DOCSLIB.ORG

Turkey: Selected Foreign Policy Issues and U.S

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Turkey: Selected Foreign Policy Issues and U.S Turkey: Selected Foreign Policy Issues and U.S. Views Carol Migdalovitz Specialist in Middle Eastern Affairs November 28, 2010 Congressional Research Service 7-5700 www.crs.gov RL34642 CRS Report for Congress Prepared for Members and Committees of Congress Turkey: Selected Foreign Policy Issues and U.S. Views Summary This report focuses on the foreign policy of Turkey, a long-time valued U.S. NATO ally, and examines the ruling Justice and Development Party’s (AKP) recalculation of the country’s approach to foreign affairs and its possible effects on relations with the United States. It begins with a discussion of Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu’s theoretical framework for a multidirectional outreach less firmly anchored in the West than in the past and his efforts to seek “zero problems” with Turkey’s neighbors and new partners beyond. The AKP is able to follow these guidelines because it has consolidated its political power domestically, exerted unprecedented control over the formerly powerful military, and spurred robust economic growth. The desire for export markets is a major motivator for the directional diversification, and the growth in trade, in turn, contributes to the prosperity and growth of AKP’s middle class base which is strengthening the party. Increasingly, the party’s Islamist origins also appear to be determining policy. Moreover, the party’s foreign policy independence appeals to the traditionally strong nationalism of the Turks and, therefore, contributes to its popularity at home. This report surveys Turkish foreign policy issues that are of critical interest to U.S. officials and Members of Congress. Three main categories of issues are: ones on which Turkish and U.S. policies continue to coalesce, ones on which policies diverge, and ones which may be less than completely harmonious but not adversarial. The United States and Turkey continue to find common interest in their desire for the stability and territorial integrity of Iraq and to prevent the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK), based in northern Iraq, from perpetrating violence in Turkey; for peace and reconciliation in Afghanistan; and for the diversification of European energy resources. In other areas, there has been divergence. Most prominently, Turkish and U.S. officials disagree about whether Iran has a nuclear program solely intended for peaceful purposes or also to produce nuclear weapons and, thereby, pose a threat to allied security. They also differ about the deterioration in Turkish-Israeli relations, provoked largely by the 2009 conflict between Israel and Hamas in the Gaza Strip and the May 2010 crisis over Israel’s seizure of a Turkish ship bound for Gaza. The AKP government’s reaction to these events and sympathies for Hamas complicate efforts to revive Turkish-Israeli ties. In addition, they affect U.S. efforts to find common ground with Turkey about the peace process. The United States also sometimes seems to support Turkey’s EU ambitions, normalization of Turkish-Armenian relations, and a settlement on Cyprus more than the AKP. Finally, the report discusses U.S. policymakers’ attempts to grapple with the complexity of Turkish policies, the bilateral relationship, and emerging differences. Obama Administration officials often appear publicly to gloss over disagreements as they reiterate longstanding U.S. appreciation for Turkey’s contributions in areas of agreement. Completing the report and of interest to Congress are discussions of U.S. use of the Turkish air base at Incirlik that is vital for cargo deliveries to forces in Iraq and Afghanistan, Turkey’s role in NATO’s new missile defense architecture, and overviews of bilateral trade and U.S. aid to Turkey. For domestic context, see CRS Report R41368, Turkey: Politics of Identity and Power. See also sections on Turkey in CRS Report R40849, Iran: Regional Perspectives and U.S. Policy; CRS Report RL33793, Iraq: Regional Perspectives and U.S. Policy; and CRS Report R41275, Israel’s Blockade of Gaza, the Mavi Marmara Incident, and Its Aftermath. Congressional Research Service Turkey: Selected Foreign Policy Issues and U.S. Views Contents Introduction ................................................................................................................................1 AKP’s Approach to Foreign Policy..............................................................................................2 Iraq.............................................................................................................................................6 Israel.........................................................................................................................................10 The Palestinian Authority and Hamas........................................................................................15 Israeli-Syrian Talks ...................................................................................................................15 Syria .........................................................................................................................................16 Iran...........................................................................................................................................17 Overview ............................................................................................................................17 Nuclear Issue ......................................................................................................................18 Shared Concerns on Iraq .....................................................................................................23 Economic and Energy Relations..........................................................................................23 European Union........................................................................................................................25 Cyprus......................................................................................................................................29 Armenia....................................................................................................................................31 Bilateral Relations...............................................................................................................31 Genocide Issue....................................................................................................................35 Afghanistan ..............................................................................................................................37 Energy ......................................................................................................................................39 Oil and Gas Pipelines..........................................................................................................39 U.S. Energy Policy..............................................................................................................42 Nuclear Energy ...................................................................................................................43 China ........................................................................................................................................43 U.S.-Turkish Relations..............................................................................................................44 Policy Overview .................................................................................................................44 Missile Defense ..................................................................................................................48 Incirlik Air Base..................................................................................................................49 Trade ..................................................................................................................................50 U.S. Aid..............................................................................................................................51 Conclusions ..............................................................................................................................52 Figures Figure 1. Turkey and Its Neighbors .............................................................................................5 Tables Table 1. European Union Assistance to Turkey..........................................................................28 Table 2. U.S. Merchandise Trade with Turkey ...........................................................................51 Congressional Research Service Turkey: Selected Foreign Policy Issues and U.S. Views Table 3. U.S. Foreign Assistance ...............................................................................................51 Contacts Author Contact Information ......................................................................................................53 Congressional Research Service Turkey: Selected Foreign Policy Issues and U.S. Views Introduction Turkey, a NATO ally, is situated amid the troubled Balkans, Caucasus, and Middle East regions and is a critical energy and transit hub between Central Asia/the Caucasus and Europe. The ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) projects Turkey as a major regional power with ambitions to be a global actor and power. Since the AKP was first elected in 2002,Turkey has assumed the post of secretary-general of the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), taken observer status at the Arab League,
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Attachement 2 Inter-Ethnic Conflicts in Kazakhstan
    ATTACHEMENT 2 INTER-ETHNIC CONFLICTS IN KAZAKHSTAN BETWEEN 2006 AND 2007 Events in Aktau On August 20, 2006 Aktau City witnessed riots. Printed mass media reported that originally an unauthorized but peaceful rally of workers was taking place at the central square of the city Yntymak. The workers of Mangistau MunayGas OJSC were demanding salary increase. According to City Akimat (local authority), around 10 or 15 people were participating in the rally. Next day information leaked to the press that there were more than 200 people gathered at the square by night. According to city authorities small groups from the rally moved to courtyards of resident buildings and tried to organize pogroms. Other sources speak about clashes with police and number of arrested vary between 17 and 25 persons. Participants of the rally were joined by the youth who started violent clashes with the police. Opposition mass media reported that at that moment some people in crowed began screaming racial offenses against the Caucasians who live in the area and then began to smash cafeterias and shops owned by Lezgins, Chechens and Azerbaijanis. Mangyshlak peninsula which hosts port city of Aktau has already several times been a field of interethnic conflicts. The most notorious one is a massacre in New Ozen (currently Zhanaozen) of summer 1989 when indigenous people had bloody fights with Lezgins and Chechens. From time to time local conflicts between indigenous people, i.e. Kazakhs, and representatives of the Caucasian diasporas take place in villages of Mangyshlak peninsula. As a rule conflicts arise out of incidents of a criminal nature.
