Donald Trump's electoral success is not only a Republican Party victory, but also the decisive defeat of Hillary Clinton, the Democratic Party and Barack Obama's second term on three fronts: The House of Representatives, Senate and presidency. Shortly after he was elected president in 2008, Obama was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. In fact, this prize was not given to Obama himself as a black and democrat president, but to the world's expectations of him. This was a world that was destroyed and dragged into a crisis by George W. Bush. And the former owners of the system knew that this world was not "sustainable" as they themselves said. However, Obama could work himself into the favor of neither the old nor the new. He faltered between the two, paving the way for Clinton's defeat. Therefore, we can easily say Obama lost, not Clinton.
Well, did Obama do anything? He did. However, what he tried to do was not the things that the U.S. could do on its own or with the support of the moribund European Union. Ignorant of Turkey, Obama tried to complete the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) with the EU. Moreover, he thought that he would consolidate the U.S.'s trade hegemony in Asia through the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) agreement. However, Pacific countries with which the U.S. made agreements began outperforming it in new economic areas such as biotechnology, space technologies, the defense industry and information technologies; and TPP negotiations came to a deadlock in these areas. For instance, American pharmaceutical manufacturers and computer producers objected to the TPP, saying that they would go bankrupt.
Obama described the steps taken for the TTP as a great success. The same was true for the TTIP, too. In fact, even Americans themselves took for granted that the TTIP would never come true as it was the pipe dream of Obama and Clinton. This was because, China's One Belt One Road (OBOR) project, namely the connection of the Asia Pacific to the European mainland and Britain, would not be possible by relying on the moribund EU economy.
Today, there are three major routes connecting Asia Pacific to the European market. They are critical commercial transits that complement each other and ensure economic integration between Asia and Europe. The three major corridors that connect developing Asia, particularly China, to Europe are as follows:
The Northern Corridor: It passes through the Russian mainland along the Trans-Siberian line and reaches Europe passing through Kazakhstan and Belarus. As is known, Russia has been in a customs union with Kazakhstan and Belarus since 2010. After the Crimean crisis, the Northern Corridor poses significant political disadvantages for the West.
The Middle Corridor: This route reaches Europe by passing though China, Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, the Caspian Sea (by ferry), Azerbaijan and Turkey.
The Southern Corridor: It starts from Kazakhstan and passes through the Turkmenistan-Iran-Turkey line.
Two out of these three routes, middle and southern corridors, which will constitute the new Silk Road and connect Asia and Europe, pass through Turkey.
The New Silk Road, or the southern and middle corridor outside of Russia, offers important options to the West as follows:
The reality of China and developing Asia should be acknowledged, since it presents a new development paradigm, which has to converge with the West. The economic and political integration is of great importance for the achievement of this convergence in a peaceful way and this can be ensured only through the lines of the New Silk Road.
Regardless of which part of the New Silk Road comes to the fore, Turkey is the key country. On the other hand, Caucasian, Russian and Levantine energy resources will join global trade through the Southern Gas Corridor (SGC) and Turkish Stream.
Therefore, the whole world should have observed Turkey's peace, democracy and stability. The Obama administration failed to understand that instability in Turkey would backfire on the whole world. Quite the contrary, it supported the PKK terrorist organization's offshoots in Iraq under the pretext of fighting Daesh. It turned a blind eye to the Gülenist Terror Group (FETÖ) and sat back and watched the July 15 coup attempt. Furthermore, the support some segments in the U.S. gave to the coup attempt did not bother the Obama administration. This was because the project of a weak, unstable and integrated Turkey - if needed - underlay this attempt.
They thought Turkey would be merely a silent and liberal transit country in the new integration that the U.S. would establish with the EU, and would return to its submissive position like in the old days. In other words, they aimed for a Turkey that would succumb to neoliberal economic policies and reconcile with anyone at the U.S.'s will even if it went against its own interests. In fact, the name of the Peace at Home Council, which FETÖ coup-makers gave to themselves, tells this very well. This strategy of the Obama administration also underlies the EU's admiration for the PKK.
Consequently, Trump's victory does not mean a new Bush period, but the end of the uncertainties of the Obama period. And we no longer have the protectionism and trade order of the 1970s, 1980s and 1990s. Everyone can produce anything they want and cannot hide technology as they will suffer the consequences of unfair protectionism. Therefore, I advise you to not care about Trump's statements on the issues in the election campaign. However, the main surprise will be the Federal Reserve's (Fed) decision on increasing interest rates or keeping them stable in December.
to read our informative text prepared pursuant to the Law on the Protection of Personal Data No. 6698 and to get information about the
used on our website in accordance with the relevant legislation.
6698 sayılı Kişisel Verilerin Korunması Kanunu uyarınca hazırlanmış aydınlatma metnimizi okumak ve sitemizde ilgili mevzuata uygun olarak kullanılan
ilgili bilgi almak için lütfen