CC BY
33
ISLAM IN FOREIGN COUNTRIES
KANYBEK KUDAYAROV. INTRODUCTION TO TURKEY'S DEFENSE POLICY. Analytical review. (The ending, openinig in the previous issue)
Keywords: Turkey; defense policy; defense industry; armament; military conflict; security.
Kanybek Kudayarov,
PhD(History), Research Associate, Asia and Africa Department member, INION RAN, e-mail: kana8306@mail.ru
Citation: Kudayarov K. Introduction to Turkey's Defense Policy. Analytical review. The ending // Russia and the Moslem World, 2022, № 4 (318), P. 65-82. DOI: 10.31249/rmw/2022.04.06
Abstract. The review analyzes the publications of nine Turkish specialists who give an idea of the modern defense policy of Turkey, the main stages of its development and implementation. The authors provide comprehensive theoretical and practical information for a better understanding of the processes taking place in the military sphere. Much attention is paid to the domestic and foreign policy processes that predetermined the further development of the Turkish defense policy, the ultimate goal of which is to transform the Republic of Turkey into a strong regional power. Strategic autonomy, which official Ankara seeks both in the field of military-industrial production and in other sectors of the state's life, is an indispensable condition for achieving this goal.
The studies described in the review claim to make an important contribution to understanding the logic that the Turkish leadership adheres to in implementing its regional policy.
Defense Planning
Mehmet Hilmi Ozdemir and Nursima Shankulubey Baikal, representing the Ankara company "Savunma Teknolojileri Muhendislik ve Ticaret A.§.", define the term "defense" as a comprehensive concept that can be interpreted differently in relation to different disciplines. From a military point of view, "defense" can be defined as a kind of service that includes the concept of "security", which is provided by the armed forces to protect / eliminate threats using available resources. When considering "defense" from a political point of view, it implies generalization of the concept (instead of discussing specific events or details), which contributes to a departure from the original meaning of this term. Turning to the definition of the term "defense planning", it should be said that it implies an effective way of using the resources allocated to defense to protect national interests, the ultimate goal of which is to ensure the desired level of security. According to the authors, at a time when the concept of an "asymmetric threat" was out of the question, the main goal of the armed forces was to outnumber the enemy in manpower and weapons. For example, the Pentagon's long-term defense planning during the Cold War was very simple: it involved studying which systems were in service in the USSR, after which mass production of similar weapons systems (aircraft, aircraft carriers, tanks, etc.) was launched.
Review of defense planning. Changes in defense planning are associated with important historical and geopolitical events, with regional and global processes that increase uncertainty in the world. These include the Second World War, the collapse of the Berlin Wall and the collapse of the USSR, the end of the Cold
War period, the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, the collapse of the Iraqi regime, the events of the "Arab Spring" and much more. For example, after the collapse of the Soviet Union, the Americans declared that the USSR no longer poses a threat to Western Europe and that the planning of NATO's armed forces should be considered in the context of crisis management [4, p. 128].
Experts believe that today we are in an environment where changes and transformations, especially in technology and real politics, are taking place at a fairly rapid pace, leading to a parallel change in the security environment and an increase in uncertainty. Defense planners should understand that the approaches they use should be aimed at creating flexible and elastic plans. Defense planning should be conducted taking into account the analysis of the lessons of the past and the realities of the present.
New Defense Technologies
Argyment Karapynar (Ankara Scientific University, Ankara, Turkey) rightly emphasizes that progress in science and technology is largely due to defense needs. The development of various technological solutions based on cybernetic, quantum, space, bio- and other technologies has seriously advanced defense projects to a qualitatively new level. With the Fourth Industrial Revolution, the regulatory role of the industrial sector has reached a high level. The development of defense technologies has changed the understanding and capabilities of states in the field of design. Karapynar is confident that in this new era, artificial intelligence (AI) will reach unprecedented sizes, especially due to the combination of machine learning, unmanned systems and robotics. At the strategic and operational levels, AI will increase the clarity of intelligence, evaluate minor changes in large databases and reduce human influence on plans and decisions [5, p. 146]. Decision-making processes will change
as systems become more autonomous. Artificial intelligence systems and autonomous systems will also change the use of human power. As technology evolves, more and more developments will bring innovation with them. It is important for a state to raise awareness about the development of defense technologies and, accordingly, to have high-level defense technologies.
