Who is in Charge of Making Decisions? The Competition between the Government and the Foreign Policy Bureaucracy in Turkey (1991-2014)

Abstract

This study argues that the fragmentation in foreign policymaking due to adopting different foreign policy ideas, that is, ideas of the elected leadership and the bureaucracy, is likely to generate competition between the state agencies that constitute the foreign policy bureaucracy. Turkish foreign policy between 1991 and 2014 offers an explanatory platform to understand how an anti-establishment, revisionist party demonstrates its toolbox in defining divergent foreign policy ideas, whereas the state’s foreign policy elites stood by with preestablished ideas. I suggest that the term between 1991 and 2002 was an example of the bureaucratic decision-making model. In this model, state agencies work through their internal decision-making systems and cooperate to inform the ultimate decision-maker. In this vein, Turkish foreign policy between 2002 and 2011 was a period that showed how the AKP government introduced its foreign policy agenda while working in the bureaucratic decision-making model. I also argue that Turkish foreign policy of Turkey from 2011 to 2014 introduced the governmental decision-making. In this period, the purpose of government was to formulate policies against the preestablished ideas of Turkish foreign policy bureaucracy. The anti-establishment feature of AKP’s foreign policy embodied the divergence between the elected and appointed officials. As a case study, the bilateral relations between Turkey and Israel were based on the cooperation between the armies and the MFAs between 1991 and 2002. The collaboration gave both sides the capacity to operate in Middle Eastern politics. In the term between 2002 and 2014, however, the bilateral ties were tested with multiple crises while Turkey’s decision-making system transitioned to the governmental decision-making model. The decline of the appointed bureaucrats in decision-making and the rise of elected officials ended the years based on partnership. Overall, the analysis based on a series of interviews conducted with 83 foreign policymakers in Turkey and Israel shows that the turf war in the foreign policy bureaucracy is a conceptual framework for comprehending how elected officials use bureaucratic tactics to undermine the involvement of bureaucrats in decision-making processes.