Brotherhood by ethnonym. At the summit in Baku, the Turkic Council replenished with Uzbekistan
The summit of the Turkic Council (CU) was held in the Azerbaijani capital. He was remembered by two the news. Uzbekistan officially joined the Cooperation Council of Turkic-Speaking States, and the former President of Kazakhstan, Nursultan Nazarbayev, who holds the title of Elbasy (“leader of the nation”) in his homeland, was declared lifelong honorary chairman of the Turkic Council.
This interstate entity with headquarters in Turkish Istanbul was created in the autumn of 2009 at a summit in Azerbaijani Nakhichevan. Then it included four states: Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Turkey.
Thus ended the many years of attempts by the leaders of the four countries to form an international organization based on ethnic and linguistic affinity. Actually, from the beginning of the nineties, Turkey was persistently promoting this idea, having seen the opportunity to unite around itself a sort of brotherhood by ethnonym at the expense of the Central Asian republics that fell out of the orbit of Soviet influence.
The first time she convened a summit of closely related countries in her capital back in the distant 1992 year. Then the event was ignored by Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan, focused on an independent (in some ways even separate, isolationist), independent policy. However, their neighbors accepted the Turkish idea, albeit with some caution. At the first stage, the organization was exclusively culturally oriented. The communication of countries went mainly along the lines of Turkic arts and languages. Even the International Organization of Turkic Culture (TÜRKSOY) was created, developing joint activities.
Later, in the wake of the successes of the Turkish economy, other ties, in particular parliamentary ones, began to strengthen (for example, the parliamentary Assembly of Turkic-speaking countries appeared). Then Ankara’s partners entered into an education agreement with her (TÜRKPA), which moved Turkish emissaries to the former Soviet republics, who were engaged in the preparation of a new elite there that was close to them in spirit, ideology and faith. In fact, it was the “soft power” of Turkey, spreading its influence in the neighboring region.
Even Turkmenistan could not resist such pressure. In the summer of 2014, at a summit in Turkish Bodrum, members of the Turkic Council decided to admit it to their ranks. However, this initiative did not receive further development, and Turkmenistan is still listed as a state - a potential member of the CU. But the first regional Diaspora representation of the Turkic Council appeared in Ukraine (the Azerbaijanis living in Kiev took care of this). Hungary became an observer country in the Customs Union, because, according to Prime Minister Viktor Orban, “it stands on the Kypchak-Turkic basis.”
The dynamics of the development of relations in the Turkic Council pleased its participants, promised good prospects, until an attempted coup d'etat took place in Turkey. Turkish leader Recep Erdogan blamed Fethullah Gulen, a prominent public figure in Turkey and the entire Turkic world, who lives in the United States.
Then the first crack ran in the Turkic Council. The fact is that the Turkish educational programs in the countries of Central Asia were implemented precisely by the structures of Gulen. The “soft power” of his supporters not only promoted the interests of Turkey in the post-Soviet republics, but also spread the influence of the preacher Gulen himself. Over time, his pupils rose in the local administrative hierarchy, took high government posts.
In Kyrgyzstan, for example, the then Turkish ambassador to Bishkek (the case, as we recall, was in the summer of 2016 of the year) Metin Kılıç counted about three thousand Gulen’s supporters in government, administrative and public positions. For a small republic this is a lot. It is no accident that the then President of Kyrgyzstan Almazbek Atambayev refused to condemn Gulen as the organizer of the coup, which is why he quarreled with Recep Erdogan.
The second factor that shook the record leadership of Ankara in the Turkic Council was the fall of the Turkish economy. According to the International Monetary Fund, from 2016 to 2019, its GDP fell from $ 859 to $ 766 billion. The Turkish lira went down. Saving her, Ankara threw its gold reserves to the market and spent almost 200 tons of gold in a short time. The treasury of the republic was reduced from 504 to 320 tons and became the third among the countries of the Turkic Council (Kazakhstan has now accumulated 380 tons of gold, and Uzbekistan - 328).
As a result, the summit held in Baku was marked not by new integration programs, but by the next exaltation of Kazakhstan's Elbasy and accession to the CU of Uzbekistan. The latter circumstance, of course, will be good for the prospects of the Turkic Council.
