Political Intermediaries and Turkey’s State-to-Society Diplomacy in the Balkans

Öz

The Justice and Development Party governments in Turkey have placed public diplomacy into the
service of foreign policy as a multi-dimensional tool-kit to be utilized in extending the overseas
communication beyond governments towards their publics. And this may be the first time in the
Republican history that by the Justice and Development Party era, people abroad have found Turkey’s
mission bodies more accessible and reachable in terms of both institutional presence and of institutional
willingness to involve in their affairs/problems. The Justice and Development Party governments have
accordingly adopted a comprehensive ‘state-to-society’ public diplomacy agenda, targeting for instance
the so-called ‘kin communities’, by which shared civilizational memories, values and histories are
often recalled and promoted in building relations. The target communities have thus been encouraged
to embrace such identity frames and hence to re-negotiate and when possible redefine their sense
of belonging in a civilizational sense. This is a development which brings the constitutive appeal of
the country’s new foreign policy into a brighter light. Based on this, this paper initially questions the
constitutive influences Turkey has possibly posed to the targeted communities abroad. Moreover,
in the implementation of such state-to-society public diplomacy, certain political figures in Turkey
have functioned as intermediaries between the public diplomacy bureaucracy and the communities
abroad, as facilitators of Turkey’s access to the targeted communities, and vice versa. These political
elites have mostly been the members of the ruling party in the Parliament, acted as the chairman of
inter-parliamentary friendship groups, accompanied prime ministers and presidents in their visits to
target communities, and used their personal ties and networks to bring the targeted communities closer
to Turkey, and vice versa. They therefore have direct involvement in the conduct of overseas stateto-
society policy and have personally contributed to the country’s public diplomacy campaigns. This
paper, at this juncture, secondly aims to unfold this intermediary role of the political elites, which
would help garner a better understanding of the sources and causes of Turkey’s societal influences
abroad. The paper uses Turkey’s relations with the Bosniak and Albanian communities in the Balkans
as case studies to trace the state-to-society diplomacy and the intermediaries’ roles within it. To better
observe both the influence and the intermediaries’ facilitative role, interviews are conducted with some
of the political intermediaries who took part in Turkey’s reach to the kin communities in the Balkans.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Public Diplomacy,Political Intermediaries,Foreign Policy,Turkey,Balkans

Siyasi aracılar ve Türkiye’nin Balkanlarda Devletten-Topluma Yönlü Diplomasisi

Öz

Türkiye’de Adalet ve Kalkınma Partisi hükümetleri kamu diplomasisini, yurtdışı iletişimi ülke
yönetimlerinin ötesinde halklara doğru taşımak için kullanılacak stratejik bir dil ve çok-boyutlu
bir enstrüman olarak, dış politikanın hizmetine sundu. Ve belki de Cumhuriyet tarihinde ilk kez
yurtdışındaki insanlar, Adalet ve Kalkınma Partisi dönemiyle birlikte, Türkiye’nin misyon kurumlarını
hem kurumsal mevcudiyet hem de onların ilişkilerine/sorunlarına müdahil olma istekliliği anlamında
daha erişilebilir ve ulaşılabilir buldular. İletişime geçilen halkların ilişkilerine/sorunlarına müdahil olma
istekliliği kapsamında Adalet ve Kalkınma Partisi hükümetleri kapsamlı bir devletten-topluma yönlü,
örneğin akraba toplulukları hedef alan, bir kamu diplomasisi gündemi benimsedi ve bu kapsamda
ilgili topluluklarla ilişki geliştirilirken ortak medeniyet hafızası, değerleri ve tarihi sıklıkla hatırlatıldı
ve desteklendi. Hedef topluluklar da bu minvalde kimlikleri üzerine düşünürken ilgili medeniyetsel
zihni çerçeveleri benimsemeleri ve aidiyetlerini medeniyete referansla yeniden müzakere etmeleri ve
mümkünse yeniden tanımlamaları yönünde teşvik edildi. Bu durum ülkenin yeni dış politikasında
mevcut kurucu (şekillendirici ve etki doğurucu) istekliliği daha da görünür kılan bir gelişmedir.
