Research Article / Araştırma Makalesi

Turgut Özal's Middle East Policies: Decisions and Its Reflections on Turkish Politics
Turgut Özal’ın Ortadoğu Politikaları: Kararlar ve Türk Siyasetine Yansımaları

Umut Turgut Yıldırım*

Abstract: One of the significant shifts in Turkish politics occurred during the Turgut Özal era. Turgut Özal,
who profoundly transformed the political, social, and economic paradigms that had dominated Turkish political
life since the establishment of the Republic, also played an important role in shaping the country's foreign
policy during his approximately ten-year tenure. Özal’s influence, particularly through the new initiatives,
understandings, and strategies he pursued in foreign policy, aimed to provide a new perspective on the country's
international identity and its regional and global role. Türkiye's regional role in the Middle East was also
impacted by this evolving understanding, marking a significant shift from the perspectives that had prevailed
since the founding of the Republic. However, this transformation was not confined to foreign policy alone;
Özal's foreign policy decisions also led to changes and transformations in the established dynamics of Turkish
political life in the subsequent years. This article aims to reveal the reflections of Özal's foreign policy decisions
regarding developments in the Middle East on Türkiye's domestic politics. In other words, it examines the
changes in Turkish political life in terms of both decision-making processes and outcomes, focusing on the
impact of Özal's policies on critical developments in the Middle East. In this context, the Arab-Israeli conflict,
the Iran-Iraq War, and the Gulf War between 1983-1993 have been identified as key developments to study
Özal’s foreign policy decisions. Adopting a qualitative analysis method and based on the analysis of secondary
sources, the article argues that Özal's Middle East policies caused changes in Türkiye’s domestic politics in
terms of actors, structural arrangements, and state tradition.
Structured Abstract: The Middle East has played a central role in international politics for a long time. In the
19th century, it emerged as a colonial region for European states. From the latter half of the 20th century
onward, it has continued to be a focal point of interest for numerous states, largely due to hosting many power
struggles. In addition to its international importance, relations with the Middle East have been a primary focus
of foreign policy for neighboring countries. For this reason, Türkiye’s relationship with Middle Eastern
countries has been remaining one of the items of the foreign policy list even after collapse of the Ottoman
Empire.
During the Turgut Özal era (1983-1993), Middle Eastern issues became increasingly more complex.
At the same time, the international order was undergoing significant changes. Özal himself played a
transformative role in Turkish political life, restructuring traditional practices, strategies, and approaches in
both economic and foreign policy realms. For example, Özal initiated a shift in economic policy from a statist,

*
Dr. Öğr. Üyesi, İnönü Üniversitesi, İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi, Siyaset Bilimi ve Kamu Yönetimi Bölümü
Asst. Prof. Dr. Inonu University, Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, Department of Political Science and
Public Administration
0000-0003-2676-7157
umutturgut.yildirim@inonu.edu.tr
Cite as/ Atıf: Yıldırım, U.T. (2024). Turgut Özal's middle east policies: Decisions and its reflections on Turkish politics.
Turkish Studies - Economy, 19(2), 599-613. https://dx.doi.org/10.7827/TurkishStudies.73115
Received/Geliş: 19 October/Ekim 2023 Checked by plagiarism software
Accepted/Kabul: 25 June/Haziran 2024
Published/Yayın: 30 June/Haziran 2024
600 Umut Turgut Yıldırım

import-substitution approach to neoliberal economic policies characterized by liberalization and export-

oriented growth. This shift began with decisions made on January 24th and aimed to modernize Türkiye's
economy. In terms of foreign policy, Özal departed from the traditionally Western-focused and status quo-
oriented approach of the early Republic. Instead, he pursued an active, multifaceted, and pragmatic foreign
policy that prioritized economic cooperation and took a responsible stance in regional and international affairs.
This included a significant reevaluation of Türkiye's stance towards the Middle East. Özal's foreign policy
objectives in the Middle East included intervening in regional events and developments, fostering economic
ties with Middle Eastern countries, and enhancing regional security. His approach marked a departure from
Türkiye's long-standing strategy of minimal involvement and indifference towards regional dynamics. In
summary, Turgut Özal's leadership during his tenure as President of Türkiye brought about substantial changes
in economic and foreign policy, particularly towards the Middle East, emphasizing engagement, economic
cooperation, and proactive diplomacy over previous policies of non-interference and isolationism.
A considerable amount of literature has been published on assessing Özal’s impact on Turkish foreign
policy. Some of these studies indicate that Özal brought about a radical change and transformation in foreign
policy. Then several researchers claimed that Türkiye transitioned from a passive foreign policy to an active
and visionary one. Some others too pointed out that Özal's primary goal was a multidimensional policy rather
than a foreign policy directed solely toward the West, and that Türkiye began to prioritize regional relations
with Özal (Ataman, 2002; Balcı and Madakbaş Gülener, 2018; Brown, 2007; Daban, 2017; Dündar, 2016;
Kasapsaraçoğlu, 2020; Kurt, 2018; Önal and Özdağ, 2016; Tuncer, 2015). However, what is not yet clear is
the impact of Özal’s Middle East policies on Turkish domestic political life. The reflections of Özal's policies
toward the Middle East on Turkish political life remain an underexplored topic in the literature. Due to this
literature gap, the article focuses on foreign policy decisions, processes and outcomes developed for significant
events in Türkiye-Middle East relations during the Özal era to highlight the reflections of these on the country's
domestic politics. The prominent developments of the period are determined as the Arab-Israeli conflict, the
Iran-Iraq War, and the Gulf War. It should be noted that the purpose of this study is not to delve deeply into
selected cases but to discuss the impacts of Turgut Özal's foreign policy on Turkish political life. In line with
this goal, this article conducted using qualitative research methods. It reviewed sources in the literature which
served as the primary data source for analysis and adopted a descriptive approach and referenced secondary-
level sources such as books, articles, internet sources, and more, in analyzing the subject. On this basis, the
following conclusions can be drawn from the article:
Despite Turgut Özal's foreign policy approach can be characterized as pragmatic, active, and Western-
oriented it did not ignore the countries ties with Türkiye's eastern neighbors. This is because Türkiye's relations
with the Middle East, which had progressed rather limitedly since the founding of the Republic, gained vitality
in terms of both political and socio-economic aspects under Özal's leadership. Moreover, Özal altered the long-
standing Turkish political tradition of having limited relations with the Middle East because he adopted a policy
that actively involved in regional issues in events such as the Iran-Iraq War, the Arab-Israeli tensions, and the
Gulf War in 1991. Besides this, Turgut Özal's Middle East policies not only brought about a change in foreign
policy but also had significant effects on Türkiye's domestic politics. In other words, Özal's policies toward the
Middle East had long-lasting effects on Türkiye's domestic politics as well. One of these impacts is that he
strengthened the hand of political leaders in the decision-making process of foreign policy. Özal took the
initiative in making foreign policy decisions related to the events and developments examined in this study and
generally implemented his own decisions. After 1989, he tried to eliminate the long-standing hegemony of the
military and bureaucracy in foreign policy as fas as he could. Despite the resistance of bureaucratic tutelage in
decisions related to the Middle East, he did not back down from his policies. In this regard, Özal played a
significant role in the civilianization of foreign policy decision-making processes and shifting them into the
political arena. Secondly, Özal's decisions also had consequences for the post-Özal period in Turkish politics.
The policies he pursued during the Iran-Iraq War and the Gulf War negatively impacted the country's economy
in the 1990s. Thirdly, security issues began to arise. The crisis of migration at the country's border and the
subsequent increase in terrorist incidents became prominent issues in the post-Özal period.
Keywords: Political Science, Turkish Political Life, Turgut Özal, Foreign Policy, Middle East.

