When Aid Fails: The Unsuccessful U.S. Attempt to Coerce Turkey through Aid Prior to the 2003 Invasion of Iraq

R. J. Dillard
{"title":"When Aid Fails: The Unsuccessful U.S. Attempt to Coerce Turkey through Aid Prior to the 2003 Invasion of Iraq","authors":"R. J. Dillard","doi":"10.21599/atjir.32219","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Amidst the multitude of analyses on the question of aid effectiveness, there remains a dearth of studies focused primarily on the aid-for-policy bargaining process itself. This is especially unfortunate due to the conclusions which could be drawn by analyzing specific instances of aid-for-policy failure. In this case study analysis, I will approach the question of aid effectiveness by examining U.S.-Turkish bilateral interactions leading up to the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in 2003. Despite numerous attempts by the U.S. to gain access to Turkish military bases through coercive aid, Turkish acquiescence eluded U.S. diplomats, thus impacting the entire character of the war effort. Assessing effectiveness and the superiority of aid as a diplomatic tool requires an examination of both donor and recipient interests. This case demonstrates that a donor can invest less through foreign aid and achieve a similar or better end state compared to using other diplomatic tools or not seeking the goal at all.","PeriodicalId":7411,"journal":{"name":"Alternatives: Turkish Journal of International Relations","volume":"240 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Alternatives: Turkish Journal of International Relations","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21599/atjir.32219","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Amidst the multitude of analyses on the question of aid effectiveness, there remains a dearth of studies focused primarily on the aid-for-policy bargaining process itself. This is especially unfortunate due to the conclusions which could be drawn by analyzing specific instances of aid-for-policy failure. In this case study analysis, I will approach the question of aid effectiveness by examining U.S.-Turkish bilateral interactions leading up to the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in 2003. Despite numerous attempts by the U.S. to gain access to Turkish military bases through coercive aid, Turkish acquiescence eluded U.S. diplomats, thus impacting the entire character of the war effort. Assessing effectiveness and the superiority of aid as a diplomatic tool requires an examination of both donor and recipient interests. This case demonstrates that a donor can invest less through foreign aid and achieve a similar or better end state compared to using other diplomatic tools or not seeking the goal at all.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
当援助失败时:在2003年入侵伊拉克之前,美国试图通过援助来胁迫土耳其,但没有成功
在对援助有效性问题的大量分析中,仍然缺乏主要集中于以援助换政策谈判过程本身的研究。这是特别不幸的,因为可以通过分析以援助换政策失败的具体实例得出结论。在这个案例研究分析中,我将通过研究导致美国领导的2003年入侵伊拉克的美土双边互动来探讨援助有效性的问题。尽管美国多次尝试通过强制援助进入土耳其军事基地,但土耳其的默许避开了美国外交官,从而影响了整个战争努力的性质。评估援助作为一种外交工具的有效性和优越性,需要同时考察捐助国和受援国的利益。这个案例表明,与使用其他外交工具或根本不寻求目标相比,捐助者可以通过外国援助减少投资,实现类似或更好的最终状态。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The ILO’s Safety and Health in Mines Convention: Reframing the Scope of Obligations for a Sustainable World The EU-Turkey refugee deal of autumn 2015 as a two-level game Trading Places: How Turkey Can Join the Rich, Using Trade Policy U.S.-Turkey Relationship and Syrian Crisis Samtskhe-Javakheti Region: A Neglected Keypoint for European Security of Energy Supply?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1