Bu zeminde, bu çalışma da öncelikli olarak Türkiye’nin hedef topluluklar üzerinde oluşturdukları
muhtemel kurucu etkileri sorgulamaktadır. Dahası, ilgili devletten-topluma yönlü kamu diplomasisinin
yürütülmesinde, Türkiye’de belirli siyasi figürler kamu diplomasisi bürokrasisi ile yurt dışındaki
topluluklar arasında, Türkiye’nin o topluluklara o toplulukların da Türkiye’ye erişimini kolaylaştıran,
aracılar olarak görev aldılar. Bu siyasi elitler ekseriyetle parlamentoda iktidar partisi üyelerindendir,
parlamentolar arası dostluk grubu başkanlıkları yapmışlardır, hedef toplulukları da içeren yurtdışı
gezilerinde başbakanlara ve cumhurbaşkanlarına eşlik etmişlerdir ve kişisel bağlantılarını kullanarak
hedef toplulukları Türkiye’ye Türkiye’yi de hedef topluluklara yakınlaştırmışlardır. Onlar ayrıca,
ülke dışındaki devletten-topluma yönlü siyasetin uygulanmasında doğrudan rol almışlar ve ülkenin
kamu diplomasisi uğraşlarına doğrudan kişisel katkı sunmuşlardır. Bu makale, tam da bu noktada,
ikinci olarak ilgili siyasi elitlerin aracılık rolünü açığa çıkartmayı hedeflemektedir; bu Türkiye’nin
yurtdışındaki etkilerinin kaynaklarının ve nedenlerinin daha iyi anlaşılmasına yardımcı olacaktır.
Çalışma, devletten-topluma yönlü diplomasinin ve aracıların bundaki rollerinin izini sürmek için
Türkiye’nin Balkanlar’da yaşayan Boşnak ve Arnavut topluluklarla ilişkilerini vaka incelemesi olarak
seçmiştir. Çalışma kapsamında, bahsi geçen etkiyi ve aracıların bu etkinin oluşumundaki kolaylaştırıcı
rollerini daha iyi gözlemleyebilmek için Türkiye’nin Balkanlarda yaşayan topluluklarla ilişki geliştirmesi
sürecinde yer almış bazı siyasi aracılarla röportajlar yapılmıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Kamu Diplomasisi,Siyasi Aracılar,Dış Politika,Türkiye,Balkanlar

Kaynakça

1. Al-Ghazzi O., M. M. Kraidy (2013) “Neo-Ottoman Cool 2: Turkish Nation Branding and Arabic-Language Transnational Broadcasting”, International Journal of Communication, 7, 2341-2360.
2. Aras B. (2012) “Turkey’s Mediation and Friends of Mediation Initiative”, SAM Papers, 4.
3. Aras, B., P. Akpınar (2015) “The Role of Humanitarian NGOs in Turkey’s Peacebuilding”, International Peacebuilding, 22 (3): 230-247.
4. Baklacıoğlu, N.Ö. (2015) “Between neo-Ottomanist kin policy in the Balkans and Transnational Kin Economics in the EU”, Journal on Ethnopolitics and Minority Issues in Europe, 14 (3): 47-72.
5. Bilmez, B. (2003) “Sami Frashëri or Şemseddin Sami? Mythologization of an Ottoman intellectual in the modern Turkish and socialist Albanian historiographies – based on ‘selective perception’”, Balkanologie, 7 (2): 19-46.
6. Bjola C., S. Murray (2016) (eds.) Secret Diplomacy: Concepts, contexts and cases, Oxon: Routledge.
7. Boskovic, M. M., D. Reljic, A. Vracic (2015), “Elsewhere in the Neighborhood: Reaching Out to the Western Balkans”, in Cevik S. and P. Seib (eds.), Turkey’s Public Dipnylomacy, London: Palgrave Macmillan, 99-120.