Turkish Studies - Economy, 19(2)

Turgut Özal's Middle East Policies: Decisions and Its Reflections on Turkish Politics 601

Öz: Türkiye siyaseti eksen kaymalarından birini Turgut Özal döneminde yaşadı. Cumhuriyet’in kuruluşundan
bu yana Türk siyasi hayatında süregelen siyasal, sosyal ve ekonomik hayatı, bakış açılarını ve paradigmaları
belirli anlamda değiştiren Turgut Özal, yaklaşık on yıl iktidarda kalarak ülkenin dış politikasının da yeniden
şekillenmesinde önemli bir rol oynadı. Özal’ın etkisi, özellikle dış politikada izlediği yeni açılımlar, anlayışlar
ve stratejilerle ülkenin uluslararası politikadaki kimliği ile bölgesel ve küresel rolüne yeni bir görünüm vermeyi
amaçlamasıyla öne çıkıyordu. Türkiye'nin Orta Doğu'daki bölgesel rolü de değişen bu anlayıştan nasibini aldı
ve gerçekten de bu değişim Cumhuriyet’in kuruluşundan beri süregelen bir anlayışın yenisiyle
değiştirilmesiydi. Bununla birlikte, değişim yalnızca bu alanla sınırlı kalmadı ve Özal’ın dış politika kararları
ileriki yıllarda Türk siyasal hayatının yerleşik dinamikleri üzerinde de değişim ve dönüşüme neden oldu. Bu
makale de Özal'ın Ortadoğu’daki gelişmelere yönelik dış politika kararlarının Türkiye’deki iç politikaya
yansımalarını ortaya koymak amacıyla hazırlandı. Diğer ifadeyle Ortadoğu'daki kritik gelişmelere verilen dış
politika kararlarının hem karar alma süreçleri hem de sonuçları üzerinden Türk siyasal hayatındaki değişimleri
Özal’ın etkileri bakımından ele almaktadır. Bu minvalde, 1983-1993 yılları arasında gerçekleşen Arap-İsrail
çatışması, İran-Irak Savaşı ve Körfez Savaşı, Özal’ın dış politika kararlarının incelendiği kritik gelişmeler
olarak belirlenmiştir. Nitel analiz yöntemini benimseyen ve ikincil kaynakların analizine dayanan makalede
Özal’ın Ortadoğu politikalarının Türkiye’nin iç siyasetinde hem aktörler hem yapısal düzen hem de devlet
geleneği bakımından değişimlere neden olduğu ileri sürülmüştür.
Anahtar Kelimeler: Siyaset Bilimi, Türk Siyasal Hayatı, Turgut Özal, Dış Politika, Ortadoğu.

Introduction
In the history of Turkish political life, Turgut Özal was a prominent figure who has wielding
influence over both domestic and foreign politics for approximately a decade. As Muhittin Ataman
(2002, p. 123) stated that "Özal restructured Turkish politics in many areas." Indeed, Türkiye began
to pursue such an outwardly policies in the fields of economy, politics, and foreign policy for the
first time in some cases during the Özal’s governments. Beyond the aspects of traditional Turkish
foreign policy, it was evident that a new paradigm was embraced, both regional and international
level. For instance, when Turgut Özal came to office for the first time, Turkish foreign policy began
to place a greater emphasis on relations with the Islamic, Turkic and Middle Eastern countries than
it had previously. The transformation and shift brought about by Özal in the foreign policy have been
extensively discussed in the literature (Ataman, 2002; Balcı and Madakbaş Gülener, 2018; Brown,
2007; Daban, 2017; Dündar, 2016; Kasapsaraçoğlu, 2020; Kurt, 2018; Önal and Özdağ, 2016;
Tuncer, 2015). Previous studies have shown that Türkiye has begun to replace its foreign policy that
is formulated by founders of the Republic and exclusively Western-oriented and isolated from the
regional ties with a new foreign policy that aims to be multifaceted and be open to change. Being
active in the Middle East region not only defined the foreign policy steps taken, alliances formed,
and future projections, but also shaped Turkish political life. While there is no doubt that
aforementioned literature contributed immensely to the understanding of Turkish foreign policy, they
gave little attention to the question that what are the main effects of these changes on domestic
politics? In the other words, literature on analyzing the effects of Özal’s policies and actions on
Türkiye’s domestic politics are still very limited. To properly address this question, the article mainly
focused on foreign policy strategies, practices, and decisions about critical developments in Türkiye-
Middle East relations during the Turgut Özal period in the context of their reflections on the country's
political life.
The article is structured mainly in four parts except from introduction. The first part
addresses Türkiye’s foreign policy towards the Middle East from the establishment of the nation-
state to the 1980s and look at the general overview of its strategies and major codes from a historical
perspective. The second part includes a brief summary of selected prominent cases which are
analyzed in the paper and assesses the Özal's foreign policy responses, approaches, practices and,
decisions. The third section focuses on the question that is how Özal’s foreign policies and actions
towards selected developments influenced Turkish political life and critically discusses the changes

