The Campaign Against Turkey

The Western press has been rather harsh on Turkey lately. In the US, most of the coverage and analysis of Turkey’s new Eastward orientation by the Justice and Development-led government of Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan has been negative, often implying that the J&D party is dragging a secular Turkey toward Islamic radicalization, cozying up to hard-line states such as Iran and Syria, and supporting unsavory groups such as Hamas and Hezbollah. Though there has been a marked change in Turkey’s domestic and foreign policy toward internal reconciliation and a more active engagement in regional affairs, this framework is misplaced – either inadvertently or, as is more likely, deliberately.

Far from dragging an unwilling Turkey toward Islamicization, the current Turkish government was twice elected by the Turkish people in free and fair democratic elections, and as such, enjoys the support and renewed confidence of the Turkish people. The election of the J&D came after decades of an almost-monopolistic hold on power by a succession of nationalist, Western-oriented governments that were characterized by chronic corruption, slow reforms, and persistent tension with all of Turkey’s immediate neighbors.

Arguably, for the first time since the establishment of the modern Turkish republic, the current government is reflective of the true identity of the Turkish people. For decades, the hard-line secular parties steered Turkey too far to the West, leaving most Turks unable to reconcile their Eastern traditions and Muslim faith with the European national identity their governments so coveted. Though this European orientation suited a minority of the urban, secular Turkish elite, the majority of Turks never felt European. Today, the government, in profile and policy, has struck the right balance between the official Western-style secular democracy and the Islamic identity of the majority of Turks.

On policy, domestically, over the past eight years, the mildly-Islamic J&D government has, ironically, implemented more prolific, EU-mandated political, economic and legal reforms than any of its secular predecessors, securing the long-standing goal of launching negotiations for EU accession in 2005. And, the current government has gone farther than any of its Western-backed predecessors toward an internal reconciliation with its own restive Kurdish population.

Externally, the current government has pursued a policy of zero conflict with all of its neighbors, resolving long-standing problems with neighbors from Armenia and Greece, to Syria and Iran, based on engagement and dialogue. In addition, Turkey has leveraged its unique strategic position to attempt to broker deals between Iran and the West over the nuclear standoff, and between Syria and Israel, in search of an elusive peace agreement. As such, unlike its detractors, the majority of whom supported the invasion of Iraq and continue to support a confrontational policy with Iran, Turkey’s current foreign policy contributes to, rather than undermines, regional stability.

Turkey’s current government has done little to justify the wholesale alarm that many Western agitators are raising. From opposing the US invasion of Iraq to the vocal criticism of Israeli policies against the Palestinians, the evidence cited for Western concerns has more to do with a large, strong, modern Muslim democracy charting a more balanced and independent foreign policy that subordinates Western interests to its own, than a genuine fear of a slide toward radical Islam.

In light of the ascent of hard-line Islamic fundamentalism across the Muslim World, it should be self-serving for the West in general, and the US particularly, to support the current government of Turkey. Today’s Turkey provides a good example of relatively effective governance, true reform, and most importantly, a model reconciliation between an open, tolerant Muslim society and a Western-style, secular democratic system. This harmonious model of Islam and democracy deserves to be supported, celebrated and promoted, rather than criticized and vilified.

It is telling that according to mainstream US media, an institutional desert like Saudi Arabia where an absolute monarch rules over a fundamentalist society and a medieval system, is invariably coupled with the word ‘moderate’, while Turkey, a democratic, secular republic of mature institutions, and a modern legal framework is often described as ‘radical’ and ‘Islamist’. A cynic might conclude this to be a deliberate, smear campaign aimed at mischaracterizing and delegitimizing Turkey’s government, to influence its foreign policy. I guess this makes me very cynical.