    [Show full text]
  • Legislating Autocracy? Recent Legal Developments in Turkey
    National Security Program Foreign Policy Project Legislating Autocracy? Recent Legal Developments In Turkey April 2014 National Security Program Foreign Policy Project ABOUT BPC Founded in 2007 by former Senate Majority Leaders Howard Baker, Tom Daschle, Bob Dole, and George Mitchell, the Bipartisan Policy Center (BPC) is a non-profit organization that drives principled solutions through rigorous analysis, reasoned negotiation, and respectful dialogue. With projects in multiple issue areas, BPC combines politically balanced policymaking with strong, proactive advocacy and outreach. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS We gratefully acknowledge the assistance of BPC interns Jessica Atlas and Preston Feinberg for their contributions. DISCLAIMER This report is a product of BPC’s Foreign Policy Project. The findings expressed herein are those solely of the Foreign Policy Project, though no member may be satisfied with every formulation in the report. The report does not necessarily represent the views or opinions of BPC, its founders, or its board of directors. Recent Legal Developments in Turkey | 2 Task Force Co-Chairs Ambassador Morton Abramowitz Former U.S. Ambassador to Turkey Ambassador Eric Edelman Former U.S. Ambassador to Turkey Task Force Members Henri Barkey Bernard L. and Bertha F. Cohen Professor of Internal Relations, Lehigh University Svante Cornell Research Director, Central Asia-Caucasus Institute and Silk Road Studies Program Ambassador Paula Dobriansky Former Under Secretary of State for Global Affairs John Hannah Former Assistant for National Security Affairs to the Vice President Ed Husain Senior Fellow for Middle Eastern Studies, Council on Foreign Relations David Kramer Executive Director, Freedom House Aaron Lobel Founder and President, America Abroad Media Alan Makovsky Former Senior Professional Staff Member, House Foreign Affairs Committee Admiral (ret.) Gregory Johnson Former Commander of U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • What It Means and What’
    Cracking Down on Creative Voices: Turkey’s Silencing of Writers, Intellectuals, and Artists Five Years After the Failed Coup Thank you for joining us for Cracking Down on Creative Voices: Turkey’s Silencing of Writers, Intellectuals, and Artists Five Years After the Failed Coup Since the attempted coup d’état in 2016, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan has elevated his attacks on Turkey’s civil society to unprecedented levels, becoming one of the world’s foremost persecutors of freedom of expression. In the five years since the attempted coup, dozens of writers, activists, artists, and intellectuals have been targeted, prosecuted, and jailed; 29 publishing houses have been closed; over 135,000 books have been banned from Turkish public libraries; and more than 5,800 academics have been dismissed from their posts for expressing dissent. PEN America’s 2020 Freedom to Write Index found that Turkey was the world’s third highest imprisoner of writers and public intellectuals, with at least 25 cases of detention or imprisonment. This repressive climate has left writers and other members of Turkey’s cultural sector feeling embattled and targeted, unsure of what they can say or write without falling into their government’s crosshairs. PEN America, the Project on Middle East Democracy (POMED), and members of Turkey’s cultural, artistic, and literary communities discussed these trends and made recommendations on how policymakers might respond to Erdoğan’s campaign of repression. The discussion highlighted PEN America’s report on freedom of expression in Turkey, which features interviews from members of Turkey’s literary, cultural, and human rights communities to better understand how this society- wide crackdown has affected freedom of expression within the country.
    [Show full text]
  • The 'New Middle East,' Revised Edition
    9/29/2014 Diplomatist BILATERAL NEWS: India and Brazil sign 3 agreements during Prime Minister's visit to Brazil CONTENTS PRINT VERSION SPECIAL REPORTS SUPPLEMENTS OUR PATRONS MEDIA SCRAPBOOK Home / September 2014 The ‘New Middle East,’ Revised Edition GLOBAL CENTRE STAGE In July 2014, President Obama sent the White House’s Coordinator for the Middle East, Philip Gordon, to address the ‘Israel Conference on Peace’ in Tel-Aviv. ‘How’ Gordon asked ‘will [Israel] have peace if it is unwilling to delineate a border, end the occupation and allow for Palestinian sovereignty, security, and dignity?’ This is a good question, but Dr Emmanuel Navon asks how Israel will achieve peace if it is willing to delineate a border, end the occupation and allow for Palestinian sovereignty, security, and dignity, especially when experience, logic and deduction suggest that the West Bank would turn into a larger and more lethal version of the Gaza Strip after the Israeli withdrawal During the last war between Israel and Hamas (which officially ended with a ceasefire on August 27, 2014), US Secretary of State John Kerry inadvertently created a common ground among rivals: Israel, the Palestinian Authority, Egypt and Jordan all agreed in July 2014 that Kerry had ruined the chances of a ceasefire between Israel and Hamas. Collaborating with Turkey DEFINITION and Qatar to reach a ceasefire was tantamount to calling the neighbourhood’s pyromaniac instead of the fire department to extinguish the fire. Qatar bankrolls Hamas and Turkey advocates on its behalf. While in Paris in July, Kerry was all smiles Diplomat + with Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu whose boss, Recep Erdogan, recently accused Israel of genocide and compared Netanyahu to Hitler.
