Bridging the divides that separate us
View
WHAT seems like a sudden negative turn in trade relations between Turkey and the US following the trade war since August 10 is neither sudden nor purely economic.
While the crisis seems to be about Us-turkey relations, the impact is felt as far as Johannesburg and Blantyre. The domino effect on the global economy is greater than expected. I would go so far as to as to suggest its implications for global governance are astronomical.
The crisis began when US President Donald Trump announced via Twitter that the US would double the tariffs on steel and aluminium imports from Turkey.
The reason given was that Ankara had refused to release from prison an evangelical pastor from the US. Pastor Andrew Brunson was arrested over allegations of involvement in the 2016 attempted coup d’état against Turkey’s president, Recip Erdogan.
The Turkish currency, the lira, was quick to decline, losing 35% of its value against the US dollar in a couple of hours, worsening Turkey’s debt status and its general economic status.
The contagion effect spread like a virus to other emerging markets and inflation rose, threatening the lives of the poor all over the world. This revealed the soft underbelly of an emerging economy that is heavily reliant on foreign currency loans.
Turkey quickly retaliated by doubling tariffs against tobacco, alcohol and passenger cars imported from the US. And Turkey escalated the war of words by alleging that the crisis was deliberate and calculated sabotage by Turkey’s enemies.
The Turkish people were asked to boycott US electronic products and opt for alternative goods from their country and South Korea.
Turkey framed this in terms of “the West is attacking us”, helping to mobilise public sympathy and solidarity with others in the world.
It’s no surprise that Qatar was the first country to offer Turkey investments worth $15billion
(R223bn) to ward off the impact of the US tariffs.
Its emir has borne the brunt of a US economic blockade imposed by Trump in 2017 as he accused Qatar of funding radical extremism while embracing Saudi Arabia, which was also fingered in supporting extremism.
Turkey went on the offensive, looking for alternative markets for its exports in Europe, where the Trump administration’s posture on trade and Nato has strained relations. It also reached out to other emerging economies hit most by the US action on Turkey. It is trying to harness global discomfort with US’S bully posture across the world.
Therefore, the crisis has to do with more than just economics.
There is no doubt that the geopolitics, personalities and global transformations have much to do with it. Trump’s actions and the counter-actions by Erdogan combine personalities and geopolitics in ways we are yet to fully understand.
For years, the relationship between the US and Turkey has been defined by the shifting geopolitics of the region and the relationship between the US and emerging powers in general.
This relationship has taken many problematic turns, encompassing fears that the emerging powers were asserting their own paths in their regions and globally.
This would threaten the ability of global powers such as the US to significantly define the terms of engagement in the Middle East and other regions.
Another element is the “external enemy” helping the elite in the global south to consolidate power domestically and gloss over domestic problems.
For some time, Turkey has been sending signals about its regional power status and ability to shape developments in the region.
In this regard, it has been in competition with Us-supported Egypt and Russia-backed Syria.
It has, by extension and for other reasons, been seeking to redefine its relations with the US and Russia in the hope of assuming greater regional leadership and global stature.
Turkey has difficult relations with these neighbours and other states in the region, which makes its claim to regional leadership questionable.
Turkey sees the US as working on regime change throughout the Middle East, and is intent on stopping this. But it also trying to avoid dealing honestly with domestic problems such as the Kurdish issue.
For Turkey, the demand to release the pastor amounts to undermining sovereign equality between the US and Turkey. But for the US, it is about lack of trust and faith in Turkey’s ability to administer justice.
Turkey-us relations are also clouded by differences in Syria.
All this means that the tariff put in place measures have served merely as a trigger for the explosion of tensions that have built up over a long period.
They also serve as examples of how the relations between dominant and emerging powers get shaped by the need to assert authority on the part of big powers; and the need to assert independent positions on the part of emerging powers.
It also showcases how domestic imperatives shape these countries’ foreign policy outlooks. This has been a source of tensions, difficulties and even animosity between dominant powers and emerging regional powers.
So we need something more than stopping tariff wars. We need serious dialogue to redefine the relations between both countries – one that could identify areas where they could work together, find ways of respecting irreconcilable differences and learn to live with the differences.
Mutual respect, operating according to international laws and norms, honouring international principles like co-operation and independence, and dialogue to resolve issues form the basis on which lasting solutions can be found.
Emerging powers have sprung up and are unlikely to disappear. Dominant powers will remain influential for a long time.
The two need to write a new script on relations, one that enriches the world rather than threatens chaos and harm to poor and peripheral people.
Zondi is a professor at the Institute for Strategic and Political Affairs at the University of Pretoria.