Turkey wants a policy of engagement exactly like President

The evening sun cast a warm golden light across the room, its rays filtering through the curtains and giving the small space a soft, serene glow. The air was still, and the quiet sound of the world outside seemed distant, as if the busy rush of the city had faded into the background. Jack sat on the edge of the couch, his legs stretched out in front of him, while Jeeny sat across from him at the small table, sipping from a mug of tea, her gaze thoughtful.

Host: The room felt peaceful, the world outside moving on, but within this space, a conversation about something larger was beginning to unfold. Jeeny broke the silence first, her voice steady as she brought up a topic they had been circling for a while.

Jeeny: “I’ve been thinking about something Ahmet Davutoglu said: ‘Turkey wants a policy of engagement exactly like President Obama’s new approach. A policy of engagement, less confrontation, less tense attitude, especially in the region.’ What do you think about that, Jack? Do you think engagement is the right approach when it comes to international relations? Or is confrontation sometimes necessary?”

Jack: He leaned back, his fingers tapping lightly on his knee as he thought about the question. “I get what he’s saying. Engagement, not just confrontation, makes sense if you’re looking for long-term peace. But it’s not always that simple, right? You can’t just be all about engagement without addressing the tough issues. Sometimes confrontation is necessary. It’s not pretty, but if you’re not willing to stand up for what’s right, you risk being walked all over.”

Jeeny: She tilted her head, her eyes narrowing slightly as she processed his words. “I agree that sometimes you have to stand firm, but don’t you think we’ve seen what a policy of constant confrontation does? It just breeds more tension, more division. Engagement — real, genuine engagement — means trying to understand the other side, listening to what they need, and finding common ground. It’s not about giving up your stance, but about finding a way to move forward without the constant strain.”

Jack: “But doesn’t engagement sometimes feel like you’re compromising too much?” His voice took on a slightly defensive tone. “It can feel like you’re giving up parts of what you stand for just to make things smooth. There’s a line, right? You can’t be so eager to engage that you lose yourself in the process.”

Jeeny: “That’s the thing though, Jack. Engagement isn’t about losing yourself; it’s about finding a way to make things work without making things worse. The whole idea behind Obama’s approach and what Turkey is advocating for is trying to build relationships, not destroy them. You don’t have to give up your values, but you do have to be willing to find a space where dialogue is open, where both sides are heard. It’s not about being weak; it’s about being strategic.”

Host: The quiet between them deepened, the conversation turning inward, each of them processing the balance between engagement and confrontation. Outside the window, the city continued its steady pulse, but inside, the room was thick with thought, as though the world had momentarily paused to let them explore this delicate subject.

Jack: “I guess I’ve always seen engagement as just a softer way of dealing with things, and I’ve always leaned toward the direct, no-nonsense approach. Maybe I’ve been too focused on confrontation, and I haven’t really thought about the potential of what engaging in a meaningful way can do.”

Jeeny: She smiled softly, her voice gentle but full of conviction. “It’s easy to fall into the trap of thinking that confrontation gets results. But sometimes the greatest strength lies in being able to engage, to listen, and to build connections. It’s not always easy, but the world doesn’t get any better by being divided. Sometimes, it’s the quieter approach — the willingness to build, to understand, that leads to real change.”

Jack: “Maybe you’re right,” he said, his voice softer now, more reflective. “Maybe the goal isn’t just to win a fight. Maybe it’s about winning the peace. Engagement doesn’t mean giving up; it just means being open to finding a solution without constantly having to clash.”

Jeeny: “Exactly. And sometimes, even when we’re in disagreement, it’s about finding ways to work together. You can hold onto your beliefs and still find a way to have a conversation, to find common ground. Engagement allows for dialogue, for understanding, and that’s how things really change. Not through constant battle, but through listening, negotiating, and finding a way forward.”

Host: The evening grew quieter as the conversation slowed, the room filled with a different kind of understanding. Jack’s face had softened, the frustration that had been there earlier slowly dissipating. For the first time, he could see the power of engagement not as a sign of weakness, but as a strategic, thoughtful approach to a world full of division.

Jack: “I think I get it now. Engagement is about finding a way forward, even when it’s hard, even when you’re afraid you’ll lose yourself in the process. But maybe that’s the only way to really make progress.”

Jeeny: She smiled gently, her eyes lighting up with quiet satisfaction. “Yes, Jack. Engagement doesn’t mean you lose yourself. It means you’re willing to stay in the conversation, to find the strength in dialogue. That’s how we move forward.”

Host: The night had settled, and the world outside seemed a little less overwhelming. Jack sat still, the realization of what true engagement could mean taking root within him. It wasn’t just about avoiding confrontation; it was about knowing when to engage, when to listen, and when to fight for something bigger than the differences that often divide them.

The city hummed in the distance, but inside, there was peace — a shared understanding that the path forward wasn’t just about victory, but about connection.