Turkish Defense Industry in the Period before 1974
Husny Ezlu (National Defense University, Istanbul, Turkey) analyzes the history of the Turkish "defense industry" of the last century, when the most important events that determine the dynamics of the Turkish military industry took place. The Ottoman state maintained its military and technological superiority until the end of the 17th century. However , since the 18th century it begins to lag behind Europe and only since the 19th century begins to pursue a policy of active development of the defense industry. The 20th century seems to be the most dynamic in this regard, which accounts for the zigzag development of the Turkish defense industry, which was directly influenced by foreign policy factors. For example, the rapid growth of military production in the early twentieth century was followed by its reduction (prescribed as part of the conclusion of the 1918 Mudros Armistice). Nevertheless, the further creation of military factories in Anatolia is associated with the beginning of the national struggle of Turkey led by Ataturk against the occupying forces. These plants subsequently came under the control of the General Directorate of Military Factories of Turkey, established in 1921. Due to the conditions prevailing after the Second World War in the defense sector, a new (leading) organization was created - the Corporation of Mechanical Engineering and Chemical Industry (MECC). By 1940, significant progress had been made in the defense industry, but assistance under the Marshall Plan and the Truman
Doctrine led in most cases to the closure of Turkish military enterprises, while a smaller part of it was repurposed. Thus, in the 1950s and 1960s, the Turkish defense industry practically ceased to exist, since within the framework of American military assistance, on the one hand, military equipment was replenished, but, on the other hand, this hindered the development of Turkish military factories, reducing domestic orders and creating a burden on the budget. Under these conditions, in 1968, the aircraft factory producing the TNK-5A light transport aircraft had to be transformed into a textile factory. The same fate befell many other military enterprises.
It was only after the Cyprus events (1974) that the countdown to the revival of the Turkish defense industry began. The Cyprus peacekeeping operation and the arms embargo imposed on Turkey after this operation revealed the need to develop a defense industry based on national resources [6, p. 175]. Despite the numerous difficulties that stand in the way of the development of the defense sector, Turkey has managed not only to make significant progress in this direction and achieve 75% import substitution of military products, but also to move to the export of its military products.
Turkish Defense Industry from 1974 to the Present
Expert Merv Saren (Bayezid Lightning University, Ankara, Turkey) examines the situation of the modern Turkish military-industrial complex, the foundations of which were laid in the mid-1970s. As you know, due to the assistance provided by the United States to Turkey in the 1940s and 1970s, by the 1960s the latter had turned into a country dependent financially, economically and militarily on the United States and NATO. However, since the 1960s, despite all the opportunities and advantages that Turkey and its allies offered each other, problems began to arise in relations between them. Frustrations about the policy pursued towards Turkey by the United States
and partners in the North Atlantic Treaty began to accumulate in the country. The first case of the Turks falling into some kind of frustration was associated with Washington's withdrawal of Jupiter missiles from Turkey without notifying official Ankara. The second unpleasant moment for the Turkish authorities was the disagreement with the Americans during the Cyprus events of 1963-1964, in which the United States categorically opposed Turkey's use of US military assistance to resolve the Cyprus issue (military intervention in Cyprus). The crisis in Turkish-American relations has become an incentive for the revival of the Turkish defense industry. Further actions of the United States contributed to the complete reversal of Turkish policy towards supporting its own military-industrial complex. For example, the US embargo on arms supplies to Turkey for the period 19751978 not only once again exposed the problem of supplying Western-style weapons, but also actualized the issues of lack of own resources for their production. Despite the existing problems, it was in the 1970s that industrialization, which was carried out under the "Erbakan" motto "let's make our own tank and engine", noticeably accelerated. In 1973, the company TAI (Turkish Aerospace Industries) was established, in 1975 -Aselsan and Tumosan.