www.turkishstudies.net/economy
602 Umut Turgut Yıldırım

taking place in politics during and after Özal's decisions. The concluding part of the article includes
last remarks.
Turkish Foreign Policy in the Middle East from Foundation of the Republic to Özal:
When the Republic of Türkiye was founded, the primary goal of the founders was to establish
and solidify its presence in the new world order by establishing political, economic, commercial, and
military relations and alliances with all countries, especially its neighbors, and to ensure peace within
the country by implementing realistic and peaceful policies. In this regard, the foreign policy pursued
especially between 1919 and 1923 was focused on establishing its own security in order to create a
fully independent and contemporary state (Karpat, 2012, p. 161). As a new state, Türkiye adopted a
policy based on quasi-isolation in foreign affairs to both sever ties with its past and secure its future
(Alptekin, 2018, p. 118).
The approach towards the Middle East was no different in this context. So one of the
fundamental aspects of Turkish foreign policy at that time was neglecting the Middle Eastern
countries. So Türkiye's ties with the Middle East, spanning from its formative years to half a century
hence, have predominantly remained limited. Foreign policy’s priorities leaned notably towards
fostering collaboration and alliances with Western states, because the founders ignited the fuse of a
new period of modernization or civilization in Türkiye after the declaration of the Republic. Indeed,
the Ottoman Empire had collapsed, and its heterogeneous societal structure had nearly vanished. The
fundamental goal was to continue in the new state with a novel political identity. Therefore, the
founders outlined the two fundamental principles on which the new state's identity would be based:
nationalism and secularism. Thus, the state had announced that it would turn its face not towards the
East, but the West (Kösebalan, 2011, pp. 49-50). As mentioned above, this was also the main logic
of the country's foreign policy. Therefore, Türkiye's fundamental foreign policy approach towards
the Middle East was primarily built on the principles of non-interference and neglecting the region
(Khan, 2015, p. 31). In addition to this, during the early years of the one-party rule, Türkiye’s foreign
policy was composed of efforts trying to protect the new state from external threats such as
imperialism, security problems, etc. Therefore, it has mainly been sought to protect the political and
territorial unity and its freedom. So policy-makers have followed a consistent foreign policy which
mainly based on preserving its national independence, sovereignty, and territorial integrity. Due to
this protectionism during the 1920s and beyond, Türkiye's foreign policy has always prioritized
establishing peaceful international ties and collaboration, as well as contributing to regional peace,
security, and stability (Çiller, 1996).
Türkiye's intention to preserve the status quo was supported by various security reflexes. For
example, the presence of the Soviets in the region was a deterrent dynamic for Türkiye (Sayarı, 2000,
p. 170). New state had also tried to avoid its imperial past that was mainly based on the Ottoman
tradition, especially the Islamic one. Therefore, relations with these countries were minimized
(Larrabee, 2007, p. 103). That means the core strategy of foreign policy was to align with Western
nations rather than Eastern ones. As William Hale pointed out that (1992, p. 681) the Republican
reforms, like the abolition of the Republican reforms, like the abolition of the caliphate, were also
main illustrator of this intention.
The Middle East in Turkish foreign policy was an area that was neglected and subject to an
isolation strategy for a particular period. Türkiye’s fundamental attitude towards developments in the
region was being passive and neutral. On the other hand, Türkiye's foreign policy, especially its
relations with the Middle East, became more intertwined with its ties to the West, particularly the
United States of America (USA) during the transition period, from one-party to multi-party rule. This
shift was primarily driven by the onset of the Cold War, during which Türkiye aligned itself with the
bloc led by the USA (Karpat, 2012, p. 162). Alignment with the West was also the result of the
Soviets’ threat. The Soviet Union publicly stated that they would not renew the Alliance Pact signed

Turkish Studies - Economy, 19(2)

Turgut Özal's Middle East Policies: Decisions and Its Reflections on Turkish Politics 603

between Türkiye and the Soviet Union in 1925 and revealed the conditions that Türkiye must meet
as including the coming back of Kars and Ardahan provinces to the Soviets, acknowledging
the authorization over the Istanbul and Gallipoli Straits, and a reviewing of the Thrace region's
borders in favor of Bulgaria (Altuğ, 1988, p. 10).
When Adnan Menderes’ Democract Party (DP) came to power in 1950 after transition to
democracy in 1945, Turkish foreign policy began more than it’s past to take side with the USA-led
western block. DP’s Foreign Minister Fuat Köprülü declared that Western-oriented foreign policy
would be supported by the new government (Ahmad, 1977, p. 390). Accordingly, in the term between
1950 and 1960, Westernism was the essential code in the foreign policy formulation and decision-
making process. Being a member of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization in 1952, participating in
the Baghdad Pact in 1955 and, giving support to France in the Algerian National War of
Independence (1954-62) were instances of Türkiye’s Western-sided foreign policy during that period
(Turan, 2003). Türkiye, during the DP era, shaped its relations with the Middle East within the
framework of its alliance with the West, with the aims of reducing instability in the region and
countering the expansion of the Soviets (Yeşilbursa, 2010, pp.78-79).
Since the mid-1960s, remarkable changes have begun to be seen in Turkish foreign policy
towards Middle East. Realizing that its foreign policy interests will not always be compatible with
the USA and Western countries after the Johnson Letter sent to Türkiye due to the Cyprus Problem
in 1964 was one of the external factors for Türkiye's beginning to change its pro-Western attitudes
(Sönmezoğlu, 2006, p. 362; Sander, 2013, p. 233). Withdrawing from pro-Western attitude on
foreign policy showed itself when Türkiye refused the Unites States’ request seeking the use of
Turkish military bases to help Israel in the 1967 Arab-Israeli War. Süleyman Demirel has also
revealed the espousing a foreign policy approach that granted a favorable disposition towards the
Middle East, emblematic of his endorsement. His alignment alongside the Middle East on matters
particularly involving the Arab-Israeli and Israeli-Palestinian conflicts signaled a disposition that
stood apart from Western inclinations. Correspondingly the Arab world has demonstrated support
for Türkiye in international affairs during this new era (Kösebalan, 2011, p. 101). The beginning of
Türkiye's participation in the Islamic Conferences in 1969 and convene to deliberate upon the
predicaments of the Islamic world, also showed to the transformation in policy of government about
Islamic world (Sander, 2013, p. 235).
In addition to neglecting the Middle East in foreign policy, another defining characteristic
was the increasing influence of the bureaucracy, especially the military, in foreign policy decision-
making processes. Indeed, the military was a significant institution throughout Turkish society, given
its important roles in the recent history of both the Ottoman Empire and subsequently Türkiye
(Tachau & Heper, 1983, p. 18). Moreover, not only in political life but also in societal matters, the
military held high prestige (Karpat, 1970, p. 1656). After the establishment of the Republic, the role
it assigned to itself in Turkish political life was that of the protector of the state and the regime. In
other words, the military was perceived as the foundational institution of political life in Türkiye
(Brown, 1987). This reality became evident in both the 1960 and 1980 military interventions.
Furthermore, following those interventions, the military increased its capacity to exert influence in
the political arena (Tachau & Heper, 1983, pp. 23-26).
Moreover, its determinative role in domestic politics, another one where the military's
influence escalated was foreign policy. From the founding of the Republic until the 1980s, the
military had gained specific prominence in the decision-making processes of foreign policy (Aksu,
2012, p. 460). The fact that the founding cadres of the state were mostly soldiers bequeathed such a
tradition to Turkish politics (Alptekin, 2018, p. 144). Particularly concerning matters of national
security, military has held a position beyond merely advising the political power; it held a decisive
role (Uzgel, 1998, p. 317). Hence, when Özal came to power after the 1980's coup he faced two

