Turkish Foreign Policy after the Second World War
Good Fit
- Students and researchers of international relations, political history and Turkish foreign policy
- Those who want to see Turkey's policy toward the West, the Middle East and the Caucasus during and after the Cold War as a whole
- Readers looking for a reference book with a bibliography and period tables
Not a Fit
- Anyone seeking a light, narrative-style reading of history: the text is academic and heavy
- Anyone wanting a short summary: the book runs to over 800 pages
- Anyone wanting to see several different views of controversial subjects (Cyprus, the Armenian and Kurdish issues) together: this book is the view of one author
The introduction sets out the author's main thesis: the foreign policy of states is determined more by external factors than by internal ones and this holds for Turkey too. That is why after changes of government there is less change in foreign policy than expected: those who come to power soon see the importance of external factors. The author also notes its limits: foreign policy is not wholly independent of internal developments, but the limits of the possibility of change should be sought not in party programmes but in developments in the international structure.
Two kinds of factor are shown for understanding the foundations of Turkish foreign policy: structural (geography and history) and behavioural (preserving the status quo on the basis of Lausanne, Westernism, concern about the Soviet Union/Russia). Turkey, which holds the Straits, is a link between Europe/the Balkans and the Middle East/Asia; this ambivalent position also shows itself in joining NATO and in today's debate over the European Union. Living for a long time next to Russia as a hostile power affects its security perception. Because Turkey is the heir to an empire it has problems with its neighbours: Greece, Bulgaria, Syria, Iraq and Armenia write their histories against the Ottomans.
The Second World War period is presented as a «break» in foreign policy. In the 1930s Italy's turn to the Eastern Mediterranean brought Turkey closer to Britain before Montreux in 1936; on 24 August 1939 the German–Soviet non-aggression pact upset all the balances; on 19 October 1939 Turkey signed a Mutual Assistance Treaty with Britain and France. After Italy entered the war in 1940 Turkey did not join, citing the collapse of France and the failure to deliver the promised weapons; Churchill's message in January 1941, Hitler's in March and the Turkish–German non-aggression pact of 18 June 1941 are key moments of the war period.
In the next phase the Allies tried to bring Turkey into the war: the Adana meeting in January 1943 (Churchill–İnönü), Cairo in November, the Tehran Conference (the decision to persuade Turkey to join the war) and the Cairo talks in December. İnönü accepted in principle, if conditionally, to join the war, but on condition of weapons and material; in 1944 no agreement was reached. The author concludes: during the war Turkey followed not «complete neutrality» but a policy aimed at staying out of the war; it benefited from the neutrality strategy and used the alliance strategy when necessary.
- The introduction gives the author's thesis, the structural and behavioural factors and a summary of the war period together
- Each claim is grounded with reference to a source (Ataöv, Gönlübol, Ülman, Gürün, Weisband)
- The periods are analysed with the same scheme, which makes it easy to use the book as a reference
- The text refers widely to documents and conferences of the period
A collection of articles on Turkish foreign policy edited by the same author
A broad two-volume work explaining Turkish foreign policy with documents and commentary
A book proposing another theoretical and strategic frame for Turkish foreign policy
At the end of the part read the author states that on 23 February 1945, in order to attend the San Francisco Conference and be among the original members of the United Nations, Turkey legally ended its non-belligerent status by declaring war on Germany; the post-war foreign policy, he says, must be treated within the framework of the problems with the Soviet Union and the emerging bipolar international structure. What follows is outside the scope of this review.
If you see a problem, write to us. Publisher, author, rights holder, or just a reader — it doesn't matter. If there's something problematic about copyright in this review, if the review's author has broken the site's rules, or if you simply have a suggestion or complaint, hey@kitabdanevar.com. We'd rather resolve this between ourselves than go to court: we review requests within 48 hours and, if needed, correct or fully remove the review.