A series of important events taking place since the late 1970s, including the Iranian Revolution (1979), the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan (1979), the Iran-Iraq War (1980-1988) and other events, have increased the geopolitical and geostrategic significance of Turkey in NATO, which allowed the resumption of military assistance to Turkey [7, p. 208]. However, since the 1990s, there has been another crisis in these relations caused by differences in the definition and approaches to solving Turkish security problems, since Turkey's struggle with the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK), drug trafficking, arms smuggling, illegal immigration has not received sufficient attention and support from the EU and NATO.
Since the early 1980s, Aspilsan, Tusa§ and other defense enterprises have been established. Despite the state monopoly in the defense sector, since the mid-1980s, private companies have been encouraged to invest in the military-industrial complex. In 1985, Law No. 3238 was adopted, aimed at the production of various types of weapons, tools and equipment for Turkish needs. For the development and modernization of the military-industrial complex, the Defense Industry Development and Support Department (SAGEB) was created. The Turkish defense industry has made a big leap forward with the creation of defense enterprises on a project basis [7, p. 211].
In the last two decades, the understanding of Turkish defense and security has been based on three basic concepts: the "internal concept", the "national concept" and the "concept of strategic autonomy". The main feature of these concepts is to meet internal military needs at the expense of their own resources. Great progress has been made in the development and inventory of domestic and national products, such as the ATAK helicopter, the Hurku§ general purpose helicopter, the Altay tank and the Milgem. The list of TAF (Turkish Air Force) includes ground, air and sea platforms, such as armored vehicles, UAVs, training aircraft, air defense systems, etc. The Turkish defense industry has begun to transform into a new structure that focuses on such procurement models as "joint production / technology transfer", "original design" and "R&D", instead of the previously practiced "smart procurement" and "licensed production". The level of satisfaction of Turkey's domestic needs has increased from 25% in 2002 to 70% by 2020. At the same time, the processes of research, development, and production of complex technological products are continuing, the number of which has grown rapidly from 66 (in 2002) to 667 (in 2018). In proportion to the development of the domestic military-industrial complex, their financing is also growing, expressed in the allocation of 60 billion dollars from the state budget in 2018, of which for R&D needs accounts for 1.45 billion
. The volume of Turkish exports in the defense and aerospace industry increased from $248 million (2002) to $2.2 billion (2018). The number of companies operating in the defense industry has increased from 56 to 1,500. It is also a great achievement that 7 Turkish companies (Aselsan, Havelsan, Roketsan, TAI / Tusa§, STM, BMC, FNSS) were able to get into the international rating "Defense News Top 100", where one hundred leading manufacturers working in the defense industry are represented.
Turkey's Defense Strategies and Policies
Murat Aslan (Hassan Kalyonju University, Gaziantep, Turkey) believes that Turkey's security and defense strategy was actually determined by the requirements dictated by international structures during the Cold War, and was suitable in conditions of conventional or nuclear war. Turkey's modern security strategy is outlined in the "National Security Policy Document" (MGSB), also known as the "Red Book" (because of the color of its cover). As for the strategy of waging a regional war, it was developed taking into account the experience of the Cyprus problem in the 1970s [8, p. 230]. However, since the 1990s, the threats of separatist terrorism have come to the fore as part of this strategy.
While defense policy defines the priorities, principles and goals of defense, defense strategy refers to the method of policy implementation. The defense policy is reflected in the document entitled "National Policy of Turkey" [8, p. 238]. The Turkish National Military Strategy (developed by the Ministry of National Defense and approved by the President) defines the basic principles of a military-political nature in accordance with the priorities defined by the MGSB. The "Document on National Security Policy" is being developed by the National Security Council under the President of Turkey and covers the theoretical basis. This process includes 3 parts: protection / defense planning, protection management and its implementation.
Defense management is the systematic implementation of the processes of planning, organization and staffing, orientation and monitoring / supervision aimed at achieving the goal [8, p. 244]. Defense planning is conducted at the headquarters of the Ministry of National Defense. Protection management is carried out by the Supreme Defense Industry Coordination Council (SSYKK), which ensures coordination between ministries. There is also the Defense Industry Executive Committee (SSIK), which finances purchases and makes management decisions, and the Defense Industry Directorate (SSB) under the President, which coordinates the supply chain. The procurement process of SSYKK, SSIK and SSB focuses on the capabilities required by the military strategy in accordance with the MGSB. The ten-year procurement and supply program is being prepared / updated in accordance with the Operational Requirements plan of the Turkish Armed Forces (TAF) and the strategic target plan prepared with reference to the Turkish military strategy. Thus, the MGSB, where Turkey's security strategy and the national military strategy, which determines defense policy are being developed, form the basis of defense management efforts.