www.turkishstudies.net/economy
604 Umut Turgut Yıldırım

challenges regarding foreign policy. One of these was the bureaucratic tutelage in the decision-
making processes of foreign policy. Passive foreign policy in the Middle East was another one.
Turgut Özal’s Foreign Policy and the Middle East
Although relations with the Middle East had gained a certain degree of dynamism since the
1960s, a new trajectory was instilled into these relations with the ascent of Turgut Özal's Motherland
Party to power in 1983 (Zürcher, 2015, pp. 406-407). The new government began to change the
foreign policy codes established by the Republic in line with its ideology. This change was a result
of Özal's foreign policy perspective. As Muhittin Ataman stated, Özal's foreign policy was shaped in
line with the following principles (2003, pp. 50-51):
• Liberal and economy weighted,
• Multidimensional, based on interdependence and interest,
• Active, and revisionist,
• Moderate to ethnic diversities, tolerant rather than confrontational.
Under Özal's leadership, the country's foreign policy priorities have undergone significant
changes, primarily as follows: transitioning from a stance of non-involvement in Middle Eastern
developments to active engagement; shifting from alignment solely with Western states in regional
relations to pursuing multilateral one, and evolving from a conservative position to actively seeking
new agreements. These new approaches that Özal brought to Turkish foreign policy have shaped the
framework of Türkiye-Middle East relations during the 1980s and the early years of the 1990s. Due
to Özal's ideology of liberalism, the economy gained importance over other factors and Türkiye
became enthusiastic about establishing new alliances irrespective of geographical, ideological, or
ethnic considerations (Kösebalan, 2011, p. 110, 121; Tuncer, 2015, pp. 32-33).
In his first election manifesto, Özal underlined the importance of strengthening relationships
with the Middle East and Muslim states owing to Türkiye's geographical position and historical links.
Furthermore, Özal stated that Türkiye has a dual identity between the West and the East and he
emphasized that it must strengthen economic relations with the Middle East and ensure peace in the
region (ANAP Seçim Beyannamesi, 1983, p. 48). Because according to Özal, Türkiye could only
become a regional power by enhancing its effectiveness in regional relations. He particularly foresaw
that Türkiye unwilling to engage in dialogue in the Middle East would not emerge as a regional
power (Daban, 2017, p. 88). This changing foreign policy perspective shaped the responses to the
developments occurring in the Middle East during the Özal era. Türkiye shifted from a policy of non-
involvement in regional matters to an active interventionist stance.
Throughout Özal's governments, Türkiye found itself engaged in diplomatic discussions in
response to developments occured in the region. Thus, it can be stated that Özal's particular impacts
on the Republic's foreign policy occurred through his alteration of the stance of neutrality towards
regional developments (Baharçiçek, 2020, pp. 46-47). This foreign policy shift is most clearly
evident in the policies pursued in response to the developments occurring in the Middle East. Under
the following headings, the responses of Özal to significant developments that erupted in the region
after these alterations in foreign policy are examined. The following sections will argue the
reflections of these decisions taken by Özal on Turkish political life.
The Arab-Israel Conflict
The official history of the Arab-Israeli Conflict started in 1948 when the establishment of
Israel was officially proclaimed, although it can be traced back to older hostilities (Lewis, 1996, p.
282). This is because, despite the historical enmity between the parties, the first war between Arabs
and Israelis started on May 15, 1948, the day after the establishment of the State of Israel (Cleveland,
2008, p. 296). The root cause of this tension is undoubtedly religious, based on Jewish territorial

Turkish Studies - Economy, 19(2)

Turgut Özal's Middle East Policies: Decisions and Its Reflections on Turkish Politics 605

claims based on the biblical promise of the "holy land". Palestinians, on the other hand, claim a
historical right to their homeland. Due to this disagreement, the conflict is still unresolved today
(Erdoğan & Habash, 2020, p. 126).
Palestine and Türkiye are two countries that have the same historical past in the Middle East
region. As it is known, for over 400 years the Palestinian territories had been ruled by the Ottoman
Empire. Beyond these political ties, these two countries have the same religious past as well. The
religious places in Palestine territory such as the Al-Aqsa Mosque which was the first qibla of
Muslims, and the Dome of the Rock make Palestine a sacred and significant area for Muslims and
thus Türkiye. On the other hand, Israel is one of the countries with which Türkiye has had close
relations from its foundation. Therefore, the Arab-Israeli conflict has been one of the main topics of
Türkiye’s foreign policy for a long time because of its close political, economic, and historical ties
with Arab countries and Israel (Armaoğlu, 1994, p. 268; Bayraklı, 2014, p. 479; Karpat, 2012, p.
199).
The strategy that Türkiye pursued in response to the Arab-Israeli conflict, from its
establishment to the Özal era, was primarily based on maintaining diplomatic relations with Israel
while supporting the development of mutual relations with the Arab states (Yavuz & Khan, 1992,
pp. 70-71). However, the fundamental cornerstone of this policy was to avoid direct engagement in
the conflict between the parties involved (Armaoğlu, 1994, p. 293). Nevertheless, the 1970s marked
a shift in Türkiye's foreign policy strategies in favor of Palestine in the Arab-Israeli conflict. For
instance, during the 1973 Arab-Israeli War, Türkiye refrained from allowing the use of its military
bases by the USA, a supporter of Israel, while it extended cooperation to the Soviet air force, which
was aligned with Egypt and Syria (Sönmezoğlu, 2006, pp. 363-369). The 1973 Oil Crisis nearly
doubled Türkiye's foreign trade deficits and had a severely negative impact on the country. As a
result, Türkiye sought to strengthen its economic ties with oil-producing states, based on the belief
that this would provide economic benefits. Additionally, when the USA declared that it did not
support Türkiye’s Cyprus Operation in 1974 and decided to impose a two-year embargo on it, the
inclination to get closer to the Middle East became more pronounced (Sinkaya, 2011, p. 86).
During this period, Türkiye's support for the Arabs was more visible compared to the past,
but it did not go beyond the verbal level. However, when the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO)
was granted the authority to open a representative office in Ankara, Türkiye's support for the Arabs
became more tangible for the first time (Yavuz & Khan, 1992, p. 73). Despite the tensions between
Türkiye and Israel in the early 1980s due to Israel's declaration of Jerusalem as its capital, a process
of rapprochement with Israel started during the Özal era. What differed during Özal's rule was that
Türkiye's foreign policy regarding the Arab-Israeli conflict generally portrayed a balanced approach
between the two sides. As Tayyar Arı (2004a, p. 680) points out, the foreign policy followed by
Türkiye throughout the 1980s emphasized supporting the Arabs while establishing a balanced
relationship with Israel. Therefore, the core Turkish foreign policy regarding the Arab-Israeli conflict
can be defined as maintaining diplomatic relations with Israel while supporting Palestine's self-
determination cause and acting based on concrete economic and security interests in the region
(Yavuz & Khan, 1992, p. 72; Yavuz, 1997, p. 27; Uzer, 2013, pp. 98-99). Despite these policies, the
relationship between Türkiye and Israel generally maintained a positive outlook (Arı, 2001, p. 427).
Türkiye, while condemning Israel's occupation of Arab lands, generally supported Israel's right to
exist as a state in international organizations (Baş, 2018, p. 114). It should be noted that the Arab-
Israeli conflict, previously disregarded during the early years of the Republic, became one of the
fundamental issues in foreign policy during the Özal period. In line with his foreign policy approach,
Özal pursued a balanced stance in this matter by focusing on economic interests while engaging with
both sides.

