Oriental experts are asking themselves whether there is a secret
government agenda to impose Islamic law in Turkey. But are the
secularists merely stirring up fears about political Islam to
win more power? In a debate fueled by suspicion and acrimony,
there are no clear-cut answers. But given Turkey's geographical
location, it is hardly surprising that the nation is susceptible
to the threat of radical Islam being imported across its south-eastern
borders.
When the modern Turkish republic was born in 1923, its founding
father Mustafa Kemal Atatürk pushed through, what was arguably
the most radical program of secularization ever attempted in any
Muslim society, before or since. Although himself a distinguished
general, Atatürk was in many ways ahead of some leaders in
the democratic West. For example, women won the right to vote in
Turkey already back in 1934, well before female suffrage came to
France in 1944 or Italy 1946! Having introduced Latin Alphabet,
instead of Arabic and replaced the Muslim Sharia with a modern code
composed of Swiss and Italian law - Turkey became a secular republic
replacing centuries, under strict caliphate rule.
No
wonder that Western optimists regard Turkey as a model for other
Muslim societies - a pro-Western state, practicing multi-party democracy,
which has turned its back on Muslim radicalism. But is all this
about to change and might secular Turkey to return into the Islamic
fold? Sofar, in spite of the recent mass demonstrations, in which
hundreds of thousands took to the streets, few expect a scenario,
in which Turkey turns its back on the West and aligns itself with
Islamic governments such as the one in neighboring Iran. Turkey
has a strong secular tradition, and Prime Minister Recep Tayyip
Erdogan's government - for all its Islamic credentials - has bound
its reputation to the bid for the coveted entry into the European
Union.
But
analysts warn, that the Turks are culturally and historically Muslim,
living in a predominantly Muslim region and this turbulent environment,
which is currently undergoing capacious changes, may not by-pass
Turkey's society after all. The country is already polarized between,
on the one hand, pious and sometimes politically active Muslims
and, on the other, the secular urban elite, which includes the powerful
military establishment, the so-called "Guardian of Atatürk's"
secular legacy. In fact, Turkey's armed forces have already ousted
four governments since 1960, but only a single one against an Islamic
party. But the military leadership, under its present commander-in-chief
General Mehmet Yasar Büyükanit, 67, suspect the current
prime minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, 54, being a moderate Islamist
in radical disguise. Erdogan, a semi-professional footballer in
his younger days, became the leader of Turkey's Islamic Justice
and Development Party (Turkish: Adalet ve Kalkinma Partisi or AKP).
He was jailed for four months in 1999 on a charge of inciting religious
hatred after reciting an Islamic poem with the line: "Mosques
are our barracks, domes our helmets, minarets our bayonets, believers
our soldiers." But as prime minister, since March 2003, the
charismatic Erdogan has cultivated a moderate image, carefully avoiding
confrontation with the secular establishment. Having officially
disavowed the hardline Islamic views of his past, Erdogan made great
efforts in trying to recast himself as a pro-Western conservative.
But
the Turkish secularists have bitter memories of the country's first
fundamentalist Prime Minister, Necmettin Erbakan, whom they forced
from power in 1997 after only one year in office. But what provoked
the latest massive public protests and the veiled threat of military
intervention, was the monopolization of political power by one particular
party. Prime Minister Erdogan and especially his close ally and
presidential candidate, Foreign Minister Abdullah Gül alarmed
secularists who thought an Islamic-rooted government in control
of Parliament, the prime minister's office and finally the presidency
would no longer face checks and balances on the nation's authority.
Sofar, the current president, Ahmet Necdet Sezer, a former chief
justice and a firm defender of secularist principles of the Republic,
has managed in blocking many Islamic party suspicious government
bills and appointments, with his veto.
Abdullah
Gül, 58, himself a devout of the Muslim faith, has nevertheless
established a good reputation as a moderate in the West. Elected
prime minister in 2002 for a short period, Gül became foreign
minister in Erdogan's new government a year later. In spite of his
Islamic orientation, Gül became the key player in attempts
to receive an Turkey's accession to the European Union.
But strangely as it might appear in the post 9/11 era, the West,
usually deeply mistrustful of anything remotely suggesting Islamism,
has praised Turkey's Gül as a "great reformer" and
"reliable partner." However, in Turkey itself, the secular
elites are vehemently opposed to Gül's potential nomination
for presidency, who they claim will take the country back to a darker
age. "Turkey will not be another Iran, we don’t want
Sharia," protesters chanted out in nationwide mass rallies.
