Abstract
Chap. 5 examines the central Asian response to the Turkish Model which can only be considered in terms of the political, economic and social realities at the time of the emergence of the republics (which was the only time when it had been seriously considered) but also in terms of the fact that the region had only just emerged out of being a part of a larger Soviet Union, was being considered by China, the state bordering the eastern side of the region, as its zone of influence and was generally being visualized as an emerging arena for international competition for its natural resources. This was also the time when the states were in the process of transforming themselves and there was reassertion of the “national” in every sphere. It is also necessary to keep in mind that the reaction of the four “Turkic” states of central Asia to the model was also dissimilar. Domestic compulsions and foreign policy orientation of the states determined the level of enthusiasm of these states regarding their relations with Turkey and the “Turkish Model.” This chapter argues that the level of enthusiasm that the states displayed towards the model was dependent not only on considerations of “ethnic” or “linguistic” connections or even on the economic support that Turkey could extend to them but also on various other factors like the level of Russian interest in the region, Russia’s relations with Turkey, Chinese concerns about eastern Turkestan, international politics and the significance of the region in geopolitical terms, oil and pipeline politics and the projection of Turkey as a bridge for the states’ relation with the West. In this context it examines the relevance of the Gulen movement in the relation of these states with Turkey.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
- 2.
For details on why the Central Asian leaders decided to join the CIS, see Islamov (1994). Here it is pointed out that the primary reason for this was economic and the result of the administrative command integration setup in the Soviet period.
- 3.
See Nezavisimaya Gazeta May 13, 1993.
- 4.
See Argumenty and Fakty June 26, 1993.
- 5.
Jackson outlines three key stages through which foreign policy moved. In the first stage (August 1991–March 1992), debate and policy were characterized by the domination of liberal westernist ideas. In the second phase (March 1992–November 1993), multiple ideas were entertained and pragmatic nationalism became prominent in foreign policy debate. During the third (November 1993–June 1996), debate and government rhetoric were dominated by pragmatic nationalism. There was broad agreement that Russia should remain involved in its “natural sphere of influence” though the negative consequences and costs of this involvement were also aired. Policies were focused on particular interests and specific actions, and their success varied depending on the particular case.
- 6.
For a detailed account of the nature of Xinjiang’s western borderlands see Raczka (1998). Raczka contrasts the natural north–south divide of the region with the imperial east–west divide and suggests that the north–south divide is far less arbitrary than the imperial China–Russia border.
- 7.
Eastern Turkestan Information, 2(2), March 1992, cited in Dillon (2004).
- 8.
- 9.
V Uzbekistane otmechaetsya prazdnik Navrov, Uzbekistan Nation News Agency, http://uza.uz/ru/society/2445.
- 10.
The author met with one such group based in Ankara that connected Uighurs, Kazakhs, and Uzbeks with people in Turkey.
- 11.
See for instance an interview of the Ambassador of Turkey to Uzbekistan in, The Journal of Turkish Weekly, (2010).
- 12.
Sabah Gazetesi1992, cited in Bal (2000).
- 13.
Newspot, June 18, 1992, cited in Bal (2000).
References
Asia Times Online (2000). Russia frets over Islamic militants, August 29. http://www.atimes.com.
Auezov, M. M. (2004). India, Russia and China in the emerging dynamics of Central Asia. In K. Santhanam & R. Dwivedi (Eds.), India and Central Asia: Advancing the common interest. New Delhi: Anamaya Publishers.
Bal, I. (2000). Turkey’s relations with the West and Turkic republics, the r ise and fall of the Turkish Model. Burlington: Ashgate.
Chufrin, G. (Ed.). (1999). Russia and Asia:The emerging security agenda. New York: OUP.
Dillon, M. (2004). Xinjiang—China’s Muslim Far Northeast. London: Routledge Curzon.
Ferghana.ru. (2007). Uzbekistan wants to be friends with Turkey again and counts on its support, August 31.
Ferghana.ru. (2013). Sait Nursi and Fethullah Gülen: Religious and educational activities between Turkey and central Asia 20 years after the end of the USSR, January 27.
Galyamova, V. (2002). Vozrozhdayushiesya Gigant i Kitaiskaya Ugroza v Istorichiskoi Retrospektive. Kazakhstan i Sovremennie Mir, 1(2).
Gokalp, Z. (1992). The principles of Turkism. Leiden: E.J. Brill.
Hymen, A. (1997). Turkestan and Pan Turkism revisited. Central Asian Survey, 16(3).
Islamov, B. A. (1994). Post Soviet Central Asia and the Commonwealth of Independent States. In B. Manz (Ed.), Central Asia in historical perspective. Boulder: Westview Press.
Iwashita, A. (2004). A 4000 kilometer journey along the Sino-Russian border, Slavic Research Centre. Hokkaido University: Sapporo.
Jackson, N. J. (2003). Russian foreign policy and the CIS: Theories, debates and actions. London: Routledge.
Karimov, I. A. (1995). Yedinstvo, Proshlovo i Budusheyevo, Rech na Torzhestvennom Otkritii Dnei Kazakhstana v Uzbekistane, May 23, 1994, in Turkestan Nash Obshii Dom. Tashkent: Uzbekistan.