www.turkishstudies.net/economy
606 Umut Turgut Yıldırım

The Iran-Iraq War

The Iran-Iraq War was one of the critical developments during Özal’s government. This
significance increases even further when considering that it was the first regional hot conflict during
the Özal era. During a period when Egypt's leadership role in the Middle East was waning, Saddam
Hussein initiated a war against Iran to fill the power vacuum in the region and gain control over
strategic areas, particularly oil-rich regions (Ayhan, 2006, pp. 308-309). This conflict prominently
showcased the transformation of Turkish foreign policy under Özal's influence. In contrast to the
established codes of the Republic, Türkiye began to prioritize an active foreign policy in response to
this regional issue in the Middle East (Arı, 2004a, p. 681). Due to his foreign policy philosophy, Özal
adopted a strategy of establishing closer political and economic relations with the parties involved in
the war, rather than maintaining an isolationist policy. Aiming to present Türkiye as capable of
meeting the needs of the two warring countries, Özal, in his capacity as Prime Minister, conducted
his first official foreign visits to Iran and Iraq (Demiray, 2015, p. 269).
In the 1980s, an Economic, Industrial, and Technical Cooperation Agreement was signed
between Türkiye and Iran, and in the following years, the foundations of the Economic Cooperation
Organization, involving Türkiye, Pakistan, and Iran, were laid. These mutual steps yielded positive
results for Türkiye. In the first half of the 1980s, while 45% of Türkiye's total exports were attributed
to Middle Eastern countries, approximately 55% of this share was constituted by exports to Iran and
Iraq. Additionally, the closure of the Syrian oil pipeline in 1982 heightened the importance of the
Kirkuk-Ceyhan Oil Pipeline between Türkiye and Iraq, and in 1987, a second pipeline was
established (Sönmezoğlu, 2006, pp. 443-443).
Özal has adopted a position of active neutrality in foreign policy, pursuing equal treatment
for both sides (Gülbay, 2022, p. 1039). He continued to maintain relations with both countries. In
fact, Türkiye gained significant economic benefits from these alliances (Kasapsaraçoğlu, 2020, p.
504). The distinctive feature that sets Özal apart from his predecessors was his active involvement
in this war. This strategy was a result of his ambition to take on a more prominent role in the Middle
East (Arı, 2001, p. 424). Therefore, it is possible to define Türkiye's wartime foreign policy as both
actively engaging with issues and pursuing a policy of balance between the parties involved.
The Gulf War (1990-1991)
The invasion of Kuwait by Saddam Hussein on August 2, 1990, created a new international
crisis, even though its reasons were more regional (Cleveland, 2008, p. 526). This invasion also
marked the first major violation of the Arab League's ideals (Lewis, 1996, p. 282). The Iraqi invasion
of Kuwait, rooted in economic conflict over oil prices and Saddam Hussein's demand for regional
hegemony, led to the 1990–1991 Gulf War (Sayari, 1992, pp. 13–14). The process began with the
occupation of Kuwait, prompting the UN to demand Iraq's withdrawal. However, Iraq rejected this
demand, leading to the imposition of embargoes. Through the efforts of the UN and the US, a
coalition force of approximately forty countries launched a war against Iraq in January 1991 (Önal
& Özdağ, 2016, pp. 56-57).
Subsequently, international military intervention by the United Nations Coalition Forces
forced Iraq to withdraw from Kuwaiti territory and restored security in the region. The Gulf War
ended in 1991 with the defeat and withdrawal of Iraqi forces, marking a turning point for both the
international system and Türkiye-Middle East relations. Turkish foreign policy towards Middle East
between 1990 and 1992 was mainly shaped according to the Gulf War. This policy was significantly
different from previous ones. Türkiye was directly and absolutely involved in a development in the
Middle East (Larrabee, 2007, p. 104). The chief architect of active foreign policy was undoubtedly
Turgut Özal.

Turkish Studies - Economy, 19(2)

Turgut Özal's Middle East Policies: Decisions and Its Reflections on Turkish Politics 607