Turkey's Policy in the Field of Military Partnership
and Defense Cooperation
Ryfat Yengel (Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey) believes that during the Cold War, Turkey sought to join NATO in order to obtain long-term security guarantees. However, the Turkish application to join NATO was rejected twice because of the special position of Great Britain, which did not want to lose its influence on Turkey, as well as because of the unwillingness of the Scandinavian countries, who were afraid of drawing the Alliance into unnecessary conflicts if the Turkish state was accepted [9, p. 265]. Turkey's participation in the Korean War on the side of the United States, other foreign policy actions of official Ankara, as well as the United States' own
foreign policy interests, contributed to Turkey's inclusion in NATO. The Americans believed that the loss of Turkey (and Greece) would lead to the loss of the Eastern Mediterranean and the Middle East. Turkey was seen as a leading country in preventing the spread of Soviet influence in the Middle East. However, Lyndon Johnson's letter to Ismet Inen (1964) severely undermined bilateral relations. The USSR took advantage of this and began to provide Turkey with great material assistance. The Joint Agreement on Defense and Cooperation signed in 1969 (Ortak Savunma ve I§birligi Anla§masi, OSIA) limited Washington's powers and transferred ownership rights to many bases built jointly by the Americans and Turks to the Turkish side, the remaining ones were identified as NATO bases. The agreement also prohibited the US military presence in Turkey outside of NATO missions.
The next crisis in Turkish-American relations was caused by the arms embargo imposed by the Americans (1975-1978) due to the Cyprus peacekeeping operation of Turkey in 1974. Turkey, for its part, also suspended the operation (OSIA). This severely limited the ability of the United States to monitor the formation and movement of Soviet troops. On the other hand, the actions of the United States forced the Turkish government to think about diversifying the sources of arms supplies and reducing dependence on American military technologies. Purchases of weapons began in Italy (fighters, helicopters, air-to-air missiles), Germany and France (anti-tank weapons, battle tanks, training aircraft, torpedo boats and mine protection ships) [9, p. 275]. Turkey has realized the importance of creating its own defense industry to ensure its security. To achieve this goal, the Turkish authorities began to take certain steps, among which the Turkish-American agreement of 1980, which provided for American assistance in this direction (Savunma ve Ekonomik I§birligi Anla§masi - SEIA), played an important role. As part of this assistance, TAI founded Turkish Aerospace in 1984. TAI's goals were the production, system integration and flight testing
of F-16 aircraft. In this context, TAI worked from 1987 to 1995. Throughout the 1980s, Turkey was the third country in terms of military aid received from the United States (after Israel and Egypt). When Jimmy Carter was President of the United States, he lifted the arms embargo imposed on Turkey. However, this was largely due to the events in the Middle East, which seriously increased Ankara's geostrategic importance in the eyes of the United States and NATO. The overthrow of the Shah's regime in Iran and the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan caused new security problems for Turkey and the United States, creating a security vacuum in eastern Turkey. Existing bases were modernized and new military bases were opened in the east and south-east of Turkey.
The collapse of the USSR and the disappearance of the Russian threat had serious consequences for Turkey's security. The Turks' need for Americans and "NATO" decreased, and Turkey began to pursue a more independent foreign policy. After the Cold War, NATO turned from a collective defense organization into a collective security organization. Since 1994, Turkey has been participating in NATO's Partnership for Peace (PFP) programs, and TAF has been performing important duties in NATO operations in the Balkans. Nevertheless, different perceptions of the threat, different mentality, cultural and civilizational differences and much more made it difficult to implement various aspects of Turkish-American cooperation. This was subsequently repeatedly reflected in the form of difficulties in purchasing American weapons for Turkey, in the creation of which Armenian and Greek congressmen played a major role. Despite these facts, cooperation on the modernization of F-16 fighters and other military equipment continued.
