The recent tensions between Turkey and the U.S. have reached a new stage as a result of the U.S.’s suspension of visa services in a completely indecent diplomatic and resentful manner and Turkey’s equal retaliation. Of course, even if there is a problem between strategic allies that cannot be underestimated, the history of bilateral relations shows that this is not something to exaggerate.
Despite those who demanded U.S. mandate during the years of the Independence War, like those who justify the situation at home today, Turkey-U.S. relations did not begin on good terms. The most important reason for this is the seeds sowed by Henry Morgenthau, the last U.S. ambassador to the Ottoman state, who personally was an enemy of Turks and Islam. His memories, full of made-to-order racist descriptions that constituted the basis of Armenians’ arguments, created the U.S.’s century-old discourse on this issue. While the issue is blatantly obvious in history, the discourse established on the allegations put forward by this anti-Turkey ambassador has been used like a whip to supposedly discipline Turkey.
The lesson taught by our ambassador Ahmed Rüstem
Let’s recall a historic instance that will set an example to all of our diplomats regarding the hypocrisy that the U.S. and its diplomats are causing today.
Ahmed (Alfred) Rüstem, son of a Polish-born convert father, was sent to Washington in 1914 as an ambassador. Seeing the anti-Turkey environment, he informed both the government through diplomacy and the U.S. public with articles that he wrote in newspapers. While denying the campaigns initiated against the Ottomans and the U.S. media’s allegations of pressure and massacres of Armenians through his articles, he also pedantically called on the U.S. administration. Ahmed Rüstem, who had to skip diplomatic channels, directed a crucial question to the U.S. administration in an article:
"If it had been found that the blacks had made an agreement with Japan in order to facilitate the U.S. invasion, could any of them survive today?"
It is no secret that those who act against the U.S. are followed all over the world. The American legend is also based on this pursuit. The scenarios of Hollywood movies are also built on legitimizing the illegal operations in this issue.
So, let's update Ahmed Rüstem's question:
What would you have said if the ringleader and the supporters of the Fetullah Terrorist Organization (FETÖ), who you are harboring in your country, were to cooperate with some Americans working at the Turkish Embassy in Washington and to conspire against you?
In fact, the answer to this question is hidden in the story of Ahmed Rüstem. Immediately after his article that he shared with the public in which the U.S.’s dirty linen was published, the first reaction came directly from President Wilson. They immediately asked Ahmed Rüstem to retract his words, apologize for them or deny them. Maintaining his firm stance, the ambassador declared that he would continue the war and would not remain indifferent to the slander targeting his country, even if they violate diplomatic rules. The Ottoman ambassador was declared persona non grata in a short time, and he officially announced that he would leave the U.S. within fifteen days, maintaining his dignified attitude.
Character of Turkey-US relations
Of course, this is not the only breaking point in Turkey-U.S. relations. It is a starting point. Having served as an obstacle, not as an ally in Turkey's most vital affairs, the U.S. has often maintained its relations with Turkey far from international diplomatic codes and courtesy. Most of the ambassadors the U.S. assigned to Turkey have generally acted like a colonial governor while the U.S. has not shown minimum courtesy even toward the highest representatives of Turkey in their contacts in the country most of the time.
The Johnson letter also revealed that the U.S. let down its ally that fought along with it in the same front even in the hardest of times. It was the U.S. that prevented and imposed an embargo on Turkey in the 1974 Cyprus Peace Operation. It has not been forgotten that it embraced the 1980 coup, which is responsible for the FETÖ trouble installed in our system, saying “Our boys did it.” Although it did not allow any Marxist movements in its own close interest regions, the U.S. saw Turkey as a defense point against the USSR and clandestinely supported the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) and similar Marxist organizations as it supports the PYD/YPG today. It was also the politics of the U.S. that invaded Iraq and set fire to our region, and that pushed Turkey to the field and isolated it in the Syria issue.
With and after the March 1 resolution, the U.S. tested Turkey with which it would never co-operate in the areas it wanted to dominate. As a result, Turkey was no longer a country that waited for instructions. With these tests, both sides understood that the concept of strategic alliance was nothing more than a formula of postponing problems. The U.S.’s true face once again came to light with its behavior after July 15.
Turkey is taking steps in the defense industry and conveying the message that it will remain in the Syria field through the Operation Euphrates Shield, that it will act in Idlib with its new allies without seeking permission against the threats and that it may carry out foreign trade with Russia and Iran in Turkish lira – all of which causes the U.S. to freak out.
Now Turkey has to maintain its war with its equanimity and honorable diplomacy. Of course, the U.S.’s incompetent diplomats and rough and intrusive policies in our region are declining in influence with every passing day – which is the main reason for its agitation. But it is not a process to be completed soon. Therefore, it should not be forgotten that so-called mutual compliments and meaningless concepts such as strategic alliance will continue a while more even though relevant parties do not believe in them.
The main issue is what will happen from now on. What kind of a regional structure will emerge and where Turkey will stand?