8. Boyar, E., K. Fleet (2008), “A Dangerous Axis: The ‘Bulgarian Müftü’, the Turkish Opposition and the Ankara Government, 1928–36”, Middle Eastern Studies, 44 (5): 775-789.

9. Chigas, D. (2003) “Track II (Citizen) Diplomacy,” in. Burgess G. and H. Burgess (eds.) Beyond Intractability, Conflict Information Consortium, University of Colorado, Boulder, (August). http://www.beyondintractability.org/essay/track2-diplomacy Clinton, H. R. (2010) “Leading through Civilian Power”, Foreign Affairs, 89: 13-24.
10. Colel, R. E. (2011) “Foreign Public Diplomacy Policy: The rhetorical turn”, Grove City College journal of Law & Public Policy, 2 (2): 149-164.
11. Cowan, G., A. Arsenault (2008) “Moving from Monologue to Dialogue to Collaboration: The Three Layers of Public Diplomacy”, The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 616 (1): 10-30.
12. Cull, N. J. (2008) “Public diplomacy: Taxonomies and histories,” The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 616 (1): 31-54.
13. Cull, N. J. (2009) “Public Diplomacy before Gullion: The evolution of a phrase,” in Snow N. and P. M. Taylor (eds.) Routledge Handbook of Public Diplomacy, London: Routledge, 19-23.
14. Deibel, T. L. and W. R. Roberts (1976) Culture and Information: Two Foreign Policy Functions, Newbury Park: Sage.
15. Delaney, R. F. (1968) “Introduction”, in Hoffman A. S. (ed.), International Communication and the New Diplomacy, Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
16. Dinnie, K. (2015) Nation branding: concepts, issues, practice, London: Routledge.
17. Gregory, B. (2008) “Public Diplomacy: Sunrise of an Academic Field”, The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 616 (1): 274-290.
18. Kalın, İ. (2011) “Soft Power and Public Diplomacy in Turkey”, Perceptions: Journal of International Affairs, 16 (3): 5-24.
19. Kamusella, T. (2016) “Albania: a denial of the Ottoman past – School textbooks and politics of memory”, Revista de etnologie şi culturologie, 20, 96-105.
20. Karadağ, H. (2016) Uluslararası İlişkilerde Yeni Bir Boyut – Kamu Diplomasisi, Ankara: Nobel Akademik Yayıncılık.
21. Karadeniz, R. F. (2011) “Türk Dış Politikası’nda ‘Dış Türkler’: Karşılaştırmalı Teorik Bir Çalışma”, Unpublished PhD Thesis, Istanbul: Marmara University.
22. Kirişçi, K. (2004) “The Kurdish question and Turkish foreign policy,” in L. Martin (ed.), The future of Turkish foreign policy, MA: MIT press, 277-314.
23. Malone, G. D. (1988) Political advocacy and cultural communication: Organizing the nation’s public diplomacy, Lanham: University Press of America.
24. Melissen, J. (2005) “The new public diplomacy: Between theory and practice,” in Jan Melissen (ed), The new public diplomacy, London: Palgrave Macmillan, 3-27.
25. Mitchell, J. (1986) International Cultural Relations, London: Allen and Unwin.
26. Mogensen K. (2015) “International trust and public diplomacy”, International Communication Gazette, 77 (4): 315-336.
27. Mor, B. D. (2007) “The rhetoric of public diplomacy and propaganda wars: A view from self-presentation theory,” European Journal of Political Research, 46 (5): 661-683.
28. Nye, J. S. (2008) “Public diplomacy and soft power,” The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 616 (1): 94-109.
29. Ogawa, T. (2009) “Origin and Development of Japan’s Public Diplomacy”, in Snow N. and P. M. Taylor (eds.) Routledge Handbook of Public Diplomacy, London: Routledge, 270-281.
