Dear National Security Minister of Uganda, ally and fellow Poland’s Chief of General Staff, precious Deputy Defense Minister of Pakistan, Deputy Internal Security Minister of Somalia, TASAM National Security and Defense Institute High Consultant Committee Members, TASAM vice chairmen, ambassadors, from our national associations; National Security Council General Secretariat, Turkish Armed Forces firstly provincial gendarmerie commander, all precious Commanders, ladies and gentlemen at the outset I’m conveying my thanks to your participation.
I express my thanks to the foundations and persons that contributed in order to organize Istanbul Security Conference secondly, and the team under the administration of Co-Director of National Defense and Security Institute Tolga SAKMAN and the whole management of us.
Today, I will try to make an introduction to “what are we going to do, why are we going to do, how will we do” with title “Chairman of Institute”. Therefore I want to start with the main titles of Conference. We decided to define the main theme of Conference this year as “Change in State Nature and the Borders of Security”. We tried to open to discussion “Change in State Nature” and institutional infrastructure insufficiency at orientation to process especially in Turkey and international meetings that we organizedin recent years. However unfortunately I can’t say we reached a significant point. Because mental and structural transformation requires much time, resource and work. Yet the worlds rapid change does not allow us the required time. Thus we see the countries, which cannot keep up with the changing world, are scattered and face with instability.
The world, we live, takes form with three parameters. These are what we mention often, main rivalry parameters between West and East: “micro-nationalism, “integration”, “unpredictability” form whole world. Micro-nationalismin the process, started with Collapse of Soviet Union, Collapse of Soviets, separation of Yugoslavia to 8 parts, separation of Sudan to two parts until there at least loss and peacefully separations are transformed into more devastating and destructive process with Arab Spring.
Especially Turkey should analyze well the risks of micro-nationalism in the region. The issue of micro-nationalism contents all differences, have conflict potential rather than the definition, just based on ethnic. Thus it seems that concept of micro-nationalism will form the next decade on a perspective that stretches from most advanced countries to third world countries as a risk. In the next 10-20 years, we should consider, through scenarios which based on valid data, a new international system, includes 400-2000 members, will be formed. I want to attract attention to analyzing risks of their own countries and to take infrastructural precautions.
I want to repeat main titles with your permission. As we are talking about “Change in State Nature and Borders of Security” also we put the “expectance governance” and “security” issue attached to expectance governance. We point to “security and defense reform” that concerns the countries, think they have to pace with the change in state nature. We will draw attention to required evolution in the fields that we put as subtitles: “border security”, “urban security”, “human security” and “food security”. These discussions and outputs will support these titles and will produce information in several grades for authorities and public.
We will argue on “regional conflicts”, “security governance”, “strategies and players”, “new security technologies” and started to be lived especially in defense sector “autonym weapons” issue and its “ethical and moral dimensions”, “energy security”, “informatics security”, “cyber security” new fundamental fields on next two days.
Also we are going to make special workshops and one of them is a workshop about “Turkey’s Mega Defense Projects”. Furthermore workshops will be made about main titles of “security-defense reform”, required by Turkey. Also there is a workshop about “political communication”. Positive and negative opinions on Turkey’s image in World will be evaluated and doyens will join to this workshop. We will continue to discuss the issues by 30 sessions at 4 halls on next two days.
All those discussions are for orientating to the world, after we will define. Together we will make exercises at the point that how our institutional infrastructures and countries will orientate to the world that is transforming on micro-nationalism, integration, and unpredictability.
Clearly, micro-nationalism, one of the fundamental elements forming the century and it seems that will be the main fact for 15 years ahead. We can say kind of events proceed slowly when international system is going on though in any choked moments, example; Collapse of USSR in one night, processes like this will get out of control and affect the regions rapidly. For example; I have been in Indonesia recently, we were in a country with 520 regions, 17.508 islands and 2500 different languages. Consequently, we never hope something like that but it’s so hard to assume countries like Indonesia will divide in how many parts in a trauma moment. This is my intention to give an example of Indonesia.
In the rest of the world;we have to predict, the risk of maintaining welfare and standards in West and processes feeding from main macro risks in East and South will trigger risks relevant to micro-nationalism. Because, flow of present time will be deceptive.
The second one is “integration”. There are significant integration studies in the world, take EU as a sample. Whole world goes through regional integrations under the leadership of a certain countries. Significant thing that EU process and experience taught to world is integration shouldn’t be very tight. Because the present point of EU is “failure in success”. We have predictthe organizations flexible than EU will grow stronger and international system will be successful in 15 wears ahead through process.
The other parameter is “unpredictability”. It forms, as every point of life would be managed as a crisis moment.
Also there are main challenges that can’t be classified neither West nor East but affects whole world. So we can determine “change of state nature” and “borders of security” correct, by considering these challenges. Because generally we make detail debates but there may be lack in positioning by whole picture. As I remember, the first conclusion declaration clause of the conference in last year was; the truth of unsustainability of production-consumption formula in world and present formula is the most serious security threat. When we consider continually production-consumption and the world that have to develop through this formula, both countries GDP size and companies size, family income; unsustainability of system is obvious.
