Few in America enamored by Trump’s praise for Erdogan

US President Donald Trump last week hosted Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan at the White House. The meeting and the press conference that followed highlighted Trump’s affinity with Erdogan — something that few others in Washington share. Many in Congress, the media and foreign policy think tanks criticized Trump’s comments at the press conference. A bipartisan group of members of Congress had even asked Trump to cancel the meeting.

The US-Turkey relationship is at a particularly low point, but Trump and Erdogan appeared to have a warm meeting. Trump said that he is “a big fan” of Erdogan and praised him for the cease-fire in northern Syria and for Turkey’s contributions to NATO.

There are few defenders of Trump’s policy toward Turkey, but they make some clear arguments. His defenders argue that Trump’s close relationship with Erdogan is an essential bridge to a key ally at a time when the bilateral relationship is struggling. Some assert that the relationship is the only thing preventing a total collapse of US-Turkey relations. Some say that Trump is trying to end “forever wars” and that it is in US interests to allow Turkey to manage northern Syria. Some of Trump’s defenders note that he and Erdogan have not always agreed, such as last month, when Trump threatened to destroy Turkey’s economy if it did not stop attacks on the Kurds.

There are some in Washington who acknowledge Turkey’s point of view. They note that Ankara has long been angry with the US for its alliance with the Syrian Kurds, which Turkey sees as terrorists; for its refusal to extradite Fethullah Gulen, who Turkey accuses of planning the 2016 attempted coup against Erdogan; for its prosecution of Turkey’s Halkbank for alleged violations of US sanctions against Iran; and the recent passage of a House of Representatives resolution to formally recognize the Armenian genocide.

However, even among those who see Turkey as an important ally, critics of Trump’s Turkey policy — and particularly his meeting and press conference with Erdogan — are far more numerous and unusually bipartisan. It is not unusual to see strong criticism of Trump’s foreign policy in the media and among foreign policy experts in Washington think tanks. It is unusual to see multiple Democratic and Republican members of Congress openly criticize the president. The willingness of several Republicans in Congress to criticize the president on the same day that impeachment hearings were underway is indicative of how strongly many Republicans oppose Trump’s approach toward Erdogan.

One of the two biggest issues for Erdogan’s critics in Washington is Turkey’s military offensive against the Syrian Kurds, who were essential allies of the US in fighting Daesh. Even Republicans widely condemned Trump’s apparent acquiescence to Erdogan’s plans to attack the Kurds; and the subsequent cease-fire did little to dampen the criticism. The widespread view in Washington is that Trump abandoned a genuine ally and jeopardized years of counterterrorism work in Syria. The other major issue is Turkey’s purchase of the Russian S-400 missile defense system. Turkey’s possession of the Russian system could undermine the effectiveness of NATO’s advanced weapons systems and potentially leak important weapons information to Russia.

Among other concerns, there are many in Washington who are deeply worried about Erdogan’s erosion of Turkish democracy, including extensive human rights violations and Turkey’s ignoble rank as the world’s largest jailer of journalists. Multiple cases of Erdogan’s security guards roughing up protesters and trying to eject journalists from events in Washington have not aided his image in the US capitol.

Some of Trump’s critics want a much tougher approach toward Turkey and active US condemnation of Erdogan’s actions in Syria, relationship with Russia, and political repression. Others might be willing to accept Trump’s friendly approach toward Erdogan if they felt that the US was getting something in exchange. However, there is a widespread view in Washington that Erdogan is not making any concessions in exchange for Trump’s praise, let alone in exchange for Trump’s withdrawal of US troops from northern Syria and his delay of congressionally mandated sanctions on Turkey for its purchase of Russian missile defenses.

Congress is seriously considering further bipartisan sanctions on Turkey for its invasion of northern Syria. And the House resolution recognizing the Armenian genocide was a major symbolic blow to Turkey. While the president remains the key actor in US foreign policy, Congress also has powers that can be significant when there is bipartisan agreement, especially in the Senate.

Erdogan is taking a major gamble by basing his relations with the US entirely on his personal relationship with Trump. He might get lucky — Trump might remain friendly toward him, and he has a good chance of winning another four-year term in 2020. However, any foreign country with long-term interests in the US would be wise to cultivate relationships beyond any particular president, who serves a temporary term and could change his mind about a relationship. Countries that take a more future-oriented view will build relationships with both parties in Congress, and with foreign policy professionals and journalists, in order to ensure that the bilateral relationship can outlast one or two presidential terms.

• Kerry Boyd Anderson is a writer and political risk consultant with more than 14 years’ experience as a professional analyst of international security issues and Middle East political and business risk. Twitter: @KBAresearch