30. Oktay, A. S. (2015) “Diaspora-making as a State-led Project: Turkey’s Expansive Diaspora Strategy and its Implications for Emigrant and Kin Populations”, Unpublished PhD Thesis, European University Institute.
31. Öktem, K. (2014) “Turkey’s New Diaspora Policy: The Challenge of Inclusivity, Outreach and Capacity”, Report prepared for Istanbul Policy Center, Sabanci University, Stiftung Mercator Initiative.
32. Pratkanis, A. (2009) “Public Diplomacy in International Conflicts: A Social Influence Analysis,” in Snow N. and P. M. Taylor (eds.), Routledge Handbook of Public Diplomacy, London: Routledge, 11-153.
33. Şahin, M., S. Çevik (eds) (2015) Türk Dış Politikası ve Kamu Diplomasisi, Ankara: Nobel Akademik Yayıncılık.
34. Sancar, G. A. (2015) “Turkey’s Public Diplomacy: Its Actors, Stakeholders, and Tools”, in Çevik S. B. and P. Seib (eds.) Turkey’s Public Diplomacy, New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 13-42.
35. Schneider, C. P. (2005) “Culture communicates: US diplomacy that Works,” in Melissen J. (ed.), The new public diplomacy, London: Palgrave Macmillan, 147-168.
36. Seo H., S. Thorson (2016) “Empathy in Public Diplomacy: Strategic Academic Engagement with North Korea”, in Pamment J. (ed.), Intersections between Public Diplomacy & International Development: Case Studies in Converging Fields, CPD Perspectives on Public Diplomacy, Los Angeles: Figueroa Press.
37. Sharp, P. (2005) “Revolutionary States, Outlaw Regimes and the Techniques of Public Diplomacy”, in Melissen J. (ed), The new public diplomacy, London: Palgrave Macmillan, 106-123.
38. Tabak, H. (2016) The Kosovar Turks and Post-Kemalist Turkey: Foreign Policy, Socialisation and Resistance, London: I.B.Tauris.
39. Tabak, H. (2017) “Manifestations of Islam in Turkey’s Foreign Policy”, in Tabak H., Ö. Tüfekçi and A. Chiriatti (eds) Domestic and Regional Uncertainties in the New Turkey, Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 85-104.
40. Tuch, H. (1990) Communicating with the World: US Public Diplomacy Overseas, New York: St Martin’s Press. Tufekci, O. (2013) “Another ‘the Last Eurasianist’: Davutoğlu’s Eurasianist Rhetoric”, Caucasus International, 2 (3): 101-109.
41. Tufekci, O. (2014) “Ahmet Davutoğlu’s Foreign Policy Understanding: A Blend of Westernist and Multiculturalist Eurasianism”, The Arab World Geographer, 17 (3): 275-289.
42. Ulusoy, K. (2015) “Turkish Foreign Policy in a Transatlantic Context: A Case for Soft Power and Public Diplomacy,” in Çevik S. B. and P. Seib (eds.) Turkey’s Public Diplomacy, New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 153-172.
43. Üngör, Ç. (2015) “Expanding Perspective: Reaching Out to China and the East,” in Çevik S. B. and P. Seib (eds.) Turkey’s Public Diplomacy, New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 213-232.
44. Zöllner, O. (2009) “German Public Diplomacy: The Dialogue of Cultures”, in Snow N. and P. M. Taylor (eds.) Routledge Handbook of Public Diplomacy, London: Routledge, 262-269.