World’s refreshment speed is presumed as 100 but consumption speed is 120. This excess seems as consumption of resources accumulated for millions of years. Thus, we must see the unsustainability of production-consumption formula through underlines of international authorities. Climate deal in Paris is an important process. Negotiations continued for more than 20 years. However it’s not obvious how to put into practice.
The second main challenge is “liquidation of middle strata”. Strongmiddle strata created by USSR’s lever in Europe especially after 1950’sare being liquidated by Chinese lever in last decade. It is valid for whole world. Lots of country have the same problem and there is a serious recession especially in labor market and conditions of middle strata. This fact appears as one of the main fields of security issue when we consider the countries, have no middle strata, are being obliged to confront with chaos or authoritarian regimes. We need to consider there is a significant dissolving of middle strata starting from most advanced countries in West however it is stabilized little by the standards of production and consumption, which is placing on a market by China. Some services and material can be reached cheaper. Still we should consider that is under risk of sustainability in the mean of resources.
Another challenge is “energy, water, food security” problem. It is yet show us the point where we brought the world relevant to production-consumption-development formula. The problems we have, will continue to be at the center of existence process of nations and security issue.
Fourth one presents in every field of life “transition to fourth dimension”. Frequently discussed as Industry 4,0, described as dialogue of machines with each other and a process expressing transformation in industry but should be underlined as it appears in every field of life and transition to fourth dimension should be governed with security parameters and security infrastructure. One of the most important results of transition to fourth dimension is liquidation of human resource in labor. Aging of population in West has triggered it. Nevertheless it seems like human resource in labor will be left his place in a significant measure to autonomous devices and robots in 10-20 years ahead of us.
The last one is “transformation in state nature and expectation governance” concept. We see all countries are exposed to serious social events with the impact of micro-nationalism and the urban area conflict as a next stage. Turkey had similar experiences and solved successfully. At this context, the importance of putting accurate policies, proper management of expectance governance and preventing accidents should be underlined.
The state infrastructure in meant of change in state nature is what kind of infrastructure, how it can be strengthened, how it can be institutionalized. At the point of “how we can provide an adaptation to the new world ahead of us” we hope this Conference will give significant conclusions. We witness fire and wedding at the same time in the most of countries in world.
The reason why we confront with this view is lack of consciousness about the future results of threats and the big picture. The institutions, which we have built, accumulated and continuing to transfer resource, will not answer to our problems.
I am drawing attention to a vital question; “how Change of State Nature and its institutional infrastructure should be” today and in short-term. One of the most important headlines is hard power- soft power issue. And “Smart power” is added to them.
However, when we consider instability doesn’t come over hard power to any of countries that have instability or beginning of events doesn’t rely on hard power but the countries destabilized over soft power, it seems every country need to have soft power program measured through its own human resource and technologic infrastructure favorable to its national security concept both in purpose of defense and attack. This field is implemented successfully for starting from USA to some countries and implemented theoretically so successful and reached to significant distance in practice. Nevertheless I think it is a great disadvantage that many countries didn’t dub such a program. We are passing from period that countries must spare at least half of resources that is spending on security and defense. Hard power is has to be transformed into a high technological, rapid and mobilized structure. It is obvious that bulky systems and large armies have no response.
USA follows similar line with its defense and security reforms in last years. For example; USA made an agreement with 35 countries in Africa in term of have maximum 800 soldiers in each country. USA will show his existence in region with almost 25,000 soldiers in 35 countries and be reached an agreement with countries. At this context I think, Turkey’s military base agreement with Qatar and resuming the discussions in the same direction, is a critic movementforbalance in Gulf region, Turkey’s interests and common benefits of ally-fellow countries in Gulf Region. There is a major general and a brigadier general from Qatar Armed Forces with us. They are here to represent their government and defense ministry. It is conduced to my mention of Turkish military base in Qatar.
As a result; how we can success all things? There are challenges surpass us in world. There are some main rivalry parameters surpass dominant powers of both West and East. Hence there are some structures can move above the whole world. Therefore, as countries how we adapt to this process? Any of countries national interests, regional stance, and national security perspectives is different. The formula is very simple however so hard to implement, many countries still couldn’t reach success; identifying political goals properly, an economy policy matches these political goals and after both of these determining defense and security policies and other sectorial policies. If there is no transitivity and analogy between these three and doesn’t act together, we need to see that sustainability of investments and institutional initiatives is not possible.
The things to success in this policy; first state and local administrations, non-governmental, diaspora, private sector, media, academy. Steering all channels to act around the determined politics will improve efficiency and prevent millions of mistakes. I hope, by this kind of main perspective the Conference will be functional to find answers to what should be the change of state nature and what will be the borders of security in period ahead of us.
Clearly, this is a civil meeting. So I beg; my ministers and commanders should be in minimum protocol expectance. In addition I invite everyone sincerely to gala dinner, is going to be here tonight. Yet we are working on strategic vision development program, developed by TASAM National Security and Defense Institute, with several countries. In that mean I want to consider that we can make contacts with the committees from ally-fellow countries. I offer my greetings and respect.
( Istanbul Security Conference 2016 | Opening Speech of Süleyman ŞENSOY Chairman of TASAM | 03.11.2016, Istanbul )