 2010, pp. 73–92; H. Kösebalaban, Turkish Foreign Policy: Islam, Nationalism, and Globalization, Palgrave MacMillan, NewYork, 2011; U. Uzer, Identity and Turkish Foreign Policy: The Kemalist Influence in Cyprus and the Caucasus, I. B. Tauris, NewYork, 2011; Ç. Saraçoğlu and Ö. Demirkol, ‘Nationalism and foreign policy discourse in Turkey under the AKP rule: geography, history and national identity’, British Journal of Middle Eastern Studies, 42(3), 2015, pp. 301–319; M. Çınar, ‘Turkey’s “Western” or “Muslim” identity and the AKP’s civilizational discourse’, Turkish Studies, 19(2), 2018, pp. 176–197; A.E. Öztürk, ‘Islam and foreign policy: Turkey’s ambivalent religious soft power in the authoritarian turn’, Religions, 12(1), 2021, pp. 1–16.

[4] See Ç. Nas, ‘Turkish identity and the perception of Europe’, Avrupa Araştırmaları Dergisi, 9(1), 2001, pp. 177–189; M. Müftüler-Baç and E. Taşkın, ‘Turkey’s accession to the European Union: Does culture and identity play a role?’, Ankara Review of European Studies, 6(2), 2007, pp. 31–50; B. Rumelili, ‘Negotiating Europe: EU-Turkey relations from an identity perspective’, Insight Turkey, 10(1), 2008, pp. 97–110; B. Rumelili, ‘Turkey: Identity, foreign policy, and socialization in a post-enlargement Europe’, Journal of European Integration, 33(2), 2011, pp. 235–249; S. Aydın-Düzgit, J. Chovanec, S. B. Gülmez, B. Rumelili and A. E. Topal, ‘Turkish and European identity constructions in the 1815–1945 Period’, FEUTURE Online Paper, No. 4, 2017; S. Aydın-Düzgit, J. Chovanec, S. B. Gülmez, B. Rumelili and A. E. Topal, ‘Turkish and European identity constructions in the 1946–1999 period’, FEUTURE Online Paper, No. 15, 2018; F. Ç. Oran, ‘The false promise of Europeanisation in Turkey’s national identity discourse’, Journal of Contemporary European Studies, 30(3), 2022, pp. 419–432.

[5] See K. Renda, Discursive change in Turkish strategic culture: changing narratives, roles and values’PhD Thesis, King’s College London, 2013; Z. Arkan and M. Kınacıoğlu, ‘Enabling “ambitious activism”: Davutoğlu’s vision of a new foreign policy identity for Turkey’, Turkish Studies, 17(3), 2016, pp. 381–405; H. L. Hauge, E. E. Özbey, A. Eralp and W. Wessels, ‘Narratives of a contested relationship: unravelling the debates in the EU and Turkey’. FEUTURE Online Paper, No.28, 2019; T. Alaranta, ‘Turkiye as the order-producing country: narrating the new Turkey in the Middle East’, in W. Mühlberger and T. Alaranta (eds), Political Narratives in the Middle East and North Africa, Springer, London, 2020, pp. 55–70.

[6] A. Wendt, ‘Anarchy is What States Make of It’, International Organization, 46, 1992, p. 397.

[7] K. Ashizawa, ‘When Identity Matters: State Identity, Regional Institution-Building, and Japanese Foreign Policy’, International Studies Review, 10, 2008, p. 575.

[8] Y. Bozdağlıoğlu, Turkish Foreign Policy and Turkish Identity: a Constructivist Approach, Routledge, NewYork, 2003, p. 28.

[9] Z. Arkan, ‘Via Media’ vs. the Critical Path: Constructivism(s) and the Case of EU Identity’, All Azimuth, 3(2), 2004, p. 21–36.

[10] T. Hopf, ‘The promise of constructivism in international relations theory’, International Security, 23(1), 1998, p.181.

[11] Y. C. Cho, ‘State Identity Formation in Constructivist Security Studies: A Suggestive Essay’. Japanese Journal of Political Science, 13(3), 2012, p. 309.

[12] B. Buzan and L. Hansen, The Evolution of International Security Studies, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2009, p. 198.

[13] P. Ehin and E. Berg (eds), Identity and Foreign Policy. Baltic-Russian Relations and European Integration, Ashgate, Burlington, p. 2.

[14] E. Ringmar, ‘On the ontological status of the state’, European Journal of International Relations, 2(4), 1996, p. 450–451.

[15] T. Hopf, ‘The Promise of Constructivism in International Relations Theory’, International Security, 23(1), 1998, pp. 183–184.

[16] Arkan and Kınacıoğlu, op. cit., p. 384.

[17] L. Hansen, Security as Practice: Discourse analysis and the Bosnian war, Routledge, NewYork, 2006, p. 42

[18] O. Wæver, ‘Identity, communities and foreign policy’ in L. Hansen and O. Wæver (eds), European Integration and National Identity: The Challange of the Nordic States, Routledge, London, 2001, p. 26.

[19] P. Baker and S. Ellece, Key Terms in Discourse Analysis. Continuum, New York, 2011, p. 73.

