Skip to main content

The Butterfly Effect of the March 1 Memorandum: The Hood Event

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Chaos, Complexity and Leadership 2020

Part of the book series: Springer Proceedings in Complexity ((SPCOM))

  • 449 Accesses

Abstract

Terrorist attacks in the United States on September 11, 2001, shook the entire world. These attacks in the United States, the superpower of the world, worried the world and were a harbinger of a new order. After attacks, states such as Iraq, Iran, Korea supported terrorism were considered devil states, and the US fought these states and global terrorism. In this context, Saddam Hussein has designated the axis of evil and the US wanted to make an operation. In this process, Turkey became a crucial ally for the United States. The US wanted to use Turkish territories. However, the Turkish government sent a memorandum to the Parliament, but it rejected this memorandum. Refusal of the memorandum was a harbinger of chaos and confusion. For example, the staff of the 11 Turkish Armed Forces, which established headquarters in Sulaymaniyah on July 4, 2003, was arrested and led away with hoods over their heads. This event, known as the Hood event in Turkey, has serious damage to relations between the US. As Edward N. Lorenz stated in the Butterfly Effect approach, everything in the universe could not be calculated and caused an insignificant event to occur unpredictable big events. In this framework, this study will be discussed with Lorenz’s Butterfly Effect Approach, also known as Chaos Theory.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 149.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Açıkalın, Ş. N., & Bölücek, C. A. (2014). Understanding of arab spring with chaos theory-uprising or revolution. In S. Banerjee, Ş. Ş. Erçetin, & A. Tekin (Eds.), Chaos, complexity and leadership (pp. 29–46). Switzerland: Springer International Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Açıkalın, Ş. N., & Artun, E. C. (2017). The concept of self-organized criticality: The case study of the arab uprising. In Ş. Ş. Erçetin, & N. Potas (Eds.), Chaos, complexity and leadership (pp. 73–85). Switzerland: Springer International Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Ağır, B. S. (2007). The bush doctrine: A search for global hegemonic stability? International Relations, 3(12), 71–100.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Akçay, E. Y. (2019). The Effectiveness of the European Union in the Iraq Crisis in 2003. In E. Y. Akçay, H. Demirhan, & S. Demez (Eds.), Crisis as a political and economic concept: A multidisciplinary approach (pp. 17–34). Berlin: Peter Lang.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Arbell, D. (2014). The US-Turkey-Israel triangle. Brookings Center for Middle East Policy Policy Paper, 34, 1–54.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Bağcı, H., & Kardas, S. (2004). Post-September 11 impact: The strategic importance of Turkey revisited. In İ. Bal (Ed.), Turkish foreign policy in post-cold era. Florida: Brown Walker Press.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Bağcı, H., & Açıkalın, Ş. N. (2013). From chaos to cosmos: Strategic depth and turkish foreing policy in syria. In Ş. Ş. Erçetin, & S. Banerjee (Eds.), Chaos, complexity and leadership (pp. 11–25). Switzerland: Springer International Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Barkey, H. J. (2010). Turkey’s new engagement in iraq embracing iraqi kurdistan. United States Instıtute of Peace Special Report, 237, 1–20.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Birdsall, N. (2003). The real challenge for iraqi development. The International Economy, 17(8), 58–61.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Brown, C. S. (2007). Turkey in the gulf wars of 1991 and 2003. Turkish Studies, 8(1), 85–119.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  11. Cagaptay, S., & Parris, M. (2003). Turkey after the Iraq war: Still a U.S. Ally?. https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/view/turkey-after-the-iraq-war-still-a-u.s.-ally.

  12. Copson, R. W. (2003). Iraq war: Background and issues overview. Report for Congress, 15, 1–50.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Cordesman, A. H. (2003). The Iraq war: Strategy, tactics, and military lessons. Westport: Praeger.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Cox, M. (2002). Paradigm shifts and 9/11: International relations after twin towers. Security Dialogue, 33(2), 247–251.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Dale, C. (2008). Operation Iraqi freedom: Strategies, approaches, results, and issues for congress. CRS Report, 28, 1–124.

    ADS  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  16. Demir, M. (2008). US Vice President to visit Turkey in March. https://www.hurriyet.com.tr/gundem/us-vice-president-to-visit-turkey-in-march-updated-8240009.

