Will Erdoğan’s new Kasımpaşa style prevail in Turkish policy?

"Relaxed like a Turk," is written under a not very relaxed looking Turkish diplomat. In other words the profile of a Turkish diplomat is depicted as one that does not feel as "one of us," who is always suspicious something is cooking behind his back.

"Mon cher," is the general word used with a negative connotation to depict a Turkish diplomat. As Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan has implied, the general image of a Turkish diplomat at home is one that is doing nothing but hopping from one cocktail to the other with a whisky glass in his hands. The perception of Turkish diplomats abroad is however, totally different than the one at home.

Especially on multilateral platforms where consensus is the key word, Turkish diplomats are known to be very intransigent and inflexible. Probably, the use of the expression "red lines," (meaning being close to discussion from a certain point) in diplomacy is a Turkish innovation.

I have known many diplomats that have contributed to that perception. For this reason, I was particularly happy to see Erdoğan defy the strong "no solution in Cyprus" lobby in the foreign ministry bureaucracy. Erdoğan’s whole strategy was based on breaking the image of "Turkish intransigence in Cyprus." He gave the message to the world that Turkey would do much more than the Greek side to find a solution to the problem.

Nowadays Erdoğan has been suggesting for Turkish diplomats to behave more aggressively. He seems to propagate a confrontational attitude to a one that is consensus seeking. And he does so at a time when as the non permanent member of the Security Council, Turkish diplomacy should be excelling on consensus building.

This obviously is not the only contradiction in prime minister’s recent behavior. He has been arguing for dialogue with Hamas. "Until Hamas renounces terrorism we won’t talk to Hamas," says the international community. "How can you exclude Hamas, which came to power through elections?" asks Erdoğan. This is the same person who said he won’t talk to Democratic Society Party, or DTP, until it stops supporting the outlawed Kurdistan Workers’ Party. Do we need to remind him that the DTP entered the parliament through elections?

It is not for the first time that Israel has heard from Turkish officials the need to talk to Hamas, the need to lift the embargo on Gaza strip. But obviously a diplomatic rhetoric was used while conveying these messages. Prime Minister has apparently decided that diplomatic rhetoric is not effective enough. But as of today, his aggressive behavior has not led to a change in Israel’s views on Hamas. To the contrary, we might even have reached the point where Israel might review its relations with Turkey.

Shimon Perez has personally used his credit many times on behalf of Turkey. He personally worked for Turkey and I am among those convinced that he is a statesman that genuinely believes in the importance of Turkey. He absolutely did not deserve being told that "he knows very well how to kill people."

There is no doubt that Turkish-Israeli relations will suffer from the Davos episode in the short- and mid-term. I am, however, among those who believe that the two countries will overcome this crisis. Obviously the strategic interdependence is the key reason why the two countries will not let relations go down the slope. But most probably the Israeli administration also questions to what degree Prime Minister’s recent rhetoric will prevail over the whole foreign policy of Turkey in the mid- to long-term. In fact this is the question the international community started to ask more frequently. Foreign observers are waiting for the aftermath of the local elections to find the answer.