45. Interview with Davut Nuriler, 08 December 2017
46. Interview with Hüseyin Kansu, 01 November 2017
47. Interview with Rıfat Sait, 15 April 2017
48. Internet Sources& News coverage
49. Akşam (2014) “Bilge Kral anılıyor”, 19 October, www.aksam.com.tr/dunya/bilge-kral-aniliyor/haber-346791 Anadolu Agency (2013a) “Balkan Türklerinden Erdoğan’a destek mitingi”, 14 June, aa.com.tr/tr/dunya/ balkan-turklerinden-erdogana-destek-mitingi/238550
50. Anadolu Agency (2013b) “Balkanlar ve Malezya’da Erdoğan’a destek mitingi”, aa.com.tr/tr/turkiye/balkanlarve- malezyada-erdogana-destek-mitingi/238486
51. Anadolu Agency (2016) “Bosniaks in Serbia hold rally in support of Turkey”, 08 August, aa.com.tr/en/ europe/bosniaks-in-serbia-hold-rally-in-support-of-turkey/623505
52. Anadolu Agency (2017a) “Erdoğan’dan, Aliya İzzetbegoviç mesajı”, 19 October, aa.com.tr/tr/turkiye/ erdogandan-aliya-izzetbegovic-mesaji/942570
53. Anadolu Agency (2017b) “Turkey helps restore 16th-century Bosnian mosque”, 12 May, aa.com.tr/en/ turkey/turkey-helps-restore-16th-century-bosnian-mosque/817097
54. Anadolu Agency (2017c) “TDV Karadağ’da Boşnakça Kur’an-ı Kerim meali dağıttı”, 03 June, aa.com.tr/tr/ dunya/tdv-karadagda-bosnakca-kuran-i-kerim-meali-dagitti/833885
55. Balkan Insight (2013) “Kosovo Textbooks Soften Line on Ottoman Rule”, 22 January, www.balkaninsight. com/en/article/kosovo-textbooks-soften-line-on-ottoman
56. Balkan Insight (2014) “New Macedonia Albanian Party Denies Erdogan Link”, 24 November, www. balkaninsight.com/en/article/new-albanian-party-in-macedonia-denies-erdogan-connection
57. DHA (2012) “Davutoğlu: Arnavut Halkı ile ortak bir kültür ve tarihe sahibiz”, 05 September, arsiv.dha.com. tr/davutoglu-arnavut-halki-ile-ortak-bir-kultur-ve-tarihe-sahibiz_359416.html.
58. Haberler (2014) “Arnavutluk İslam Birliği Başkanı Bruçay’dan Diyanet İşleri Başkanı Mehmet Görmez’e Ziyaret,” 22 May, https://www.haberler.com/arnavutluk-islam-birligi-baskani-brucay-dan-6058275-haberi/
59. Haberturk (2010), “‘Bilge Kral’ın Erdoğan’a vasiyeti” 19 October, www.haberturk.com/dunya/haber/562955- bilge-kralin-erdogana-vasiyeti
60. Hürriyet (2013) “Yedi ülkede Erdoğan’a destek mitingi”, 15 June, www.hurriyet.com.tr/yedi-ulkede-erdogana- destek-mitingi-23506365
61. Hürriyet (2017) “Turkey’s TİKA changes strategy in favor of development projects”, May 20. Report by Sevil Erkuş, www.hurriyetdailynews.com/turkeys-tika-changes-strategy-in-favor-of-developmentprojects- 113304
62. Kenan Surkovic (2017) “The Art of Carpet Weaving in Bosnia and Herzegovina”, Islamic Arts Magazine, 17 July, islamicartsmagazine.com/magazine/view/the_art_of_carpet_weaving_in_bosnia_and_herzegovina/ Meclis Haber (2011) “Balkan heyetinin TBMM’deki temasları”, 12 December, www.meclishaber.gov.tr/ develop/owa/haber_portal.aciklama?p1=118446
63. MoS (2013) “Memorandum of Support to Turkish Government, by the Muslim Youth Movement of Malaysia (ABIM)”, 14 June, https://tr.scribd.com/document/147800814/Memorandum-Support- Turkey-ABIM