Özal took full initiative and chose to participate in the Gulf War as part of the Western
coalition. This decision was consistent with Türkiye's traditional Western-aligned foreign policy.
However, the significant change under Özal was moving away from the policy of neutrality in
regional developments. Unlike the founders of the Republic, Özal's policy aimed to assert influence
over regions like Mosul and Kirkuk and embraced the historical legacy of the Ottoman Empire
(Yayman, 2018, p. 183).
Along with these motives, Türkiye participated in the sanctions imposed on Iraq, a country
with which it had nearly a two-and-a-half billion-dollar trade relationship. Consequently, Türkiye
shut down the Kirkuk-Ceyhan oil pipeline and made its military bases available for use in the Desert
Storm Operation initiated by coalition forces (Arı, 2004a, p. 682). This period marked the peak of
Özal's authority in foreign policy.
Indeed, during this time of distinct foreign policy transformation, Özal prioritized his
personal views over the established codes of Turkish foreign policy. In other words, Özal's policies
held greater significance than those of other foreign policy actors in Türkiye, who were generally not
integrated into the process (Dündar, 2016, p. 11). Thus, Özal aimed to establish a more influential
profile for Türkiye in the region. In line with this, he saw the Gulf War as an opportunity and
collaborated with Western states (Yücealtay, 2022, p. 32).
A Discussion on the Reflections of Özal's Middle East Policies on Turkish Political Life
It is generally accepted that a transformation occurred in Turkish foreign policy during Özal's
government. This transformation was especially pronounced in the context of the Middle East,
marking a shift from a passive policy to an active one. This change was influenced both by Özal's
leadership style and the circumstances of the period. In other words, Özal's foreign policy was not
solely derived from his ideology or personality; it was also shaped by the era's conjucture.
The rise of Islamism in Türkiye’s domestic politics and the increasing power of Islamist
parties in the 1970s were, for instance, internal factors that led Türkiye to develop a more positive
attitude towards the Middle East (Bozdağlıoğlu, 2003, p. 122). Rising Kurdish nationalism and
economic challenges also compelled Özal to respond to these developments (Kösebalan, 2011, p.
121). Then it was necessary to take an active role in the region to address both the terrorism threat
emanating from beyond the country's southeastern border and issues related to oil resources. Özal's
authority coincided with a conjuncture where the sustainability of the traditional foreign policy
approach was no longer viable. This was due to the dissolution of the bipolar world order and the
rise of the USA as the sole superpower, leading to a transformation in international politics that also
impacted nation-states (Kurt, 2018, p. 158).
Despite the significant change in Türkiye's regional foreign policy, the consequences of
Özal's decisions in the region had an impact on internal politics. One of the most notable impacts of
the Özal era was the shift of authority from the bureaucracy to political leaders in the decision-making
processes of foreign policy (Baharçiçek, 2020, p. 46). This shift can be identified as the
demilitarization and civilianization of foreign policy-making. Additionally, although Türkiye
achieved substantial economic and political gains in its relations with the Middle East during the
Özal era, it faced significant economic challenges in the post-1990s period. Finally, the era also
brought about notable security challenges.
Özal's active involvement in the decision-making process of foreign policy concerning the
Middle East, as well as the manner in which these policies were executed, brought a new
understanding to Turkish political life. This was in stark contrast to previous civilian governments
that often deferred to the military's expertise. Prior to Özal, either the bureaucracy or the military
actively participated in the decision-making processes of foreign policy, with limited influence from
the political arena. For instance, when Özal first came to power, the military rule of the 1980 coup

www.turkishstudies.net/economy
608 Umut Turgut Yıldırım

requested that he appoint Vahit Halefoğlu as the Minister of Foreign Affairs, contrary to the person
Özal had in mind (Kurt, 2018, pp. 162-163). This meant that the military, rather than the prime
minister, had chosen the person to manage the government's foreign policy. According to Özal,
"Democracy is the regime of 'those who are elected.' For a democracy to be effective, some
mechanisms of civilian control over the military have to be established" (Ataman, 2002, p. 134). So
his leadership significantly influenced and shaped Türkiye's policies towards the Middle East.
Özal was a leader open to change, yet the bureaucracy was distant from his approach of swift
action and achieving results, often leading to tension between these two actors. The strategy pursued
by Özal in foreign policy also signified a confrontation with the central bureaucracy. For instance, in
a significant development of the Arab-Israeli conflict, such as the declaration of the Palestinian State,
Özal promptly announced Türkiye’s recognition of the new state, contrary to the recommendations
of the foreign affairs bureaucracy. This decision, made by bypassing bureaucratic suggestions,
indicates that Özal's approach to foreign policy implementation reduced the role of the military
(Dündar, 2016, pp. 5-7).
Özal's policy during the Gulf War similarly challenged the established norms of Turkish
political life. Despite facing bureaucratic-military opposition, he advocated for sending troops to the
Gulf region and for Türkiye's direct involvement in the conflict. While the bureaucracy was inclined
to avoid the Gulf War, Özal chose to collaborate with the coalition forces led by the USA. This
tension escalated to the point of General Chief of Staff Necip Torumtay resigning during this period
(Alptekin, 2018, p. 153; Sayarı, 2000, p. 171). However, Özal did not back down and managed to
overcome bureaucratic and military resistance to a certain extent. His persistence did not eliminate
the power of the military and bureaucracy, which had held a dominant position in foreign policy
since the foundation of the Republic. Nonetheless, he opened the door for transformation. In other
words, Özal's actions paved the way for redefined civilian-military relations by providing the civilian
sector with a precedent to follow. Therefore, it can be stated that Özal's foreign policy approach
contributed to the civilianization of foreign policy in Turkish political life. Politicians began to gain
more importance than bureaucrats in the process of shaping and implementing Turkish foreign
policy.
Another influence of Middle East-related policies on domestic politics was related to the
economy. Despite improving trade with the region in the 1980s, Türkiye experienced a serious
economic crisis in the following years. Particularly during the Gulf War, Özal's active policy did not
yield the desired economic outcomes. Due to economic embargoes, Türkiye faced significant costs.
Following the UN embargo decision, Özal halted the flow of oil through the Yumurtalık Pipeline,
and diplomatic relations between Iraq and Türkiye reached a standstill, negatively impacting trade
between the two parties (Dündar, 2016, p. 14). The increased activity of terrorist organizations in
northern Iraq following the Gulf War heightened the sense of the need to ensure regional security,
making it evident that Türkiye needed to play a more active military role in the Middle East (Sinkaya,
2011, pp. 86-87). This naturally led to an increase in military expenditures, which negatively
impacted the country's economy.
The final impact of Özal's foreign policy towards the Middle East on domestic politics in
Türkiye was related to security problems. The Iran-Iraq War, which occurred along Türkiye's
southern borders, directly affected the country due to the presence of terrorist organizations near the
border (Özdemir, 2020, p. 66). Saddam Hussein's incursions into Kurdish areas in Northern Iraq led
to the displacement of many individuals, including those connected to terrorist groups, along with
the local population, who sought refuge in Türkiye. Although Özal's support for admitting these
refugees into the country faced criticism from nationalist quarters on security grounds, it did not yield
substantial results (Kösebalan, 2011, p. 125). Türkiye's non-aligned but active stance during the Iran-
Iraq War facilitated the development of economic relations with both countries and mitigated

Turkish Studies - Economy, 19(2)