    [Show full text]
  • O'hanlon Gordon Indyk
    Getting Serious About Iraq 1 Getting Serious About Iraq ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ Philip H. Gordon, Martin Indyk and Michael E. O’Hanlon In his 29 January 2002 State of the Union address, US President George W. Bush put the world on notice that the United States would ‘not stand aside as the world’s most dangerous regimes develop the world’s most dangerous weapons’.1 Such statements, repeated since then in various forms by the president and some of his top advisers, have rightly been interpreted as a sign of the administration’s determination to overthrow Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein.2 Since the January declaration, however, attempts by the administration to put together a precise plan for Saddam’s overthrow have revealed what experience from previous administrations should have made obvious from the outset: overthrowing Saddam is easier said than done. Bush’s desire to get rid of the Iraqi dictator has so far been frustrated by the inherent difficulties of overthrowing an entrenched regime as well as a series of practical hurdles that conviction alone cannot overcome. The latter include the difficulties of organising the Iraqi opposition, resistance from Arab and European allies, joint chiefs’ concerns about the problems of over-stretched armed forces and intelligence assets and the complications caused by an upsurge in Israeli– Palestinian violence. Certainly, the United States has good reasons to want to get rid of Saddam Hussein. Saddam is a menace who has ordered the invasion of several of his neighbours, killed thousands of Kurds and Iranians with poison gas, turned his own country into a brutal police state and demonstrated an insatiable appetite for weapons of mass destruction.
    [Show full text]
  • Turkmenistan 2016 Human Rights Report
    TURKMENISTAN 2016 HUMAN RIGHTS REPORT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Although the 2016 constitution declares Turkmenistan to be a secular democracy, the country has an authoritarian government controlled by the president, Gurbanguly Berdimuhamedov, and his inner circle. Berdimuhamedov has been president since 2006 and remained president following a February 2012 election the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe’s (OSCE) Office of Democratic Institutions and Human Rights determined involved limited choice between competing political alternatives. In August the country conducted interim parliamentary elections, which were not subject to international observation, to fill a limited number of vacant seats. In September parliament ratified a new constitution that extended the presidential term in office from five to seven years, cancelled a maximum age limit of 70 years, and failed to reintroduce earlier term limits. Civilian authorities maintained effective control over the security forces. The most important human rights problems were: arbitrary arrest and detention; involuntary confinement; torture; disregard for civil liberties, including restrictions on freedoms of religion, speech, press, assembly, and movement; and citizens’ inability to choose their government through free-and-fair elections that include real political alternatives. Other continuing human rights problems included denial of due process and fair trial and arbitrary interference with privacy, home, and correspondence. Restrictions on access to the internet and certain sites and information sources remained a significant problem. There was also discrimination and violence against women; trafficking in persons, including use of government-compelled forced labor during the annual cotton harvest; restrictions on the free association of workers; and forced destruction of domiciles of Ashgabat residents.
    [Show full text]
  • Is Turkey's Foreign Policy Moving East?
    University of New Orleans ScholarWorks@UNO Senior Honors Theses Undergraduate Showcase 12-2013 Is Turkey’s Foreign Policy Moving East? James Brodie LeBlue University of New Orleans Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.uno.edu/honors_theses Part of the Political Science Commons Recommended Citation LeBlue, James Brodie, "Is Turkey’s Foreign Policy Moving East?" (2013). Senior Honors Theses. 50. https://scholarworks.uno.edu/honors_theses/50 This Honors Thesis-Unrestricted is protected by copyright and/or related rights. It has been brought to you by ScholarWorks@UNO with permission from the rights-holder(s). You are free to use this Honors Thesis-Unrestricted in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s) directly, unless additional rights are indicated by a Creative Commons license in the record and/or on the work itself. This Honors Thesis-Unrestricted has been accepted for inclusion in Senior Honors Theses by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks@UNO. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Is Turkey’s Foreign Policy Moving East? An Honors Thesis Presented to the Department of Political Science of the University of New Orleans In Partial Fulfillment Of the Requirements for the Degree of Bachelor of Arts, with University Honors and Honors in Political Science by James Brodie LeBlue December 2013 Acknowledgements First and foremost, I would like to thank the incredible support system of friends and family for getting me through not only the last four years of undergrad, but also the times in writing this thesis when I thought I was just moments away from ripping my hair out because of constant rewrites.
    [Show full text]
  • Could Turkey's New Parties Change the Political Balance?