Russian experts are zealously following the international activities of the former Soviet republics. They meticulously record which of the actions of our CIS partners do not coincide with Russia's interests. Now the term “multi-vector” (the first to use it was Nursultan Nazarbayev), which refers to the contacts of Russia's partners with opposing countries, is now in use.
They talk and write a lot about this, starting from the classical understanding of international relations. In the last century, they relied on stable military alliances or political associations of states. In the new century, the picture has changed radically. Today, most countries walk between unions and associations, one way or another side adjacent to the three world leaders - the United States, Russia, China.
This can be seen not only in the post-Soviet republics drifting in the mentioned triangle. Take, for example, the European Union. Here a group of countries (Hungary, Italy, Austria) finds its interests in active cooperation with Russia. Another group (Poland and the Baltic countries) favors the United States. And although these relations are not legally formalized in allied relations, they create real problems for all EU countries and violate its unity.
Similar collisions appear even in such a super-disciplined organization as the NATO military alliance. Recently, fearing for its safety, Norway decided not to join (the government debate showed) in the missile defense of the alliance. About Turkey, which is openly fronting with NATO, we have heard quite well. There are other similar examples.
Now the seemingly indestructible union of America with the monarchies of the Persian Gulf faltered. The visit of Russian President Vladimir Putin to this region has excited the expert community. Some hastened to write Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates almost to our allies, although the mutual interest of Russia and these countries is still very local and situational.
The thing is that sustainable alliances form around strong leaders. In the triangle of the USA - Russia - China, the world sees the problems of all of them and each separately and not completely clear prospects. Perhaps this is the main reason why weaker countries walk between unions and associations, clinging to one or the other center of power.
This sometimes has practical benefits for international relations. So it was when the active mediation of the President of Kazakhstan Nursultan Nazarbayev and the President of Azerbaijan Ilham Aliyev helped to restore the broken ties between Russia and Turkey after the death of a Russian bomber in the sky of Syria. In another case, the activity of European leaders kept the United States from military aggression in Iran.
Be that as it may, "multi-vector" is already forming a new type of relationship between countries. It was recently formulated by Vladimir Putin in an interview with representatives of the Arab media. He said that in its relations with other states, Russia does not adhere to the principle of "making friends against others." In bilateral contacts, she is guided exclusively by pragmatic national interests.
Probably, such a campaign will help in the new century to make international relations sustainable. In the meantime, there is a search for this sustainability, including within the framework of such an organization as the Turkic Council.
Soft Power Turkey
This interstate entity with headquarters in Turkish Istanbul was created in the autumn of 2009 at a summit in Azerbaijani Nakhichevan. Then it included four states: Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Turkey.
Thus ended the many years of attempts by the leaders of the four countries to form an international organization based on ethnic and linguistic affinity. Actually, from the beginning of the nineties, Turkey was persistently promoting this idea, having seen the opportunity to unite around itself a sort of brotherhood by ethnonym at the expense of the Central Asian republics that fell out of the orbit of Soviet influence.
The first time she convened a summit of closely related countries in her capital back in the distant 1992 year. Then the event was ignored by Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan, focused on an independent (in some ways even separate, isolationist), independent policy. However, their neighbors accepted the Turkish idea, albeit with some caution. At the first stage, the organization was exclusively culturally oriented. The communication of countries went mainly along the lines of Turkic arts and languages. Even the International Organization of Turkic Culture (TÜRKSOY) was created, developing joint activities.
Later, in the wake of the successes of the Turkish economy, other ties, in particular parliamentary ones, began to strengthen (for example, the parliamentary Assembly of Turkic-speaking countries appeared). Then Ankara’s partners entered into an education agreement with her (TÜRKPA), which moved Turkish emissaries to the former Soviet republics, who were engaged in the preparation of a new elite there that was close to them in spirit, ideology and faith. In fact, it was the “soft power” of Turkey, spreading its influence in the neighboring region.
Even Turkmenistan could not resist such pressure. In the summer of 2014, at a summit in Turkish Bodrum, members of the Turkic Council decided to admit it to their ranks. However, this initiative did not receive further development, and Turkmenistan is still listed as a state - a potential member of the CU. But the first regional Diaspora representation of the Turkic Council appeared in Ukraine (the Azerbaijanis living in Kiev took care of this). Hungary became an observer country in the Customs Union, because, according to Prime Minister Viktor Orban, “it stands on the Kypchak-Turkic basis.”
