And we would not have brought all this up if the international conference “15th Anniversary of TurkPA: Experience of the Past, Today’s Realities and Future Prospects” recently concluded in Baku had not taken another step towards the realization of this idea. The event marked further efforts towards harmonization of legislation and establishment of a common legal space of the states of the Turkic world, which, of course, is the basis for a successful integration process.
We should point out right away that the united Turkic world and Turan are concepts that have different semantic meanings. Turan is more often understood as something belligerent, which sooner or later will enslave everyone and everything. And the lessons of the past, learned from the history of thousands of years ago, when Turkic tribes and states ruled over most of the Eurasian space, fighting with each other and often raiding and enslaving other countries, are used as the reason. Obviously, this is impossible today, and there are absolutely no prerequisites for pursuing such a bellicose policy in the future.
However, the idea of a united Turkic world is the creation of a certain geographical space across the territory of Turkic states, bound by everything that today connects the member countries of the European Union: first and foremost, a common foreign policy, security policy, civil rights policy, development of common rules of socio-economic development, and much more. That is why one should not confuse and draw parallels between very peaceful aspirations of Turkic states to unite on the principles similar to integration interaction of the EU countries with a mythical and bellicose Turan. Especially since international organizations may have different names, including Turan.
And yet, is it possible in the future to create an association of Turkic states that would resemble the European Union or would be even more perfect than this model of integration? Paradoxically, the process has already started, the Turkic world states have already gone part of the way, but the obstacles that the participants of this complex game will still have to face make one doubt the quick success of the enterprise.
We will explain and analyze all the pros and cons. But before that, let us unveil the intrigue and talk about why we chose as an example the international integration structure of the European Union and why we say that the states of the Turkic world have already completed part of the journey.
Let us draw some parallels. Here is a brief history of the establishment of the Organization of Turkic States (OTS) in its current form. In October 1992, the first Summit of Turkic-speaking states was held in Ankara. In the same year, as a result of the event held in Almaty, a new structure, the Common Administration of Turkic Culture and Arts, emerged, and a year later the International Organization of Turkic Culture was established, which declared as its main mission the preservation and passing on to future generations of common material and cultural heritage of the Turkic peoples.
In 1994, the idea of organizing a Eurasian Economic Union with the participation of Eastern European states and China was discussed at the summit of heads of Turkic-speaking states, but it did not pass, because it was only indirectly related to Turkic unity. It was only an attempt of the Turkic world to take into account the threats that the unification would have to face in the future, and in order to minimize them, the ground for getting closer to such countries as China, Russia and European states was being probed. Türkiye, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan and Kyrgyzstan, i.e., the independent Turkic states that had expressed their desire for unification, were well aware that each of the major continental players in Eurasia would have their own reasons for throwing a wrench in the works of the integration in socio-economic terms, not to mention foreign policy issues, and even more so security. Be that as it may, the Turkic states themselves unanimously decided to forego such a curtsy.
Then, in 1995, a similar Turkic summit was held again in Bishkek, and, incidentally, it was the first time that Türkiye voiced its interest in the project of building a highway that could connect it with the Central Asian states. That is, it was about restoring a part of what is now called the Great Silk Road, and to a certain extent the project is implemented thanks to the Baku-Tbilisi-Kars railway. Then, in 1998, the TurkPA was established, and in October 2009 the Turkic Council was founded, to be renamed the OTS in 2021.
The whole set of solved problems enabled the Turkic states to go part of the way to the formation of cultural, social, economic, legal and even military union within the framework of the above-mentioned six Turkic countries in a little more than twenty years. The European Union in its current form had to overcome a period of more than seventy years.
First, in 1951, Germany, Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, France and Italy formed the European Coal and Steel Community. This was necessitated by the desire to cope with the post-World War II devastation and to pool resources for steel production and coal production and trade. At the same time, there was a unification at the level of services in the telegraph and postal services. In 1956, the European Economic Community came into being, i.e., the foundation of a common market was laid in Europe, and the European Atomic Energy Community was established.
We could go on listing the stages of formation of the European Union, but it is clear that this supranational entity owes its emergence to the devastating Second World War, when European countries simply had to cope with economic problems together. In the case of Turkic states, the reason is somewhat different, although it is mostly economic as well. Of course, there is the idea of ethnic commonality, but the key point is the revival of the Great Silk Road, which was once used to export goods throughout Eurasia from China to Europe. And for the most part, it is this economic reason that makes the main continental players put obstacles in the way of the Turkic project.
European countries believe this will make them dependent on the OTS, through whose territory the route runs, while Russia and China have their own reasons to resent it. First, before the war in Ukraine, Russia had a fairly successful Trans-Siberian Railway, through which some goods from China were exported to Europe. However, in 1993, the well-known TRACECA program was established, initiated by Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan and Georgia. There was no OTS as such at that time, and the European Union, interested in the development of a transport corridor from Europe through the Black Sea, the Caucasus, the Caspian Sea with access to the Central Asian countries, undertook the financing of the project. But later on, most of the countries that formed TRACECA created the OTS, which, according to the Europeans, increased the threats for cargo transportation, as the process is easier to manage when Turkic states are divided both in their approaches to tariffs and logistics of cargo transit and many other issues. It makes it easier to negotiate with them and put pressure on some through others.
As for Russia, it believes that the establishment of the OTS increases the political threats to the country in terms of integrity, since much of its territory is populated by peoples of Turkic origins. They fear that the prosperity of the Turkic states within the new international organization may force the national territorial entities to start raising the issue of secession from Russia. And, by the way, China also has a similar reason to be wary of the OTS, because, according to the generally held opinion, the Uighurs, who form the second largest predominantly Muslim and fully Turkic ethnic group in China, are in a restricted position in terms of civil rights and freedoms. So, the Celestial Empire also fears that the success of the Turkic world states may trigger a surge of national liberation movement among the Uighurs. The last thing China needs then is the military power of the new international entity, that is, the OTS. This is why China is already trying to boost its economic ties with Central Asian countries, and through the relatively young Turkic states, reliant on Chinese investments, to slow down in the future endeavors, any disadvantageous for China, in the framework of the OTS.
Of course, when discussing the participants in the creation of a united Turkic world and the main players interested in slowing down the process, one cannot but mention the United States. Its position on this issue is ambiguous, i.e., there are no clearly pronounced accents, because theoretically, on the one hand, it is beneficial for America to have a united army of Turkic states right next to China, its main geostrategic rival, and on the other hand, in order for the Turkic world to really become a single geographical space, they will have to sacrifice Iran and strengthen Türkiye.
Türkiye, a NATO member, but still uncontrollable and independent in its foreign policy, and Iran, hostile but counterbalancing the Turkic factor, are the strongest states in the Middle East region from the military point of view. By supporting one or the other country in certain issues when necessary, the US achieves its goal here. But if there is no Iran, 30-40% of the population of which belongs to the Azerbaijani minority, one can imagine how much the Turkic and even the Azerbaijani factor, already demonstrating its disobedience to the powers that be, will be strengthened in the region. So, should the United States rock the boat and support anyone in this complex game, which, in turn, is only a part of the global American chess game?
The OTS members certainly still have a long way to go to more closely integrate economic ties, unify financial systems, and someday, perhaps, create a single currency. They will have to work just as hard to build joint armed forces and, in general, to do much of what the EU has today. The most challenging thing for these states may be the transfer of part of the governance functions to the supranational level. Only then will the OTS become a real active regional force, aimed, of course, at strengthening ties with all healthy actors in international relations.
Rauf Nasirov
Translated from Minval.az