64. Milliyet (2012) “Bulgaristan parlemento heyeti TBMM’de” 26 June, www.milliyet.com.tr/bulgaristanparlemento- heyeti-tbmm-de-siyaset-1559106/
65. Reuters (2017) “Turkey’s Erdogan gets warm welcome in mainly Muslim Serbian town”, 11 October, https:// www.reuters.com/article/us-serbia-turkey/turkeys-erdogan-gets-warm-welcome-in-mainlymuslim- serbian-town-idUSKBN1CG24F
66. Sabah (2016) “Balkan Müslümanları ‘anavatan’ Türkiye için nöbette,” 09 August, https://www.sabah.com.tr/ dunya/2016/08/09/balkan-muslumanlari-anavatan-turkiye-icin-nobette
67. Star (2016) “‘15 Temmuz Darbe Girişimi’ Saraybosna’da anlatıldı”, 10 October, www.star.com.tr/guncel/15- temmuz-darbe-girisimi-saraybosnada-anlatildi-haber-1148402/
68. TCCB, 2015, “600 Yıldır Arnavut Kardeşlerimizle Beraber Bugünlere Geldik, Beraber Geleceğe Yürüyoruz”, 13 May, https://www.tccb.gov.tr/haberler/410/32290/600-yildir-arnavut-kardeslerimizle-beraberbugunlere- geldik-beraber-gelecege-yuruyoruz.html
69. TIKA (2013a), “TİKA’s Mosque Restoration Projects,” www.tika.gov.tr/en/news/tikas_mosque_restoration_ projects-8601
70. TIKA (2013b) “Bosna-Hersek Proje & Faaliyetleri” www.tika.gov.tr/upload/oldpublication/bosnahersek.pdf
71. TIKA (2015a) “TİKA Çalışanları Bulundukları Ülkelerde Çağdaş Alperenlerdir”, www.tika.gov.tr/tr/haber/ tika_calisanlari_bulunduklari_ulkelerde_cagdas_alperenlerdir-21645
72. TIKA (2015b) “ANALYSIS: Turkey’s Balkan policy not interest-oriented”, www.tika.gov.tr/en/news/analysis_ turkeys_balkan_policy_not_interest_oriented-21145
73. TIKA (2016) “Balkan Müslümanları “Anavatan” Türkiye İçin Nöbette”, www.tika.gov.tr/tr/haber/balkan_ muslumanlari_anavatan_turkiye_icin_nobette-24298
74. Time Balkan (2016) “Üsküp’te Türkiye’ye destek mitingi düzenlenecek”, 27 July, timebalkan.com/ makedonyadan-turkiyeye-destek-devam-ediyor/
75. Time Balkan (2017) “Sırbistan’da Erdoğan’a destek mitingi”, 06 April, timebalkan.com/sirbistanda-erdoganadestek- mitingi/
76. UNESCO (2013), “Restoration of Ottoman cultural heritage in South-East Europe”, 10 December, www. unesco.org/new/en/member-states/single-view/news/restoration_of_ottoman_cultural_heritage_ in_south_east_europ/
77. World Bulletin (2013) “Turkey to restore home where Aliya Izetbegovic was born”, 20 April, www. worldbulletin.net/haber/107082/turkey-to-restore-home-where-aliya-izetbegovic-was-born
78. Yenişafak (2016) “Cumhurbaşkanı Erdoğan’ın Aliya İzzetbegoviç yazısı”, 19 October, www.yenisafak.com/ hayat/cumhurbaskani-erdoganin-aliya-izzetbegovic-yazisi-2550178
79. YTB (2015) “Saraybosna’da evlad-ı fatihan zirvesi gerçekleştirildi”, 14 December, https://www.ytb.gov.tr/ haberler/saraybosnada-evlad-i-fatihan-zirvesi-gerceklestirildi
80. YTB (2017a) “Türkiye Mezunları Dernekleri Eğitim Programı”, YTB official website, 23 November, https:// www.ytb.gov.tr/haberler/turkiye-mezunlari-dernekleri-egitim-programi
81. YTB (2017b) “Türkiye Yeniden: Mezun Buluşması – İstanbul”, 25 November, https://www.ytb.gov.tr/ haberler/turkiye-yeniden-mezun-bulusmasi-istanbul.