Latin America Discussed at the Diplomat School

"Diplomat School 5" continues to host very distinguished names. In the second week of the program, Latin American Politics, Terror in Mumbai, the still-relevant budget crises in America, Türkiye-Russia Relations, and the European Union and EU-Türkiye Relations were discussed with distinguished speakers.

The first session of the second week began with Ankara University Latin American Studies Application and Research Center Chair Prof. Dr. Mehmet Necati Kutlu. Kutlu began by stating the fundamental nature of the concept of Latin America: "The concept of Latin America refers not to a social or geographical concept, but to a cultural one." Choosing to divide his presentation into 3 parts, Kutlu examined the subject in terms of some important events in the historical process, integration efforts and relations with Türkiye. Along with the beginning of a process after 1492 in which the discovery and conquest of Latin America would be completed by the Spanish, emphasis was placed on the independence struggles of Latin American countries and on the Cuban revolution led by Castro and Che against Batista's military dictatorship. Discussing the organizations established since the 1940s to achieve integration in Latin America, a region of 600 million people with vast natural resources, Kutlu concluded the session by referring to Latin America-Türkiye relations, which date back to the Ottoman Empire and gained momentum especially in the 2000s.

In the second session, titled Terror in Mumbai, national and international security expert Dr. David H. Gray discussed the concept of terrorism and the priority of future terrorist attacks. Beginning his speech with a specific case example, Gray emphasized the changing dimensions of terrorism: "Since 1947, India and Pakistan have been in constant conflict and war with each other, armed or unarmed, and their defeats against the Hindus have pushed the Pakistanis to fight through unconventional means." Stating that Pakistan's largest and bloodiest attack against India took place in the city of Mumbai in November 2008, the speaker underlined that the Pakistanis in particular sponsor terrorist organizations. It was stated that, in addition to the city being the capital of finance, cinema, trade and the economy as the main reason it was chosen by terrorist groups, the Mumbai attack, very well planned at different points simultaneously, also left the Indian defense forces very helpless against the attacks. Noting that the Mumbai attack created a template and led countries to strengthen their defense forces and intelligence services against all terrorist attacks, Gray concluded by stating that the last Mumbai attack also served as an example for many terrorist groups in terms of technique, weaponry and operation.

The third session began with Sabancı University Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences faculty member Prof. Dr. Ersin Kalaycıoğlu. Referring to the main causes of America's budget crises, Kalaycıoğlu emphasized the connections between the functioning of the American political regime and its economic structure. After discussing the procedure for preparing budgets, the most recent budget crisis was addressed. In the context of budget crises, after referring to the role of the Tea Party, which emerged in opposition to President Barack Obama toward the 2000s, the divergence of opinion between Democrats and Liberals on budget spending was explained. Finally, Kalaycıoğlu emphasized that the thinking defended by the US Constitution advocates that political leaders be in conflict rather than in harmony with each other, because it holds that when they are in harmony, democracy and freedom disappear. The conclusion reached was that all the economic crises that have arisen fundamentally stem from the US Constitution.

In the fourth session, which addressed Türkiye-Russia Relations, Retired Ambassador Murat Bilhan informed us on the subject. Stating that he would speak only by looking at current Turkish-Russian relations, Murat Bilhan referred to his visit and meeting in Moscow the previous week. He described it as follows: "Turkish-Russian relations are not at their best, but if we define it as a concept, it is a deep rivalry, and I say this rivalry in a negative sense, containing deep cooperation within it." Describing current Turkish-Russian relations as an environment of trust turning into distrust, Bilhan mentioned that there are both converging and diverging interests. In particular, he said, "It is necessary to follow closely why diverging interests diverge." While it was stated that the deep rivalry in Türkiye-Russia relations should be perceived not as hostility but as a very deep and rapidly growing cooperation, reference was made to the fact that Türkiye-Russia relations are based on distrust and every move is perceived as an element of threat. Noting that Türkiye receives 60% of its natural gas from Russia, Bilhan stated that there is mutual dependence between Russia and Türkiye, but Russia acts as if this dependence were one-sided, saying, "They want to say that Russia gains influence over Türkiye through natural gas." Stating that this dependence is not only linked to resources, he noted that, based on the Montreux Convention Regarding the Regime of the Straits, Russia also depends on Türkiye regarding the straits.

In the final session, titled "Where Is Europe Heading, and What Could Be the Future of Türkiye-European Union Relations?", Retired Ambassador Uluç Özülker was with us. In the session assessing the EU and EU-Türkiye relations, it was first stated that although the EU was established for an economic purpose, it is more of a political structure. It was emphasized that establishing a culture of peace, reconciliation and solidarity across Europe and the foundations of international law is an achievement. In addition, also assessing the aspects in which the EU is considered unsuccessful, Özülker said that the EU's mechanism, which operates by unanimity of 28 members, slows down procedures and that this slowdown could be resolved by abolishing the unanimity procedure. After it was stated that the EU's policy toward Türkiye is shaped by the idea of a "Privileged Partnership," it was underlined that Türkiye's potential and current economy exceed those of many EU countries, and that France and a few member states do not look very favorably on Türkiye's membership. Expressing the view that Türkiye, excluded by the EU in 1997, was again addressed on the path to membership at the 1999 Helsinki Summit as a result of pressure, and that the road leading to the start of negotiations in 2004 began that year, Özülker added that the poor profile drawn by Turkish citizens living in Europe and practices contrary to democratic customs and principles seen in Türkiye at times when relations with the EU accelerated have in fact contributed to the slow progress of EU-Türkiye relations; he concluded his speech by stating that this situation would be overcome with Türkiye's economic and political potential and that structural reforms would also support this process.