Quite apart from Trump, the "Turkey team" under his administration was dominated by people who believed that Turkey could somehow be brought to understand its "real" interests and join the US as a barrier against Iran and Russia.

1/9

This is wrong on multiple levels, not least in that it romanticized "the good old days" that weren't quite what they remember and Turkey has aimed at limited cooperation, rather than hostility to Iran and Russia *for decades* (i.e., this policy predates the AKP)

2/9

I'm delighted that there will be a change of personnel. I fear (and suspect, if I'm going to be honest), that the new faces will bring with them old problems.

3/9

Yes, we will be done with Trump's disdain for American law and international institutions. On the other hand, I suspect that quite a few people in Washington are still imagining a return to a past that never was.

4/9

In particular, I think there has been a general failure to contend with how regional structural changes have pushed Turkey towards a more independent foreign policy, while ideological predilections have ensured this FP is more disruptive

5/9

I think @stevenacook highlighted this gap in view best, but I fear that the voices who will get heard are going to be singing happier songs.

6/9 https://www.cfr.org/report/future-u.s.-turkey

You're already hearing that now: sweet murmurings about a reset and new institutional approach. Reminders that "Turkey is bigger than Erdogan" (whatever that means in practice.

7/9

I don't have any Washington affiliations right now so I can say what I've always thought: it's bullshit. But it's the kind of bullshit that appears to sell in Washington: it sounds reasonable and productive. It is served with a healthy dollop of romanticism for the past.
8/9

It ignores both ideology and structural trends that make the US simply less important than it once was.

But gosh it smells sweet.

And if there is one thing that always sells, it is sweet smelling bullshit.

9/9