Turgut Özal's Middle East Policies: Decisions and Its Reflections on Turkish Politics 609

potential risks for Türkiye. However, it couldn't prevent the outbreak of security issues. While not
solely attributed to foreign policy, the increasing number of terrorist attacks in Türkiye from the mid-
1980s onward is considered a reflection of this situation (Özdemir, 2020, pp. 69-70). Therefore, it
can be observed that the Iran-Iraq War had long-term consequences for Türkiye in terms of border
security and internal stability. The second crisis that erupted in 1990 further exacerbated this
situation.
The Gulf War also brought forth a series of security issues for Türkiye. After the war,
Saddam began attacking the Kurds in northern Iraq, nearly half a million refugees settled along the
borders of Türkiye and Iran, sparking a significant migration influx into these regions. These refugees
adversely affected Türkiye both in terms of security and economics. To mitigate these negative
impacts Türkiye, led by the USA and the United Kingdom, joined Operation Provide Comfort.
Approximately seventeen thousand coalition troops were deployed to northern Iraq to establish a
secure zone that would facilitate the safe return of refugees (Hale, 1992, pp. 687-688). After the end
of the war, even though the coalition forces decided to withdraw from the region, they continued
Operation Provide Comfort to ensure the area's security, taking into account Saddam's potential
counteractions. According to this plan, ground and air forces elements composed of the armies of the
USA, UK, and Türkiye were stationed at the İncirlik Air Base and in the southern part of Türkiye
(Arı, 2004b, pp. 597-598).
The USA strategy of using Iraqi Kurds against the Saddam regime created an area in the
region where terrorists began to base themselves after the Gulf War in 1991 (Acun & Keskin, 2017,
p. 10). As a result of this defeat, a vast number of refugees fled to the Turkish–Iraqi border.
Consequently, Turkish forces entered Iraqi territory to prevent Kurdish refugees from crossing the
Turkish border (Hale, 1992, p. 687). Another impact of the Gulf War was the issue of Northern Iraq.
Following the war, with the power vacuum in the region and the support of Western states, the Kurds
established a de facto state structure in Türkiye's south. This situation also strengthened the PKK,
leading to increased attacks by the terrorist organization in Türkiye’s southeastern regions (Larrabee,
2007, p. 105). Terrorist attacks and security issues became the main agenda item of Turkish politics
in the 1990s. Thus, Özal's Gulf policy did not serve Türkiye's economic interests and also failed to
benefit its security concerns (Hale, 1992, p. 689). Although the influence of the military in foreign
policy diminished during the Özal era, the national and regional security issues that emerged in the
post-Özal period brought the military back to the forefront of political life (Uzgel, 1998, p. 315).
Conclusion
In the aftermath of the establishment of the Republic, one of the fundamental foreign policies
of the country was to minimize its relations with the Middle East and implement an isolationist policy
towards the region. This approach became a state tradition and remained a fundamental determinant
of the country's foreign policy for a certain period. On the other hand, understanding the military and
the bureaucracy-dominated foreign policy was also one of the fundamental characteristics of Turkish
political life during the Republican era. When Özal came to power, these two aspects of politics
began to change. The era of Özal marked a period in Türkiye where traditional practices, strategies,
and approaches were reconfigured within the context of foreign policy. The Western-oriented and
status quo-driven foreign policy approach adopted since the Republic towards the Middle East gave
way to an active, multidimensional, economy-centered, responsible, regionally aware, and pragmatic
foreign policy. Özal's foreign policy approach based on liberalism facilitated the opening of new
chapters in Türkiye’s regional relations, paving the way for the establishment of multidimensional
and diversified connections. This approach noticeably transformed traditional Turkish foreign policy
to a significant extent. Despite Özal not only changing the basic parameters of Turkish foreign policy
but also influencing domestic politics, his foreign policy decisions towards the Middle East had
important consequences for Turkish political life.

www.turkishstudies.net/economy
610 Umut Turgut Yıldırım

Throughout his authority, Özal made efforts to break bureaucratic tutelage over the political
realm. His foreign policy initiatives toward the Middle East strongly reflected this objective. Despite
bureaucratic obstacles, he often acted independently and successfully translated his personal beliefs
into the country's foreign policy. This approach also became a significant point of reference for post-
Özal governments. By undermining the dominance of the military and bureaucracy in foreign policy
and shifting the balance towards civilians, Özal not only contributed to Turkish democracy but also
established a noteworthy precedent for future governments. In bringing about such a transformation,
Özal's personal qualities played a crucial role. His leadership style was a determining factor. Özal
was a leader driven by the desire for swift outcomes, and he aimed for foreign policy to function
without bureaucratic impediments. Consequently, in many decisions concerning the Middle East, he
went beyond the realm of the Turkish Foreign Ministry and made individual choices. This approach,
in turn, triggered shifts in Türkiye's civil-military relations and ushered in a significant
transformation in the country's political life.

Turkish Studies - Economy, 19(2)

Turgut Özal's Middle East Policies: Decisions and Its Reflections on Turkish Politics 611

References
Acun, C. & Keskin, B. (2017). PKK’nın kuzey Suriye örgütlenmesi PYD-YPG. SETA.
Ahmad, F. (1977). The Turkish experiment in democracy 1950-1975. C. Hurstand Company.
Aksu, M. (2012). Türk dış politikası karar alma mekanizmasında Türk Silahlı Kuvvetlerinin etkinliği
ve 2003 sonrası değişim. Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi
Dergisi, 17(3), 441-465.
Alptekin, H. (2018). Türkiye’de sivil asker ilişkilerinde Özal’lı yıllara kurumsalcı bir yaklaşım:
1983-1993. Muhafazakâr Düşünce, 15(55), 141-156.
Altuğ, Y. (1988). Soviet Union’s foreign relations from the begining until the end of the Second
World War: 1917-945. Ankara Üniversitesi Siyasal Bilgiler Fakültesi Dergisi, 43, 1-10.
ANAP Seçim Beyannamesi. (1983).
Arı, T. (2001). 2000’li yıllarda Türkiye’nin Ortadoğu politikası. İ. Bal (Comp.), in 21. Yüzyılın
eşiğinde Türk dış polikası (pp. 409-439). Alfa Yayınları.
Arı, T. (2004a). 21. yüzyılda Türk dış politikası. Nobel Yayınları.
Arı, T. (2004b). Geçmişten günümüze Ortadoğu, siyaset, savaş ve diplomasi. Alfa Yayınları.
Armaoğlu, F. (1994). Filistin meselesi ve Arap-İsrail savaşları (1948-1988). Türkiye İş Bankası
Kültür Yayınları.
Ataman, M. (2002). Özal leadership and restructuring of Turkish ethnic policy in the 1980s. Middle
Eastern Studies, 38(4), 123-142.
Ataman, M. (2003). Özalist dış politika: Aktif ve rasyonel bir anlayış. Bilgi, 7(2), 49-64.
Ayhan, V. (2006). İmparatorluk yolu: Petrol savaşlarının odağında Ortadoğu. Nobel Yayıncılık.
Baharçiçek, A. (2020). Yeni dünya düzeninde Türk dış politikası. Orion Kitapevi.
Balcı, A. & Madakbaş Gülener, E. (2018). Turgut Özal dış politikası: Amerikan düzeninde yeniden
konumlanma ve otonomi arayışı. Muhafazakar Düşünce Dergisi, 15(55), 77-98.
Baş, A. (2018). Soğuk Savaş döneminde Türkiye-İsrail ilişkileri (1948-1991). İsrailiyat: İsrail ve
Yahudi Çalışmaları Dergisi, 3, 92-122.
Bayraklı, E. (2014). Kuzey Irak-İsrail ilişkileri. K. İnat & M. Ataman (Ed), in Ortadoğu Yıllığı 2013
(p. 463-486). Açılım Kitap.
Bozdağlıoğlu, Y. (2003). Turkish foreign policy and Turkish identity: A constructivist approach.
Routledge Series.
Brown, C. S. (2007). Turkey in the Gulf wars of 1991 and 2003. Turkish Studies, 8(1), 85-119.
Brown, J. (1987). The military and politics in Turkey. Armed Forces & Society, 13(2), 235–253.
Çiller, T. (1996). Turkish foreign policy in its dynamic traditon. Perceptions: Journal of
International Affairs, 1(2).
Cleveland, W. C. (2008). Modern Ortadoğu tarihi. M. Harmancı (Trans.). Agora Kitaplığı.
(Originally published in 2004)
Daban, C. (2017). Turgut Özal dönemi Türkiye dış politikası. Selçuk Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari
Bilimler Fakültesi Sosyal Ekonomik Araştırmalar Dergisi, 17(33), 77-96.