Turkey's Military and Defense Strategy:
Objectives, Supporting Elements and Results
Murat Eshiltas (Ankara University of Social Sciences, Ankara, Turkey) believes that Turkey's new military and defense strategies have undergone significant changes since the "Arab events" began to change the regional order in the Middle East and North Africa. The proliferation of non-state armed groups, the weakening of traditional state sovereignty, attempts to revise the borders of nation-states in the region, power struggles and proxy wars between countries throughout North Africa and the Middle East have shaken the security environment and forced Turkey to adopt a new military strategy. This strategy has manifested itself in Turkey's rapidly developing cross-border military operations, as well as in its rapidly growing defense industry. The transformation of its strategy is influenced by a number of domestic, regional and international events. Without going into details, we just note that as a result of the intense political struggle between the Turkish government and the army, the former managed to win over the latter and transfer the military and defense sectors to the civilian government. The new foreign policy vision initiated by the Government began to determine the priorities of the defense industry, and eventually the armed forces had to come to terms with the government's course and adapt to new conditions. At the first stage of the rule of the Justice and Development Party (AKP) (2002-2008), the army was the only entity that made decisions independent of the government on Turkey's foreign policy, taking into account its own strategic vision focused on protecting the republican (Kemalist) regime [10, p. 298]. However, in the following years, the AKP changed the balance in favor of democratizing civil-military relations. The military-industrial policy in Turkey, the attempted military coup on July 15, 2016, were a turning point in the history of civil-military relations in Turkey. After the failed coup d'état militaire, the Ministry of Defense became the highest
authority in the military decision-making process, one of the first decisions of which was the reorganization of the TAF structure. Thanks to the transition from a parliamentary system of government to a presidential one (after the 2017 referendum), the President has become an influential player in civil-military relations and the defense architecture of Turkey. The defense industry has begun to be perceived and developed as an integral part of Turkey's instruments of hard power to gain greater strategic freedom of maneuver against security threats in the region. Turkey's new strategy, combining a strengthened defense industry and military activity during the security crisis, paved the way for a more decisive position in the field of the armed forces and defense. The deterioration of diplomatic relations, as well as the growth of tactical and strategic differences regarding the Syrian conflict and other regional crises have led to the fact that Turkish leaders have lost confidence in partnership with Western countries, while this has had a significant impact on Turkey's military and defense strategy. In the context of the Syrian conflict, the growth of terrorist organizations - the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) and ISIS, the strengthening of the YPG (Kurdish People's Self-Defense Units in Syria, which are a branch of the PKK) - have created a serious strategic problem for Turkey's national security. This situation forced Turkey to adopt a more decisive military strategy to prevent the expansion and military activity of the PKK-YPG. The second dominant dynamic at the regional level was the deep geopolitical hostility between the major regional Powers, creating a very restrictive security environment in which all regional players make strategic commitments focused on security. Some players used direct military intervention in other states, while others used an asymmetric strategy of conflict and war. Another consequence of instability in the vast geopolitical field, including the Middle East, Central Asia and the Maghreb region, was the emergence of three geopolitical axes: 1) Turkey-Qatar; 2) Egypt-Saudi Arabia-UAE-Israel; 3) Iran-Syria. At the
same time, Russia, as the author believes, has changed the rules of the game in the Syrian crisis, jeopardizing Turkey's main security priorities. In addition to the geopolitical and geo-economic dynamics in the Mediterranean, the regionalization of the Libyan conflict has also made certain changes in Turkey's strategic orientation. Competition at the local and regional level, including for hydrocarbon resources, has forced Turkey to reorganize its military and defense strategy.
And finally, the third factor, which manifests itself at the international level, where geopolitical competition is increasing and the race of great powers is resuming, prompted Ankara to adopt a decisive strategy in both foreign and security policy, which, of course, changed Turkey's defense preferences.