  17. Flanagan, S. J., & Wilson, P. A. (2020). Implications for the U.S.-Turkish partnership and the U.S. Army. In S. J. Flanagan (Ed.), Turkish nationalist course: Implications for the U.S.-Turkish strategic partnership and the U.S. Army. Santa Monica: RAND.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Foundation Robert Schuman. (2002). General elections in Turkey 3rd November 2002. https://www.robert-schuman.eu/en/eem/0077-general-elections-in-turkey-3rd-november-2002.

  19. Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division. (2003). Iraq War: Background and Issues Overview. https://www.everycrsreport.com/files/20030422_RL31715_423d9db6f13f3552cf646ac695f8021bcc84ef4e.pdf.

  20. Gruen, G. E. (2004). Turkey’s strategic mideast regional initiatives. American Foreign Policy Interests, 26(6), 435–456.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Hale, W. (2007). Turkey, the US and Iraq. London: Middle East Institute at SOAS.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Henke, M. E. (2017). The rotten carrot: US-Turkish bargaining failure over Iraq in 2003 and the pitfalls of social embeddedness. Security Studies, 27(1), 120–147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Human Rights Watch. (2003). Turkey and War in Iraq: Avoiding Past Patterns of Violation. https://www.hrw.org/legacy/backgrounder/eca/turkey/turkey_violations.pdf.

  24. Huntington, S. P. (1993). The clash of civilizations? Foreign Affairs, 72(3), 22–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Kanat, K. B., Diptaş, S., Hannon, J., & Dudden, L. K. (2017). US-Turkey Relations under the AK Party. İstanbul: SETA Pub.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Kibaroğlu, M., & Sloane, M. (2005). Clash of interest over northern iraq drives turkish-israeli alliance to a crossroads. The Middle East Journal, 59(2), 246–264.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Maria, L. (2007). The concept of preventive war and its consequences for international relations. https://assembly.coe.int/nw/xml/XRef/X2H-Xref-ViewHTML.asp?FileID=11677&lang=en.

  28. Migdalovitz, C. (2002). Turkey: Issues for U.S. Policy. https://www.everycrsreport.com/files/20020522_RL31429_9e7e7343894e9cae0833aee1ae7a86b877d8399c.pdf.

  29. O’Hanion, M. (2005). Iraq Without a Plan. https://www.brookings.edu/articles/iraq-without-a-plan/.

  30. Oktav, Ö. Z. (2004). Changing security perceptions in turkish-iranian relations. Perceptions, 9(2), 103–117.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Park, B. (2014). Turkey-Kurdısh regional government relations after The U.S. withdrawal from Iraq: putting the kurds on the map?. Carlisle: U.S. Army War College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Peuch, J. C. (2002). Turkey: U.S. Deputy Defense Secretary Holds Iraq Talks. https://www.rferl.org/a/1100273.html.

  33. Rosand, E. (2004). The security council as global legislator: ultra vires or ultra innovative. Fordham International Law Journal, 28(3), 542–590.

    Google Scholar 

  34. The White House. (2002). The National Security Strategy of the United States of America. https://2009-2017.state.gov/documents/organization/63562.pdf.

  35. Thrall, A. T., & Goeper, E. (2017). Step back: Lessons for US foreign policy from the failed war on terror. CATO Institute Policy Paper, 814, 1–42.

    Google Scholar 

  36. US Department of State. (2001). The Unıted States and the Global Coalıtıon agaınst Terrorısm, September 2001-December 2003. https://2001-2009.state.gov/r/pa/ho/pubs/fs/5889.htm.

  37. Weiner, T. (1999). U.S. Helped Turkey Find and Capture Kurd Rebel. https://www.nytimes.com/1999/02/20/world/us-helped-turkey-find-and-capture-kurd-rebel.html.

  38. Wilson Center. (2004). Turkey. https://www.wilsoncenter.org/publication/turkey.

  39. Wilson Center. (2020). Regime Change in Iraq: Repercussions for Turkey. https://www.wilsoncenter.org/publication/regime-change-iraq-repercussions-for-turkey.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ekrem Yaşar Akçay .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Akçay, E.Y. (2021). The Butterfly Effect of the March 1 Memorandum: The Hood Event. In: Erçetin, Ş.Ş., Açıkalın, Ş.N., Vajzović, E. (eds) Chaos, Complexity and Leadership 2020. Springer Proceedings in Complexity. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-74057-3_18

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics