CONTEMPORARY EURASIA IX ( 2 )
Ministers ( when necessary ) in addition to the meetings of the National Security Council and forming its agenda , could have given the president , in certain political circumstances , the opportunity to actively participate in foreign policy decision-making .
After the constitutional amendments of 2017 , practically all the authority and political responsibility for foreign policy decision-making became consolidated in the figure of the president , who gained practically all the power that was previously separated between the Council of Ministers , the prime minister and the president . Additionally , the president no longer had an obligation to end his affiliation with his political party . In practice , this allowed the president to also be the leader of the strongest represented political party in Parliament and thus exert his effective control over it , as is currently the case in terms of President R . T . Erdogan and the Justice and Development Party ( JDP ).
The Executive Branch and Foreign Policy
According to all three constitutions , the Council of Ministers was partly responsible for the implementation of the government ’ s general policy . The prime minister , as the Chair of the Council of Ministers , was to ensure cooperation between ministers and supervise the implementation of the government ’ s policy , while each minister was accountable to the prime minister and responsible for the conduction of affairs under their jurisdiction , and for the acts and activities of their subordinates . 41
As a result , the political responsibility for foreign policy development and decision-making was also put on the Council of Ministers . Subsequently , as the Head of Council the prime minister was the key person responsible for foreign policy choices , and thus , excluding the period of presidency of M . K . Ataturk and I . Inonu ( although even during this period the prime ministers were among the top presidential advisors ), until 2017 the prime ministers were generally the crucial actors in foreign policy decisionmaking . However , it should be noted that in practice the level of their involvement would vary depending on their personal authority and interest in foreign affairs . For instance , in the 1950s , Prime Minister Adnan Menderes had a significant impact on the decision to send Turkish troops to Korea and Turkey ’ s accession to NATO , 42 and Prime Minister
41 Teşkilâti Esasiye Kanunu 1924 , article 46 ; Türkiye Cumhuriyeti Anayasası 1961 , article
105 ; Türkiye Cumhuriyeti Anayasası 1982 , article 112 .
42
For instance , see : Sami Kiraz , “ Menderes Dönemi Türk Dış Politikasının NATO Üyeliğive Bağdat Paktı ’ nın Kurulması Örnekleri Üzerinden Analizi ”, Turkish Studies - Economics , Finance , Politics 15 , no . 1 ( 2020 ): 309-321 , http :// dx . doi . org / 10.29228 / TurkishStudies . 41483 . 40