    POLICY BRIEF EUROPE IN THE WORLD PROGRAMME 13 MARCH 2020 Could Turkey’s new parties Amanda Paul Senior Policy Analyst European Policy Centre change the Demir Murat Seyrek Senior Policy Advisor political balance? European Foundation for Democracy New political trends are unfolding in Turkey. Recently of these two parties, coupled with the success of the established political parties have raised hopes for change opposition in the 2019 municipal elections, shows that in the country, impacting the political balance between Turkish democracy is not dead and buried. The EU must the government and the opposition. While this is not a continue to engage with and support those that are foregone conclusion, it is a development worth watching fighting for democratic change. closely, including for the EU. The Justice and Development Party (AKP) has dominated BACKGROUND – DWINDLING AKP SUPPORT Turkish politics for over 17 years. Nevertheless, with mounting domestic headaches and a moribund economy, Just at the time when Erdoğan consolidated power the AKP seems to be running out of steam. Support for through the adoption of an executive presidential system, the party is at an all-time low, while President Recep following the 2017 constitutional referendum, he lost Tayyip Erdoğan’s popularity is also in decline. the ability to rule without alliances, due to the need for an absolute majority to be elected. That forced the AKP, which until 2017 did not need political alliances, to join forces with Devlet Bahçeli’s Nationalist Movement Party Turkish democracy is not dead and (MHP) and form the People’s Alliance. buried. The EU must continue to engage This alliance was successful in securing victory in both and support those that are fighting for the constitutional referendum and subsequent 2018 democratic change.
    [Show full text]
  • Turkey's Slide Into Authoritarianism
    Turkey’s Slide into Authoritarianism by Burak Bekdil n the evening of July 15, 2016, the inhabitants of OAnkara and Istanbul left their dinner tables in panic and rushed to their windows and balconies. What they saw was shocking and surreal, if not apocalyptic: tanks closing the Bosphorus bridge in Istanbul1 and encircling the parliament;2 rival F-16 raids against government and coup forces;3 military brass Tanks and soldiers closed the Bosphorus bridge and being taken hostage by their surrounded the Turkish parliament in Istanbul as Turkey aides;4 combat between the was plunged into chaos for a few days in July 2016 when an military and the police,5 followed attempted coup threatened to overthrow the Erdoğan by soldiers attacking civilians;6 government. and finally civilians lynching soldiers who had supported the coup.7 even in a country torn by ethnic strife, All of this happened at a time perpetual terror attacks, and deep when no one was expecting a putsch, ideological polarization. Turkish Coups in Brief 1 Hürriyet (Istanbul), July 20, 2016. Turks soon learned that the coup 2 Reuters, July 16, 2016. attempt had not been staged by the military’s 8 3 The Wall Street Journal, July 17, 2016. top brass but by dissident officers. A similar 4 attempt on May 27, 1960, had succeeded, RT TV (Moscow), July 23, 2016. leaving behind the bodies of the executed 5 Hürriyet, July 18, 2016. 6 Ibid., July 29,2016. 7 Ibid., July 17, 2016. 8 CNN News, July 18, 2016. MIDDLE EAST QUARTERLY Winter 2017 Bekdil: Turkey’s Failed Coup / 1 prime minister and foreign minister.9 When a statement on the military’s website, in 1971 the military issued an ultimatum to warning the Islamist government of then- the government of Prime Minister Süleyman prime minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan Demirel, the prime minister resigned.10 against any move that might undermine The military intervened again in Turkey’s secular regime.
    [Show full text]
  • U.S.-Turkish Relations: a Review at the Beginning of the Third Decade of the Post-Cold War
    U.S.-Turkish Relations a review at the beginning of the third decade of the post–cold war era 1800 K Street, NW | Washington, DC 20006 Tel: (202) 887-0200 | Fax: (202) 775-3199 E-mail: [email protected] | Web: www.csis.org Report Coordinators Bulent Aliriza Bulent Aras November 2012 ISBN 978-0-89206-759-6 Ë|xHSKITCy067596zv*:+:!:+:! Blank U.S.-Turkish Relations a review at the beginning of the third decade of the post–cold war era Report Coordinators Bulent Aliriza Bulent Aras November 2012 About CSIS—50th Anniversary Year For 50 years, the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) has developed practical solutions to the world’s greatest challenges. As we celebrate this milestone, CSIS scholars continue to provide strategic insights and bipartisan policy solutions to help decisionmakers chart a course toward a better world. CSIS is a bipartisan, nonprofit organization headquartered in Washington, D.C. The Center’s 220 full-time staff and large network of affiliated scholars conduct research and analysis and de- velop policy initiatives that look into the future and anticipate change. Since 1962, CSIS has been dedicated to finding ways to sustain American prominence and prosperity as a force for good in the world. After 50 years, CSIS has become one of the world’s pre- eminent international policy institutions focused on defense and security; regional stability; and transnational challenges ranging from energy and climate to global development and economic integration. Former U.S. senator Sam Nunn has chaired the CSIS Board of Trustees since 1999. John J. Hamre became the Center’s president and chief executive officer in 2000.
