In a recent appearance on 1 February at Eren Eğilmez’s TV Program, Gerçek Fikri Ne?, Prof. Dr. Hüseyin Bağcı offered a compelling analysis of the current geopolitical dynamics, focusing on U.S. strategy in the Middle East, the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, and the shifting alliances shaping the region. You may see his analyses from the sections 20:20 to 27:00, 1:01:26 to 1:13:55, 2:24:48 to 2:37:07, and from 3:10:53 to 3:16:45.
The U.S. and Syria
Prof. Dr. Hüseyin Bağcı emphasized that a complete withdrawal of the US from Syria is unlikely, stating that it is part of a long-term American strategy. Since the Truman Doctrine, Bağcı noted that the US has aimed to maintain its military and political presence in the Middle East. He argued that withdrawing from Syria would create a significant power vacuum in the region, which could increase the influence of Russia, Iran, and radical groups. Furthermore, Bağcı suggested that the US will continue its intelligence and security policies through its CENTCOM (US Central Command) structure in the region, so a short-term withdrawal would be contrary to US interests. Highlighting that Turkey is directly affected by developments in Syria, Bağcı stated that it is of strategic importance for Ankara to reach an agreement with Washington
Arab States
Prof. Bağcı stated that China is becoming an increasingly important diplomatic actor in the Middle East, and noted that its role in achieving the Iran-Saudi Arabia normalization was remarkable. However, he emphasized that the vast majority of Arab countries are still economically and strategically dependent on the US. Pointing out that countries like Egypt and Jordan maintain strong ties with Washington, Bağcı said that despite the increasing influence of China and Russia in the region, it is not possible for these countries to completely abandon the US in the near future. 1 Bağcı stated that unlike the Soviet Union during the Cold War, which supported socialist movements, Russia and China will not cooperate with radical groups in the region today. Therefore, he argued that the current order in the Middle East will continue to remain under US influence.
The Palestinian-Israeli Conflict
Prof. Bağcı noted that Hamas is becoming the new face of Palestinian resistance and is on its way to replacing the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO). However, Bağcı emphasized that Hamas's rise to this point has come at a great human cost, stating that more than 50,000 people, especially children, women, and the elderly, have lost their lives in the conflicts. Referring to Israel's past prisoner exchanges, he noted that Hamas has strengthened its control over Gazans, but it is uncertain whether it will have as strong representation at the international level as the PLO. He also emphasized that Hamas is at a critical juncture in the upcoming period regarding whether it will move its operations outside of Gaza. He stated that if Hamas begins to carry out international-scale actions against Israel, such as the PLO's 1972 Munich Olympics attack, the global perception will change completely.
Turkey and Israel
Turkey’s Role: Bağcı said that Turkey is an important actor that can change the balances in the Middle East, and that reshaping relations with Syria in particular will be a critical process. He stated that Ankara could secure its border security by reviving the Adana Agreement signed with Syria in 1998. He also stated that Turkey should pursue a balancing policy with both the US and the Arab countries in the region. Regarding relations with Israel, he said that if there is a change of government after Netanyahu, Turkey could strengthen its diplomatic contacts with Israel again. Bağcı emphasized that Turkey can increase its influence in the Middle East by using its soft power as well as hard power elements, and can play a critical role for regional stability, especially with economic and diplomatic tools.
Israel’s Security Doctrine: Touching upon Israel's current security approach, Bağcı stated that the Netanyahu government is pursuing a hard-line strategy that prioritizes military measures. He stated that large-scale operations, especially those targeting Gaza, are part of Israel's security perception and that this policy is being maintained with public support. He said that Netanyahu's goal is to completely destroy Hamas's military capacity, but that this could lead to a larger wave of resistance in the long run. He emphasized that Israel, in the past, adopted a strategy of reducing its enemies in the region by entering a normalization process with Arab states, but that the unresolved Palestinian issue undermined these efforts. He stated that under the Netanyahu administration, Israel has adopted a security doctrine that prioritizes military deterrence over negotiation, so a new peace process does not seem likely for now.
Trump’s Geopolitical Legacy
Prof. Bağcı evaluated Donald Trump's presidency as a period that reshaped the United States' global strategy, emphasizing that Trump particularly highlighted economic nationalism and challenged traditional alliances. Trump's demands for NATO allies to increase their defense spending and his questioning of U.S. security guarantees shook global power balances, particularly in Europe. Bağcı noted that Trump prioritized bilateral agreements over multilateral alliances, leading to profound changes in the U.S.'s long-term foreign policy. Additionally, he stated that Trump adopted a more protectionist stance against globalization, aiming to prioritize the U.S. economy, which in turn forced a reevaluation of international economic and military alliances. In this context, Bağcı argued that the Trump era caused significant fractures in the U.S.'s relations with its traditional allies, while simultaneously attempting to sustain Washington's global hegemony through different means.
The Dollar’s Dominance
Prof. Bağcı stated that despite the efforts of the BRICS countries to create an alternative currency to the US dollar, it is unlikely to happen in the short term. He emphasized that although BRICS has a significant weight in the global economy, the economic and political differences among its members make the process of creating a common currency difficult. He said that the rivalry between China and India, Russia's facing sanctions, and the internal economic fluctuations of countries like Brazil will hinder this process. Bağcı also reminded that even the European Union took decades to switch to the common currency, the Euro, stating that it will be a much more complex and long-term project for BRICS to achieve this process. Stating that the US and Europe still largely control the global financial system and that the dollar's dominance in international trade will not be easily shaken, Bağcı said that even if BRICS manages to establish such a system, a stronger geopolitical transformation is needed for the current global economic order to change.
Two Possible Futures for the Middle East
Prof. Bağcı argued that the future of the Middle East will be shaped around two basic scenarios: either the conflicts and power struggles in the region will continue, or a process of regional cooperation and restructuring will begin. However, looking at the current dynamics, he predicted that the tensions and military interventions in the region will continue. He emphasized that elements such as the unresolved Israeli-Palestinian conflict, Iran's continued increase in regional influence, and the US's continued military presence have further complicated the balances in the Middle East. Bağcı stated that Turkey, Iran, and the Arab countries will follow different policies to maintain regional balance, and that Turkey, in particular, can be an important actor for regional stability by using diplomacy, military power, and economic tools together. However, he said that in order for lasting peace and economic development to be achieved in the Middle East, the countries of the region must increase their cooperation among themselves. Bağcı stated that the struggle for interests of global actors such as the US, China, and Russia in the Middle East will continue, and emphasized that it is difficult for the region to achieve stability in the short term, but new geopolitical balances may be formed in the long term.