[20] R. Krebs, ‘How dominant narratives rise and fall: military conflict, politics and the Cold War consensus’, International Organization, 69(4), 2015, p. 813.

[21] M. Feldman, K. Sköldberg, R. N. Brown and D. Horner, ‘Making sense of stories: a rhetorical approach to narrative analysis’, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 14(2), 2004, p. 148.

[22] N. Montesano Montessori and E. Morales-Lopez, ‘Multimodal narrative as an instrument for social change—Reinventing democracy in Spain: the case of 15 M’, CADAAD, 7(2), 2015, p. 207.

[23] R. Wodak, R. Cillia, M. Reisigl and K. Liebhart, The Discursive Construction of National Identity, Edinburg University Press, Edinburg, 2009, p. 8.

[24] M. Souto-Manning, ‘Critical narrative analysis: the interplay of critical discourse and narrative analyses’, International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 27(2), 2012, p. 162.

[25] R. Wodak, ‘The discourse-historical approach’, in R. Wodak and M. Meyer (eds), Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis, Sage, London, 2001, p. 73.

[26] J. Milliken, ‘The Study of Discourse in International Relations: A Critique of Research and Methods’, European Journal of International Relations, 5(225), 1999, p. 233.

[27] A. R. Cihan, İsmet İnönü’nün TBMM’deki Konuşmaları: 1920–1973 [İsmet İnönü’s Speeches at the GNAT: 1920–1973], TBMM Kültür, Sanat ve Yayın Kurulu, Ankara, 1992.

[28] TBMM Tutanak Dergisi, Dönem:1, Cilt:3, Birleşim:115, 1922; TBMM Tutanak Dergisi, Dönem:1, Cilt:3, Birleşim 116, 1922; TBMM Tutanak Dergisi, Dönem:1, Cilt: 4, Birleşim 5, 1923.

[29] İ. Neziroğlu and T. Yılmaz, Başbakanlarımız ve Genel Kurul Konuşmaları Cilt 9 [Prime Ministers’ Speeches in the GNAT General Assembly Vol. 9]. TBMM Basımevi, Ankara, 2014.

[30] Wodak, op. cit., p. 74.

[31] Atatürk Araştırma Merkezi Başkanlığı. Atatürk’ün Söylev ve Demeçleri I-III [Ataturk’s Speeches and Statements I-III]. Divan Yayıncılık, Ankara, 2006, p. 140; Atatürk Araştırma Merkezi Başkanlığı, op. cit., p. 296; Atatürk Araştırma Merkezi Başkanlığı, op. cit., p. 173; Atatürk Araştırma Merkezi Başkanlığı, op. cit., p. 323; Atatürk Araştırma Merkezi Başkanlığı, op. cit., pp. 177–178; M. K. Atatürk, Nutuk [The Speech], Panama Yayıncılık, Ankara, 2012, p. 13,66,147,260,301.

[32] İ. Turan, İsmet İnönü Konuşma, Demeç, Makale, Mesaj ve Söyleşileri (1919–1933) [Ismet Inonü Speeches, Statements, Articles, Messages and Interviews (1919–1933)], TBMM Kültür Sanat ve Yayın Kurulu Yayınları, Ankara, 2021, p. 925; Cihan, op. cit., p.380; İ. Turan, İsmet İnönü Konuşma, Demeç, Makale, Mesaj ve Söyleşiler (1933–1938) [Ismet Inönü Speeches, Statements, Articles, Messages and Interviews (1933–1938)], TBMM Kültür Sanat ve Yayın Kurulu, Ankara, 2003.

[33] Cihan, op. cit., p.60.

[34] Atatürk Araştırma Merkezi Başkanlığı, op. cit., p. 396.

[35] Ibid., p. 296.

[36] TBMM Zabıt Ceridesi, 2. Dönem, 1. Cilt, 7. Birleşim, 1923, p.221; N. Menemencioğlu, 10 Ans sur les Traces de Lausanne [10 Years in the Tracks of Lausanne], Akşam Matbaası, İstanbul, 1935, p. 71

[37] Turan, op. cit.

[38] Menemencioğlu,op. cit., p. 177.

[39] Atatürk, op. cit., p. 147.

[40] Atatürk Araştırma Merkezi Başkanlığı, op. cit., p.271 ; Atatürk Araştırma Merkezi Başkanlığı, op. cit., p. 170; Atatürk Araştırma Merkezi Başkanlığı, op. cit., p. 381.

[41] Turan, İsmet İnönü Konuşma, Demeç, Makale, Mesaj ve Söyleşileri (1919–1933), op. cit., p. 1342; Turan, İsmet İnönü Konuşma, Demeç, Makale, Mesaj ve Söyleşileri (1919–1933), op. cit., p. 1210; A. R. Cihan, İsmet İnönü’nün T.B.M.M’.deki Konuşmaları 1920–1973 [İsmet İnönü’s Parliamentary Speeches 1920–1973], TBMM Kültür Sanat ve Yayın Kurulu Yayınları, Ankara, 1992, p. 429.

[42] Menemencioğlu, op. cit., p. 132, p. 146.