Thus, no wonder that feelings between Turkey’s Islamic politicians
and its secularists ran high throughout the country and in Istanbul
alone more than a million Turks have flooded the streets to protest
Gül’s candidacy. Exacerbating the rift were reports of
Gul's wife, Hayrunisa, wearing an Islamic headscarf, a garment that
secularists say, would sully the presidential palace. The Gül
family moving into the presidential palace is intolerable to the
secularists. Some of their leaders went as far as to, describe the
Islamist's aiming to elect a "sultan," a reference to
the authoritarian leaders of the Ottoman Caliphate period, who based
their legitimacy partly on their role as the "guardians of
Islam".
Oriental scholars caution, that while Erdogan and his political
followers seem to disapprove any violence in the name of Islam,
there would be a very thin line between violent Islam and "Muslim
democracy" when the latter becomes the dominant ideology among
an unstable, unpredictable and young populace, which in Turkey,
as in other Mid- Eastern Muslim nations presents an already a dangerously
dominant demographic factor. But the West, still adhering to its
obstinate but already, widely disproven ideologies of a democratization
process in the Muslim world, are more worried about the Turkish
military's intrusion into politics than about the ruling party's
Islamic agenda. The European Union warned Turkey's military, last
week to stay out of politics after the General Staff said it was
watching the parliamentary election of a new president with concern.
"It is important that the military leaves the remit of democracy
to the democratically elected government and this is a test case
if the Turkish armed forces respect democratic secularism,"
declared a senior EU offcial.
Thus it seems hardly surprising that, under the prevailing attitude,
the Turkish military establishment is now feeling extremely threatened.
The president, as head of the National Security Council, has the
power to mobilize troops and he also appoints the commander of the
general staff. Indeed, Gül's election would have given AK all
three key levers of Turkish politics: the presidency, a prime minister
and speaker of parliament, which is alarming secularists already
fearing that Erdogan's party would indulge a hidden Islamist agenda.
But such is the Turkish paradox: The opponents of Islam are not
necessarily forces of progress, and many are critical of or even
antagonistic to the West. The protestors in Istanbul were not just
chanting "Down with the government," but also "No
to America, no to the EU." A major reason for this growing
antagonism is the somewhat strange Israel-Turkey strategic entente.
There have been signs of discontent over this delicate issue. Soon
after Turkey and Israel concluded their first major military agreement
in 1996, allowing for the transfer and sale of arms and military
technology between the two countries, a Turkish pharmacist named
Ibrahim Gümrükçüoglu, attempted to murder
Turkish president Süleyman Demirel. Surprisingly, sofar the
relationship has not even cooled down by the access of Erdogan's
Islamic party to power and withstood several regional crisis, including
last year's summer war in Lebanon. But a worst-case scenario could
resemble the same way Iranian-Israeli relations, formerly close,
became totally antagonistic after the 1979 Khomeini revolution.
The danger of an radical Islamic Turkey may not be apprehended
at first, due to the leadership's attitude signaling a moderate
Islam. But Atatürk had already realized that there was no such
a thing as a "moderate Islam" and therefore created a
modern, strictly secular Turkey. At his time, Postwar Islam was
already substantially weakened by the colonialists- but with the
rising specter of a "Political Islam" , which is shrewdly
exploiting President Bush's 'democratization process' throughout
the Middle East- times are changing fast and not favorably for the
western strategic aims. Once the Turkish Islamists will have matters
fully under grip, things may still go from bad to worse. Examples
are already most recent: the Shiite fundamentalism in Iraq, vs Sunni
extremists enhancing al Qaeda influence, the rise of Hamas to power
by democratic means, in a Palestinian secular society- a similar
situation may occur in Egypt with a rising Muslim Brotherhood. Even
an Alawite ruled secular Syria could revert into an Islamic state,
if it's neighbor, Turkey becomes an Islamic nation, causes sufficient
impatience by Sunni to oust the dominating Alawite minority rule.
One can ony imagine what will happen then in the Hashemite Kingdom
of Jordan!
For Western strategic interest in that turbulent region, the stakes
of the threat in Turkey going the way of Iran are enormous. Should
Turkey become an Islamic republic, no Iranian containment policy
could succeed and any solution, still possible to pacify Iraq would
become severely jeopardized. Turkey would leave NATO and possibly
even join the 2006 formed Syrian-Iranian defense pact. Undoubtedly,
it would strengthen the anti-Israeli bloc of Islamic nations, increasing
the alarming dangers of a regional anti-western oriented conflict.
As it seems, only Turkey’s present Chief of Staff General
Yasar Büyükani, who served several terms in various NATO
Intelligence assignments and his armed forces, will remain a crucial
Bulwark in blocking this dangerous trend before it is too late.
|