Strategic autonomy. The concept of strategic autonomy is not new. It appeared in the defense industry and for a long time has been the main strategic goal determining defense and security issues. Strategic autonomy means the ability of a state to pursue its national interests and implement its preferred foreign policy without restrictions from other states. The goals of strategic autonomy are also an integral part of Turkey's regional geopolitical vision, which opens up a second dimension of the goals of the new military and defense strategy. Turkey is trying to prove itself as one of the dominant players in its region, seeking strategic autonomy. This foreign policy goal has become prevalent in Turkey's regional strategic orientation since 2002. In the absence of security after the "Arab Spring", Turkey's desire to become a regional power has acquired a new strategic orientation. Its military and defense strategies have been restructured in accordance with these goals, new for the Turkish state. While important investments in the defense industry have been directed to ensure a more resolute military position, Turkey's military activity has become even more noticeable in the context of its regional policy.
To ensure security, preparation for military service and combat readiness, the ability of the armed forces to fight and
perform assigned tasks are of great importance. One of the most important elements here is combat readiness, which means the management of the armed forces and their components and formations, warships, aircraft, weapons systems or other military equipment and equipment that will be used during military operations or in accordance with the purposes intended for them. The second no less important thing is the support of Turkey's military and defense strategy - the presence of a preventive structure and strategy, especially in the fight against terrorism. The final element of the military and defense strategy is the demonstration of military deterrence. Its characteristic is the projection of force, which is defined as the ability of a state to use certain elements of its military power to effectively and quickly deploy and support its forces in order to strengthen regional stability and assist to deter and respond to crises [10, p. 321]. Given Turkey's desire to become a regional power and a certain level of deployed power, Turkey's military power projection missions can be divided into two categories: operations using "soft" military force and operations using "hard" military force. The tasks of the "soft power" projection included: protection of maritime communications, evacuation of civilians in the event of a crisis, humanitarian assistance and peacekeeping operations after natural disasters. The tasks of projecting "hard power": a symbolic military presence demonstrating interests, the use of the threat of the use of military force to deter potential enemies, the use of punitive or offensive force and military intervention. According to the author, Turkey's forward military deployment strategy is the most important and concrete strategic step in projecting power and should be considered as an integral part of its strategic priorities in the areas adjacent to it. For example, Turkey's military mission in Somalia is an instrument of "soft power", while Turkish policy in Qatar and Libya are manifestations of its desire to become a regional power.
Conclusion
In order to overcome security problems and geopolitical challenges, Turkey has strengthened the military component in its foreign policy actions and switched to active military operations in areas of Turkish vital interests. In many ways, this became possible thanks to the development of the domestic defense industry. The strategy chosen by Turkey, aimed at solving short - and medium-term foreign policy tasks, is quite justified so far. Nevertheless, it should be understood that Turkey's military and defense strategies should not incur serious political, economic and other costs to the state itself. At the same time, it is also important to support the current course for the development of high-tech production and provide the necessary resource base for this. The dynamics and geography of military operations should in no case go beyond the limits acceptable to the Turkish side. Since this can, on the one hand, deplete the material and technical base, without which the mobility and activity of conducting further military operations will be greatly hampered. On the other hand, the restoration of military equipment of Turkish military units seems to be very costly. According to the author, it is important to regulate the relationship between foreign policy and military strategy, based on the nature of the conflict, the number and composition of participants involved in the crisis, as well as the characteristics of the military operational environment.
After the "Arab events", Turkey's strategic environment was an arena of conflicts, competition and restrictions, where state and non-state actors fought with each other. Under these conditions, Ankara's resolute military strategy is assessed as the best way to ensure its security and resolve geopolitical problems. However, Turkey's reliance on the military component in its policy as the only tool to overcome its geopolitical problems will inevitably lead to the formation of a coalition against Ankara. And this seems to be another serious challenge for Turkey. The
counter-coalition is a natural consequence of military and geopolitical rivalry. Turkey's resolute military and defense strategy also opens the way for various types of counter-coalition movements that can lead to high strategic costs. They are capable of causing serious damage to Turkish interests in its geopolitical environment.
Literature
1. Öncel R. Savunma ve uluslararasi güvenlik // Savunma politikasina giri§ / Piringgi F., Ye§ilta§ M. (ed.). - Istanbul: SETA Kitaplari, 2021. - P. 13-42 [Defense and international security.] - Turk.
