(The Turkish Post) – By Doğu Ergil
From Strategic Depth to Strategic Isolation
In the early 2000s, Turkey stepped onto the international stage with a foreign policy vision centered on the doctrine of “strategic depth.” This vision aimed to position Turkey as the leading power in the Middle East by leveraging its historical legacy, geographical location, and ideological affinities.
However, two decades later, it is clear that this ambition has not been realized.
In my view, the primary reason for this failure lies in the ideological foundation of the policy — namely, Islamism. The wealthy Sunni states of the region had become deeply wary of radical Islamist movements and were reluctant to support Turkey, whose policies often aligned — or appeared to align — with such actors on the ground.
Another overlooked obstacle was how the legacy of the Ottoman Empire is remembered in the Middle East. Contrary to Ankara’s assumptions, the Ottoman Empire is often seen not as a source of nostalgia but as a symbol of past domination — a power from which the region had to liberate itself. This perception, however, was never fully grasped by Turkey’s Islamist elite.
Neither its political alliances, nor its erratic diplomacy, nor the fragility of its economy enabled Turkey to rise as a regional leader. Moreover, developments such as the post-Arab Spring reconfigurations, the Syrian civil war, and the deepening of the Kurdish issue further pushed Ankara into a position of regional isolation and diminishing influence.
⸻
A New Actor: The Rise of Israel
Just as Turkey’s regional influence was waning, a new contender emerged on the scene: Israel. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu made two striking declarations that marked this turning point:
“We changed the Middle East — and we will change it even more.”
“The Ottoman Empire is not coming back!”
These statements were not merely symbolic — they conveyed a determination to redraw the regional map. Israel’s assertive posture toward Iran, its expanding diplomatic and security ties with Arab states, the quiet backing it has received from Arab capitals during the Gaza war, and its deepening partnership with the United States all reflect its newfound regional role.
⸻
Turkey: Anxiety, Hesitation, and a Historic Crossroads
Netanyahu’s words stirred unease within Turkey’s ruling establishment:
“Are we next?”
But this anxiety is not just about external fragility. It is rooted in one of the country’s most unresolved internal dilemmas: the Kurdish question. The persistent domestic conflict has paralyzed Turkey’s strategic mind and undermined its regional ambitions.
At this critical juncture, a historic opportunity stands before Turkey:
To pursue reconciliation with the Kurds and forge new alliances with Kurdish entities beyond its borders. Abdullah Öcalan, long recognized by the state as the principal interlocutor and viewed by many Kurds as a political and spiritual leader, has also called for such a process:
“Let’s begin without delay.”
Yet, short-term political calculations and domestic power games continue to override long-term strategic thinking. As a result, the peace process is either stalled or deliberately frozen.
⸻
Israel–Kurdish Rapprochement: A Red Flag for Ankara
Israel’s recent engagement with certain Kurdish groups in Northern Iraq and Syria may mark a turning point — or a wake-up call — for Ankara. If Israel begins to offer the Kurds what Turkey has long withheld, or even promises them international recognition or autonomy, it could push Turkey into a strategic impasse, both domestically and diplomatically.
The Kurdish issue — long suppressed by the Turkish state and made more intractable by denial — may now be internationalized thanks to Israel’s maneuvering. In such a scenario, Turkey could lose its rhetorical superiority, see its credibility eroded among regional populations, and find its diplomatic isolation deepen.
⸻
Turkey’s Future in a Changing Middle East
The Middle East is entering a new phase of multipolar — yet chaotic — power dynamics. The relative withdrawal of the United States, the growing involvement of China and Russia, Iran’s regional ambitions, Israel’s aggressive posture, and the pragmatism of Arab regimes are reshaping the geopolitical equation.
In this new context, Turkey’s role will depend on whether it can cultivate domestic peace and produce a constructive foreign policy.
A Turkey that resolves the Kurdish issue through inclusive, peaceful means can secure its internal stability and prosperity, while also cooperating with Kurds abroad to counterbalance Israel’s growing influence. Otherwise, a state plagued by internal strife and economic fragility is likely to remain a reactive, sidelined actor in the regional game.
⸻
Conclusion
Turkey now faces a stark choice:
It can either retreat inward, trapped by the traumas of the past and the fears of the present — or it can recognize the evolving regional realities and enter into a new social contract with the Kurds.
To win the Great Game, Turkey must first make peace within.
Because when the domestic front is weak, no victory on the foreign front can ever be lasting.