    [Show full text]
  • America's Anxious Allies: Trip Report from Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Israel by Meghan O'sullivan, Philip Gordon, Dennis Ross, James Jeffrey
    MENU Policy Analysis / PolicyWatch 2696 America's Anxious Allies: Trip Report from Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Israel by Meghan O'Sullivan, Philip Gordon, Dennis Ross, James Jeffrey Sep 28, 2016 Also available in Arabic ABOUT THE AUTHORS Meghan O'Sullivan Meghan O'Sullivan is the Jeane Kirkpatrick Professor of the Practice of International Affairs at Harvard University's Kennedy School. Philip Gordon Philip Gordon is a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations and a former White House coordinator for the Middle East, North Africa, and the Gulf region. Dennis Ross Dennis Ross, a former special assistant to President Barack Obama, is the counselor and William Davidson Distinguished Fellow at The Washington Institute. James Jeffrey Ambassador is a former U.S. special representative for Syria engagement and former U.S. ambassador to Turkey and Iraq; from 2013-2018 he was the Philip Solondz Distinguished Fellow at The Washington Institute. He currently chairs the Wilson Center’s Middle East Program. Brief Analysis A bipartisan team of distinguished former officials share their insights from a recent tour of key regional capitals. On September 26, The Washington Institute held a Policy Forum with Meghan O'Sullivan, Philip Gordon, Dennis Ross, and James Jeffrey, who recently returned from a bipartisan tour of Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Israel. O'Sullivan is the Jeane Kirkpatrick Professor at Harvard's Kennedy School and former special assistant to the president for Iraq and Afghanistan. Gordon is a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations and former White House coordinator for the Middle East, North Africa, and the Gulf region.
    [Show full text]
  • February 2, 2015 To: Prof. Dr. Ahmet Davutoğlu Prime Minister of The
    February 2, 2015 To: Prof. Dr. Ahmet Davutoğlu Prime Minister of the Republic of Turkey CC: Deputy Prime Minister Ali Babacan, Deputy Undersecretary for Turkish Treasury Cavit Dağdaş, Ambassador Feridun Sinirlioğlu, and G20 Finance Ministers RE: Implementation of G20 Commitment to Phase-out Fossil Fuel Subsidies Dear Prime Minister Davutoğlu, In the spirit of your G20 Presidency’s outreach efforts with civil society, we – representing 39 civil society organizations – are writing in support of the Turkish Presidency’s “2015 Year of Implementation.” We share the Turkish government’s concern that G20 commitments are characterized by long delayed implementation. We were very pleased to see that the Turkish G20 Presidency Priorities for 2015 included discussions on the G20’s commitment to phase out inefficient fossil fuel subsidies and for the recognition that 2015 is a crucial year for climate change with the UNFCCC negotiations set to make a global agreement in December. We strongly agree that 2015 is the time to increase action on climate change. Thus, we request the following G20 outcomes towards implementing the phase out of fossil fuel subsidies: Agree to immediately eliminate all subsidies for fossil fuel exploration. According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and the International Energy Agency (IEA), in order to meet the internationally agreed goal of limiting global average temperature increase to 2 degrees Celsius, at least two-thirds of already existing reserves of fossil fuels need to be left in the ground. A recent assessment found that G20 governments are spending approximately $88 billion a year on finding new oil, gas and coal reserves.1 The report shows that with rising costs for hard-to-reach reserves, and falling coal and oil prices, generous public subsidies are propping up fossil fuel exploration, which would otherwise be deemed uneconomic.
    [Show full text]