Two years ago, in our AVİM commentary titled “The Necessity of Constructive Eurasianism,” we dealt with the notion of Eurasianism and stated that this notion is prevalently categorized as being inherently at variance with or antagonistic towards the West.[1] We stressed that these approaches do not do justice to the term Eurasia itself. In this respect, we expressed the following views:
“Geographically, Eurasia covers a huge landmass from Lisbon to Vladivostok. Thus, Eurasianism for Turkey does not necessarily have to be defined or developed along such lines. In fact, what would be in Turkey’s best interest would be to adopt a ‘Constructive Eurasianism’ that on the one hand values Turkey’s institutionalized connections with the West, and on the other hand looks into the potential offered by increased ties with Turkey’s east. In this context, this Eurasianism promoted by the Center for Eurasian Studies (AVİM) rests on the rejection of the negative interpretation of Eurasianism, which is interpreted basically as the rejection of the West.
[…] the Constructive Eurasianism advocated by AVİM requires a proper framework program to be established right from the beginning in order for Turkey to expand its relations in the Asian part of Eurasia. This proper framework, starting from simple bilateral agreements, will allow Turkey’s Constructive Eurasianism for example to exist side by side with Russia’s Neo-Eurasianism in the same geography. Turkey’s Constructive Eurasianism should be understood as geared towards encouraging regional cooperation. As such, a framework program will help to differentiate Turkey’s Constructive Eurasianism from the likes to Russia’s Neo-Eurasianism that seeks to establish a sphere of (Russian) influence rather than regional cooperation.”
In the said AVİM commentary, we also stated that;
“In sum, Constructive Eurasianism, unlike other forms of Eurasianism prevalent in Turkey, will benefit Turkey because it rejects creating new rivalries and antagonisms, and instead seeks to create new avenues for cooperation so that Turkey can position itself properly in a changing world. This will allow Turkey to maintain its integration with the West while at the same time start a new integration process with the East. As such, Constructive Eurasianism will allow Turkey to function as a true nexus between the West and the East.”
We have reviewed and discussed in our recent AVİM analysis the European Union’s (EU) new strategy on Central Asia.[2] As it was explained in detail in our said analysis, The EU announced last month that the Council of the EU on 17 June adopted conclusions on a new EU strategy regarding the Central Asia. The EU, with this new strategy is aiming to adapt the EU policies to new opportunities that have emerged in the region. It recognizes the strategic role of Central Asia in global efforts to promote Euro-Asian connectivity and stresses that these efforts should bring benefits to the region. The new EU strategy states that the Union will focus on promoting resilience, prosperity, and regional cooperation in Central Asia.
The new EU Central Asia strategy, from our perspective, represents a good example for the notion of Constructive Eurasianism. It would be beneficial for both the EU and Turkey to cooperate in the Central Asia in the framework of this notion. For such an outcome, the EU should refrain from considering Turkey as a rival which she has done so in the Balkans. Instead, she should cooperate with its 55-year partner of Turkey in Central Asia. It should not be forgotten that power emerges from unity.
*Picture: https://avim.org.tr
[1] Mehmet Oğuzhan Tulun and Teoman Ertuğrul Tulun, “The Necessity Of Constructive Eurasianism,” Center For Eurasian Studies (AVİM), June 12, 2017, sec. Commentary, 2017/51, https://avim.org.tr/en/Yorum/THE-NECESSITY-OF-CONSTRUCTIVE-EURASIANISM
[2] Teoman Ertuğrul Tulun, “Eu’s Central Asia Strategy 2019: Belated And Self Centered,” Center For Eurasian Studies (AVİM), July 11, 2019, sec. Analysis, 2018/16, https://avim.org.tr/en/Analiz/EU-S-CENTRAL-ASIA-STRATEGY-2019-BELATED-AND-SELF-CENTERED
© 2009-2024 Center for Eurasian Studies (AVİM) All Rights Reserved
No comments yet.
-
POPE FRANCIS IN AZERBAIJAN
Teoman Ertuğrul TULUN 14.10.2016 -
EMMANUEL MACRON CONTINUES WITH DISPARAGING COMMENTS
Teoman Ertuğrul TULUN 04.11.2019 -
THE SHATTERING OF REGIONAL ANCHOR FOR STABILITY: THE PASSING OF KING BHUMIBOL ADULYADEJ
Teoman Ertuğrul TULUN 28.11.2016 -
URGENT NEED TO STRENGTHEN THE EFFECTIVE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS CONVENTION
Teoman Ertuğrul TULUN 16.04.2020 -
CONSTRUCTIVE EURASIANISM: REVISITING DEFINITIONS
Teoman Ertuğrul TULUN 08.01.2025
-
GEORGIA’S ANAKLIA PORT ON THE MIDDLE CORRIDOR ROUTE
Gülperi GÜNGÖR 22.07.2024 -
SOUTH ASIA: THE FIELD OF NEW ALLIANCES AND NEW CONFLICTS
Selim SEÇKİN 17.03.2020 -
THE EUROPEAN UNION AND THE CAUCASUS
Alev KILIÇ 06.12.2012 -
CALL FOR PAPERS: REVIEW OF ARMENIAN STUDIES (ISSUE #32)
AVİM 11.08.2015 -
THE ‘ARMENIAN QUESTION’ IN UKRAINE - IV: THE PRUDENCE OF OFFICIAL KYIV
Turgut Kerem TUNCEL 17.05.2021
-
THE ARMENIAN QUESTION - BASIC KNOWLEDGE AND DOCUMENTATION -
THE TRUTH WILL OUT -
RADİKAL ERMENİ UNSURLARCA GERÇEKLEŞTİRİLEN MEZALİMLER VE VANDALİZM -
PATRIOTISM PERVERTED -
MEN ARE LIKE THAT -
BAKÜ-TİFLİS-CEYHAN BORU HATTININ YAŞANAN TARİHİ -
INTERNATIONAL SCHOLARS ON THE EVENTS OF 1915 -
FAKE PHOTOS AND THE ARMENIAN PROPAGANDA -
ERMENİ PROPAGANDASI VE SAHTE RESİMLER -
A Letter From Japan - Strategically Mum: The Silence of the Armenians -
Japonya'dan Bir Mektup - Stratejik Suskunluk: Ermenilerin Sessizliği -
Anastas Mikoyan: Confessions of an Armenian Bolshevik -
Sovyet Sonrası Ukrayna’da Devlet, Toplum ve Siyaset - Değişen Dinamikler, Dönüşen Kimlikler -
Ermeni Sorunuyla İlgili İngiliz Belgeleri (1912-1923) - British Documents on Armenian Question (1912-1923) -
Turkish-Russian Academics: A Historical Study on the Caucasus -
Gürcistan'daki Müslüman Topluluklar: Azınlık Hakları, Kimlik, Siyaset -
Armenian Diaspora: Diaspora, State and the Imagination of the Republic of Armenia -
ERMENİ SORUNU - TEMEL BİLGİ VE BELGELER (2. BASKI)
-
CONFERENCE TITLED “HUNGARY’S PERSPECTIVES ON THE TURKIC WORLD"