2. Piringgi F. Savunma ve silahlanma ili§kisi // Savunma politikasina giri§ / Piringgi F., Ye§ilta§ M. (ed.). - Istanbul : SETA Kitaplari, 2021. - P. 43-74. [Pirincci F. Defense and armament relations.]- Turk.
3. Sezgin S. Savunma ekonomisi // Savunma politikasina giri§ / Piringgi F., Ye§ilta§ M. (ed.). - Istanbul: SETA Kitaplari, 2021. - P. 75-102. [Sezgin C. Defense policy.] - Turk.
4. Özdemir M.H., Baykal N.§. Savunma planlamasi / / Savunma politikasina giri§ / Piringgi F., Ye§ilta§ M. (ed.). - Istanbul : SETA Kitaplari, 2021. -P. 103-134. - Turk.
5. Karapinar E. Geli§en Savunma teknolojileri // Savunma politikasina giri§ / Piringgi F., Ye§ilta§ M. (ed.). - Istanbul : SETA Kitaplari, 2021. - P. 135-166. [New defense technologies] - Turk.
6. Özlü H. Gegmi§ ve kurulu§: 1974 öncesi döneminde türk savunma sanayii / / Savunma politikasina giri§ / Piringgi F., Ye§ilta§ M. (ed.). - Istanbul: SETA Kitaplari, 2021. - P. 167-192 [History and foundation: The Turkish defense industry in the period up to 1974.] - Turk.
7. Seren M. Geni§leme ve yükseli§ : 1974'ten günümüze türk savunma sanayii / / Savunma politikasina giri§ / Piringgi F., Ye§ilta§ M. (ed.). - Istanbul: SETA Kitaplari, 2021. - P. 193-224. [Expansion and rise: The Turkish defense industry from 1974 to the present.] -Turk.
8. Asian M. Turkiye'nin savunma stratejileri ve politikalari / / Savunma politikasina giri§ / Piringgi F., Ye§ilta§ M. (ed.). - Istanbul: SETA Kitaplari, 2021. - P. 225-252. [Defense strategies of Turkey.] - Turk.
9. Öncel R. Türkiye'nin ittifak politikalari ve savunma i§ birlikleri // Savunma politikasina giri§ / Piringgi F., Ye§ilta§ M. (ed.). - Istanbul: SETA Kitaplari, 2021. - P. 253-282. [Turkey's policy in the field of military partnership and defense cooperation.] - Turk.
10. Yesiltas M. Turkiye'nin askeri ve savunma stratejisi: hedefler, destekleyici unsurlar ve sonuglar // Savunma politikasina giri§ / Piringgi F., Ye§ilta§ M. (ed.). -Istanbul: SETA Kitaplari, 2021. - P. 283-317 [Turkey's military and defense strategy: goals, auxiliary elements and results] - Turk.
OLGA BIBIKOVA. HARKI - A NON-HEALING WOUND OF THE ALGERIAN PEOPLE
Keywords: Harki; Algerian immigrants; colonial heritage; Evian agreements.
Olga Bibikova,
PhD(History)/ Senior Research Associate,
Asia and Africa Department member,
INION RAN
e-mail: olbibikova@mail.ru
Citation: Bibikova O. Harki - a non-Healing Wound of the Algerian People // Russia and the Moslem World, 2022, № 4 (318), P. 82-93. DOI: 10.31249/rmw/2022.04.07
Abstract. The French government finally decided to fulfill its obligations to the descendants of the Harki, Algerians who served France during the colonial period. We are talking about the implementation of the Evian Agreements (03/18/1962) and ensuring the rights of the descendants of the Harki living in France.
On February 23, 2022, France adopted a law recognizing its obligations with respect to Harkis in accordance with the Evian Agreements. These agreements were signed between France and Algeria on March 18 1962 in the town of Evian-les-Bains on the southern shore of Lake Geneva to commemorate the end of the Franco-Algerian War (1954-1962).
An uninitiated person will certainly be surprised that an interstate document signed 60 years ago is being corrected and supplemented only now. Algeria is celebrating the sixtieth