www.turkishstudies.net/economy
612 Umut Turgut Yıldırım

Demiray, M. (2015). Turgut Özal dönemi Türkiye Cumhuriyeti’nin dış politikası. M. Bıyıklı (Ed.),
in Türk dış politikası –cumhuriyet dönemi 1- (pp. 239-284). Bilimevi Basın Yayın.
Dündar, L. (2016). Özal dönemi Türk dış politikasında Turgut Özal’ın kişisel özelliklerinin rolü.
Ankara Üniversitesi Türk İnkılâp Tarihi Enstitüsü Atatürk Yolu Dergisi, 58, 1-20.
Erdoğan, A. & Habash, L. (2020). U.S. policy toward the Israeli-Palestinian conflict under the Trump
administration. Insight Turkey, 22(1), 125-146.
Gülbay, A. (2022). Turkey and the Gulf War, 1991: Reactions to the imposition of adventurism in
the Grand National Assembly of Turkey. Cumhuriyet Tarihi Araştırmaları Dergisi (CTAD),
18(36), 1035-1062.
Hale, W. (1992). Turkey, the Middle East and the Gulf crisis. International Affairs, 68(4), 679–692.
Karpat, K. H. (1970). The military and politics in Turkey, 1960-64: A socio-cultural analysis of a
revolution. The American Historical Review, 75(6), 1654-1683
Karpat, K. H. (2012). Türk dış politikası tarihi. Timaş Yayınları.
Kasapsaraçoğlu, M. (2020). Türkiye’nin Ortadoğu politikasının ekonomi politiği: DP (1950-1960)
ve ANAP (1983-1991) dönemlerinin karşılaştırmalı analizi. History Studies (Doç. Dr. İlknur
Mangır Karagöz Armağanı), 12(2) 497-513.
Khan, M. S. (2015). The transformation of Turkish foreign policy towards the Middle East. Policy
Perspectives, 12(1), 31-50.
Kösebalan, H. (2011). Turkish foreign policy (Islam, nationalism, and globalization). Palgrave
Macmillan.
Kurt, V. (2018). Özal’ın dış politikası: Uluslararası siyaset, değişim ve süreklilik. Muhafazakar
Düşünce Dergisi, 15(55), 157-171.
Larrabee, F. S. (2007). Turkey rediscovers the Middle East. Foreign Affairs. 86(4), 103-114.
Lewis, B. (1996). Ortadoğu. M. Harmancı (Trans.). Sabah Kitapları. (Originally published in 1995).
Önal, T. & Özdağ, A. (2016). Körfez savaşı ve Türk dış politikasına etkisi. Turkish Studies, 11(16),
53-70.
Özdemir, S. (2020). İran-Irak Savaşı: Türkiye sınırlarında terörizme etkisi. Akademik Bakış, 13(26),
49-77.
Sander, O. (2013). Türkiye’nin dış politikası. İmge Kitapevi.
Sayarı, S. (2000). Turkish foreign policy in the post-cold war era: The challenges of multi-
regionalism. Journal of International Affairs Turkey: A Struggle between Nation and State,
54(1), 169-182.
Sinkaya, B. (2011). Geçmişten günümüze Türkiye’nin Ortadoğu politikası ve batı etkisi. ADAM
AKADEMİ, 1, 79-100.
Sönmezoğlu, F. (2006). II. Dünya Savaşı’ndan günümüze Türk dış politikası. Der Yayınevi.
Tachau, F., & Heper, M. (1983). The State, politics, and the military in Turkey. Comparative Politics,
16(1), 17–33.
Tuncer, H. (2015). Özal’ın dış politikası (1983-1989). Kaynak Yayınları.
Turan, Ö. (2003). Medeniyetlerin çatıştığı nokta: Ortadoğu.
Uzer, U. (2013). Turkish-Israeli relations: Their rise and fall. Middle East Policy,20(1), 97-110.

Turkish Studies - Economy, 19(2)

Turgut Özal's Middle East Policies: Decisions and Its Reflections on Turkish Politics 613

Uzgel, İ. (1998). Türk dış politikasında 'sivilleşme' ve demokratikleşme sorunları: Körfez Savaşı
örneği. Ankara Üniversitesi SBF Dergisi, 53(1), 309-326.
Yavuz, M. H. & Khan, M. R. (1992). Turkish foreign policy toward the Arab-Israeli conflict: Duality
and the development (1950 - 1991). Arab Studies Quarterly, 14(4), 69-94.
Yavuz, M. H. (1997). Turkish-Israeli relations through the lens of Turkish identity debate. Journal
of Paletine Studies, 27(1), 22-37.
Yayman, H. (2018). Turgut Özal kimdir?. Muhafazakâr Düşünce Dergisi, 15(55), 173-184.
Yeşilbursa, B. K. (2010). Demokrat parti dönemi Türkiye’nin Ortadoğu politikası (1950-1960).
History Studies (Middle East Special Issue), 2, 67-98.
Yücealtay, C. (2022). İran-Irak Savaşı ve Türkiye üzerine etkileri. Bellek Uluslararası Tarih ve
Kültür Araştırmaları Dergisi, 4(1), 21-34.
Zürcher, E. J. (2015). Modernleşen Türkiye’nin tarihi. Y. Saner (Trans.). İletişim Yayınları.

www.turkishstudies.net/economy