Karimova, G. (1995). Politico Aakonomichyeskoiye Reforme v Uzbekistane Realii I Perspektivi. Tashkent: Uzbekistan.Kazakhstanskaya Pravda. (1995). The Kazakh President defines the republic’s foreign policy, February 16.
Laruelle, M., & Peyrouse, S. (2012). The Chinese question in Central Asia, domestic order, social c hange and the Chinese factor. London: Hurst and Co.
Makarenko, T. (2000). Russian language in Kyrgyzstan: Balancing the security with Economics. Central Asia and Caucasus Analyst.
Malik, D. J. M. (1993). China, Central Asia, India and Pakistan now come face to face with vigorous separatism. Defence and Foreign Affairs Strategic Policy, September 30.
Marat, E. (2007). Turkey’s cultural and economic presence grows in Kyrgyzstan. Eurasia Daily Monitor, 4(145).
Melet, Y. (1998). China’s political and economic relations with Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan. Central Asian Survey, 17(2).
Naribaev, M. K. (1999). Cooperation Kazakhstan-Turkey—Turkey as a constituent part of integration process. Vestnik KazGu, Almaty, No. 1.
Niyazov, S. A. (2000). Turkmens, Turkmenistan, the world: Millennia and the 21st Century, Link between times and civilizations. http//:presidentniyazov.tripod.com/id39html.
Niyazov, S. A. (2003). It is very difficult to build a state. Address at the conference of the Humanitarian Association of “World Turkmens,” http//:presidentniyazov.tripod. com/id14html.
Niyazov, S. A. (2004). Strategic partnership in the ideals of peace and humanism. UN Chronicle Online Edition, Issue 2, http://presidentniyazov.tripod.com/id1.html.
Ormushev, A. S. (2005). Turkish republic’s contribution to the sphere of education in Kyrgyzstan in role and place of the Turkic civilization among the world civilizations. Proceedings of the second international Congress on Turkic civilization. Bishkek: Kyrgyz Turkish Manas University Publication.
Osmonov, J. (2011). Turkish Prime Minister visits Kyrgyzstan. Central Asia-Caucasus Institute Analyst, February 3.
Presidency of the Republic of Turkey. (2010). Decision to lend a helping hand to Kyrgyzstan from Turkic Council, June 15, http://www.tccb.gov.tr/news/397/49808/decision-to-lend-a-helping-hand-to-kyrgyzstan-from-turkic-council.html.
Raczka, W. (1998). Xinjiang and its Central Asian Borderlands. Central Asian Survey, 17(3).
Sen, M. (2005). Turkish Islamist Entrepreneurs in Central Asia. In B. N. Schlyter (Ed.), Prospects for democracy in Central Asia, Istanbul: Swedish Research Institute in Istanbul.
Sengupta, A. (2009). Heartlands of Eurasia: The geopolitics of political space. Lanham: Lexington Books.
Sergei, G. (1997). Russia’s Policy Towards Central Asia. Washington, D.C: Carnegie Moscow Centre.
State News Agency of Turkmenistan. (2011). Leaders of Turkmenistan and Turkey discuss prospects of strategic partnership, June 1, http://www.turkmenistan.gov.tm/en/idr=1&id=110601a.
Syroezhkin, K. (1999). The policy of Russia in Central Asia: A perspective from Kazakhstan. In C. Gennady (Ed.), Russia and Asia:The emerging security agenda. New York: OUP.
Tajikistan Daily Digest. (2002). Central Asian nations may prefer USA to Russia: Tajik Newspaper, January 24.
The Journal of Turkish Weekly. (2010). Turkey-Uzbekistan: Strengthening cooperation and achieving progress, December 2.
Today’s Zaman. (2009). Turkey-Kazakhstan relations hit a peak, October 25.
Today’s Zaman. (2013). Turkey signs 12 agreements with Turkmenistan during Gul’s visit, May 30.
Valkenier, E. K. (1994). Russian policies in Central Asia: Change or continuity. SAIS Review, 14(2), Summer-Fall.
World Bulletin. (2011). Turkish, Turkmen presidents meet to discuss gas transfer cooperation, May 31.
Yanik, L. K. (2004 March). The politics of educational exchange: Turkish education in Eurasia. Europe-Asia Studies, 56(2).
Yermukanov, M. (2005). Kazakhstan and Turkey search for common ground. Eurasia Daily Monitor, 2(87), May 4.
Zvyagelskaia, I. D. (1994). Central Asia and the Caucasus: New geopolitics. In N. Vitaly (Ed.), Central Asia and Transcaucasus: Ethnicity and conflict. Westport: Greenwood Publishing Group.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2014 Maulana Abul Kalam Azad Institute of Asian Studies (MAKAIAS)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Sengupta, A. (2014). The Central Asian Response to “Models”. In: Myth and Rhetoric of the Turkish Model. Springer, New Delhi. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-81-322-1765-7_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-81-322-1765-7_5
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, New Delhi
Print ISBN: 978-81-322-1764-0
Online ISBN: 978-81-322-1765-7
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)