The first cracks left their mark
The dynamics of the development of relations in the Turkic Council pleased its participants, promised good prospects, until an attempted coup d'etat took place in Turkey. Turkish leader Recep Erdogan blamed Fethullah Gulen, a prominent public figure in Turkey and the entire Turkic world, who lives in the United States.
Then the first crack ran in the Turkic Council. The fact is that the Turkish educational programs in the countries of Central Asia were implemented precisely by the structures of Gulen. The “soft power” of his supporters not only promoted the interests of Turkey in the post-Soviet republics, but also spread the influence of the preacher Gulen himself. Over time, his pupils rose in the local administrative hierarchy, took high government posts.
In Kyrgyzstan, for example, the then Turkish ambassador to Bishkek (the case, as we recall, was in the summer of 2016 of the year) Metin Kılıç counted about three thousand Gulen’s supporters in government, administrative and public positions. For a small republic this is a lot. It is no accident that the then President of Kyrgyzstan Almazbek Atambayev refused to condemn Gulen as the organizer of the coup, which is why he quarreled with Recep Erdogan.
The second factor that shook the record leadership of Ankara in the Turkic Council was the fall of the Turkish economy. According to the International Monetary Fund, from 2016 to 2019, its GDP fell from $ 859 to $ 766 billion. The Turkish lira went down. Saving her, Ankara threw its gold reserves to the market and spent almost 200 tons of gold in a short time. The treasury of the republic was reduced from 504 to 320 tons and became the third among the countries of the Turkic Council (Kazakhstan has now accumulated 380 tons of gold, and Uzbekistan - 328).
As a result, the summit held in Baku was marked not by new integration programs, but by the next exaltation of Kazakhstan's Elbasy and accession to the CU of Uzbekistan. The latter circumstance, of course, will be good for the prospects of the Turkic Council.
How to “not be friends against others”
Russian experts are zealously following the international activities of the former Soviet republics. They meticulously record which of the actions of our CIS partners do not coincide with Russia's interests. Now the term “multi-vector” (the first to use it was Nursultan Nazarbayev), which refers to the contacts of Russia's partners with opposing countries, is now in use.
They talk and write a lot about this, starting from the classical understanding of international relations. In the last century, they relied on stable military alliances or political associations of states. In the new century, the picture has changed radically. Today, most countries walk between unions and associations, one way or another side adjacent to the three world leaders - the United States, Russia, China.
This can be seen not only in the post-Soviet republics drifting in the mentioned triangle. Take, for example, the European Union. Here a group of countries (Hungary, Italy, Austria) finds its interests in active cooperation with Russia. Another group (Poland and the Baltic countries) favors the United States. And although these relations are not legally formalized in allied relations, they create real problems for all EU countries and violate its unity.
Similar collisions appear even in such a super-disciplined organization as the NATO military alliance. Recently, fearing for its safety, Norway decided not to join (the government debate showed) in the missile defense of the alliance. About Turkey, which is openly fronting with NATO, we have heard quite well. There are other similar examples.
Now the seemingly indestructible union of America with the monarchies of the Persian Gulf faltered. The visit of Russian President Vladimir Putin to this region has excited the expert community. Some hastened to write Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates almost to our allies, although the mutual interest of Russia and these countries is still very local and situational.
The thing is that sustainable alliances form around strong leaders. In the triangle of the USA - Russia - China, the world sees the problems of all of them and each separately and not completely clear prospects. Perhaps this is the main reason why weaker countries walk between unions and associations, clinging to one or the other center of power.
This sometimes has practical benefits for international relations. So it was when the active mediation of the President of Kazakhstan Nursultan Nazarbayev and the President of Azerbaijan Ilham Aliyev helped to restore the broken ties between Russia and Turkey after the death of a Russian bomber in the sky of Syria. In another case, the activity of European leaders kept the United States from military aggression in Iran.
Be that as it may, "multi-vector" is already forming a new type of relationship between countries. It was recently formulated by Vladimir Putin in an interview with representatives of the Arab media. He said that in its relations with other states, Russia does not adhere to the principle of "making friends against others." In bilateral contacts, she is guided exclusively by pragmatic national interests.
Probably, such a campaign will help in the new century to make international relations sustainable. In the meantime, there is a search for this sustainability, including within the framework of such an organization as the Turkic Council.
Information