[43] Ç. Keyder, ‘Wither the Project of Modernity: Turkey in the 1990s’, in R. Kasaba and S. Bozdoğan, Rethinking Modernity and National Identity in Turkey, University of Washington Press, Seattle, 1997, p. 37.

[44] Bozdağlıoğlu, op. cit., p. 60.

[45] Bernard Lewis, The Emergence of Modern Turkey, London, New York: Oxford University Press, 1961, p. 262.

[46] Atatürk Araştırma Merkezi Başkanlığı, op. cit., p. 464.

[47] Menemencioğlu, op. cit., pp. 149–150.

[48] Atatürk Araştırma Merkezi Başkanlığı, op. cit., p. 361.

[49] Ibid., p.188.

[50] İ. Turan, İsmet İnönü Konuşma, Demeç, Makale, Mesaj ve Söyleşiler (1933–1938), op. cit., p. 235.

[51] Menemencioğlu, op. cit., p. 252.

[52] TBMM Zabıt Ceridesi, Devre: IV, Cilt: 21, İçtima: 3, 35. İnikat, 5.4.1934.

[53] Türkiye Cumhuriyeti Cumhurbaşkanlığı, ‘Milletler Tarihlerinden Aldığı Güçle Yaşar’, 19 May 2015, https://www.tccb.gov.tr/haberler/410/32149/cumhurbaskani-erdogan-81-ilden-gelen-gencleri-cumhurbaskanligi-sarayinda-kabul-etti (accessed 10 June 2023).

[54] Türkiye Cumhuriyeti Dışişleri Bakanlığı, ‘Dışişleri Bakanı Sayın Ahmet Davutoğlu’nun ‘Büyük Türkiye’ye Doğru’ Sempozyumunda Yaptığı Konuşma, 26 Mart 2011,https://www.mfa.gov.tr/disisleri-bakani-sayin-ahmet-davutoglu_nun-turk-ocaklari_nin-kurulusunun-100_-yilini-kutlama-etkinlikleri-kapsaminda-duzenlenen.tr.mfa (accessed 15 June 2023).

[55] Türkiye Cumhuriyeti Dışişleri Bakanlığı, ‘Sayın Bakanımızın “Bağımsızlıklarının 20. Yılında Türk Cumhuriyetleri” Konulu Toplantıda Yaptıkları Konuşma’, 5 Ekim 2011 (accessed 20 June 2023).

[56] A. Davutoğlu, Stratejik Derinlik: Türkiye’nin Uluslararası Konumu [Strategic Depth: Turkey’s International Position], Küre Yayınları, İstanbul, 2001, p. 143.

[57] Saraçoğlu and Demirkol, op. cit., p. 312.

[58] A. Davutoğlu, Teoriden Pratiğe: Türk Dış Politikası Üzerine Konuşmalar [From Theory to Practice: Talks on Turkish Foreign Policy], Küre Yayınları, İstanbul, 2013, p. 83

[59] Neziroğlu and Yılmaz, op. cit., p. 844.

[60] A. Gül, ‘Yeni Normal Dünyada Türkiye’nin Yeni Konumu, Yeni Gücü” Paneli’nde Yaptıkları Konuşma’, 27 September 2010, http://www.abdullahgul.gen.tr/konusmalar/371/77404/8220yeni-normal-dunyada-turkiye8217nin-yeni-konumu-yeni-gucu8221-paneli8217nde-yaptiklari-konusma.html (accessed 25 June 2023).

[61] A. Davutoğlu, Stratejik Derinlik, op. cit., p. 23.

[62] Türkiye Cumhuriyeti Cumhurbaşkanlığı, ‘Türkiye’nin Tarih Boyunca Taşıdığı Misyon, Barışı Hâkim Kılmak ve Zülme Karşı Durmaktır’, 15 November 2014.

https://www.tccb.gov.tr/haberler/410/1500/turkiyenin-tarih-boyunca-tasidigi-misyon-barisi-hkim-kilmak-ve-zulme-karsi-durmaktir (accessed 25 June 2023).

[63] A. Gül, ‘Bölgesel Sorunların Çözümü, Demokratik Hukuk Devletlerinin İnşasından Geçmektedir’, 8 January 2014, http://www.abdullahgul.gen.tr/haberler/170/88190/bolgesel-sorunlarin-cozumu-demokratik-hukuk-devletlerinin-insasindan-gecmektedir.html (accessed 25 June 2023).

[64] Neziroğlu and Yılmaz, op. cit., p. 858.

[65] This term was borrowed from Kadri Renda. (See Renda, op. cit.).

[66] Türkiye Cumhuriyeti Dışişleri Bakanlığı, ‘Dışişleri Bakanı Sn. Ahmet Davutoğlu’nun IV. Büyükelçiler Konferansı Açış Konuşması’, 23 December 2011, https://www.mfa.gov.tr/disisleri-bakani-sn_-ahmet-davutoglu_nun-iv_-buyukelciler-konferansi-acis-konusmasi_-23-aralik-2011.tr.mfa (accessed 25 June 2023).

[67] TBMM Tutanak Dergisi, Dönem: 22, Cilt: 105, Birleşim: 38, 2005, p. 37.