Turkey’s ruling Islamist-rooted Justice and Development Party’s (AKP) nomination of its foreign minister Abdullah Gul to the country’s presidency to replace a secular incumbent in April set off a political standoff with the secular military. The staunchly secular army, apprehensive that Mr. Gul’s election may undermine Turkey’s secular and democratic principles, issued a veiled threat of coup. Their main cause of concern lies in Mr. Gul’s public display of piety and his wife’s donning Islamic headscarf. The same applies to Gul’s more religious boss, Prime Minister (PM) Recep Tayyip Erdogan, and his wife.
The worried secular citizens, including women, the likely worst victim of Islamization of Turkey, also took to the street in large numbers protesting Mr. Gul’s election, with one rally attracting about 1.5 million protesters. These events forced the incumbent Islamist government call an early election, which gave them a resounding new mandate, bagging 47% of the votes (surpassing 34% in 2002), over secular Republican Party’s 20%, which enabled Mr. Gul’s election to Turkey’s presidency on 28th August.
Commentators and pundits almost universally share the notion that Turkey is the sole bastion of secular democracy in the crisis-ridden Islamic world, which may potentially act as the torch-bearer for the rest to follow. Turkey is, thus, an important test-case for Islamic nations to demonstrate that they can be compatible with secular democracy and modernity, and what lies ahead for Turkey will bear profound significance not only for Muslim countries, but also for the world at large ― more so, since Turkey is seeking entry into the European Union.
This victory of ballots in Turkey has elated both Islamist political movements and their secular-democratic opponents all over the world. In the post-9/11 era, discussion about Islam’s likely incompatibility with secularism and democracy has gripped the world, which may potentially lead to a civilizational clash with Islam and the West ― which, many believe, is already underway.
In this context, Turkey’s Islamist party’s adoption of ballots - and its promise to respect the secular constitution - have raised unprecedented optimism worldwide that secularization and democratization of the Islamic world is very much possible. Commentators have emphasized that the victory of the Islamist AK party in a free election in Turkey was an “affirmation of democracy” and proof that “Islam and democracy are compatible.” Others suggested that this signaled victory for Muslim democrats in general and its snowball effect may sweep across Islamic nations. Therefore, the military’s undemocratic interference in the democratic process in Turkey attracted widespread condemnations internationally.
In the midst of these clashing viewpoints, an investigation of the history and nature of the modern Turkish republic - and the rise of the AK Party - is necessary to grasp what may lie ahead for Turkey’s democracy and secularism.
Modern Turkish republic was founded in 1923 by General Kemal Atatürk by dismantling the theocratic Ottoman caliphate. He held Islam responsible for the deplorable state of Muslim countries and instituted secularism as Turkey’s inviolable foundation. Atatürk (d. 1938) and his successors aggressively secularized and westernized Turkey during the 1930s and 1940s, which separated Islam from politics. Turkish military has acted as the guardian of secularism ever since. They have intervened four different times to depose pro-Islam parties from power and safeguard the secular fabric of the republic.
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - Franco
Alamgir
Well written and very instructive.
In this context, adding to that the US Congress taking up at this time the 1915 genocieds. In your opinion, how will this have the biggest effect.
2 - RJ
Another great article.
If Turkey becomes Islamist, would they be expelled from the NATO? Would that prevent their entry into the EU? Or would the secular West cave?
3 - RJ
Franco:
It seems that Democrats in the Congress are hell-bent on turning a historical event from 92 years ago into a political wedge issue that will drive the US and Turkey apart, thereby damaging the war effort in Iraq.
But none dare call it treason...
4 - Dave Nalle
Treason might be a bit much, but I think we can certainly call it incredibly stupid.
Dave
5 - Alamgir Hussain
The recognition of Turkey's genocide of Armenians has been a long due. There are two peoples on earth -- the Armenians and the Nubians (Sudanese) -- who have suffered the most at the hands of Islamic Jihadists. It started at the birth of Islam and continued well into 20th century for Armenians and it continues today for the Nubians.
This recognition is neccessary because Muslims see those acts of cruelty, executed in the cause of Allah, as something to be proud of. Forceful condemnation of these barbaric acts may help change Muslims' realization. Muslims need to learn from the way westerners are remorseful of what their forefathers have done to indegenous people in Australia, North and South America and elsewhere.
Whether this recognition is going to have any adverse impact on Iraq is different proposition. I don't think it will make much difference. Such scares were spread after the death of Saddam and Zarqawi. But nothing really changed.
6 - Franco
#5 "Alamgir Hussain
"The recognition of Turkey's genocide of Armenians has been a long due. This recognition is neccessary because Muslims see those acts of cruelty, executed in the cause of Allah, as something to be proud of."
I agree....
So why do you think the US Congress is doing this right now, when they have had so many years, if they turly wanted to, to get it on the table before. Specificly what do you think they are trying to achive in making this move right now?
7 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
Another home run hit out of the park, Almagir. Great job.
The comments here from RJ and Dave show that when anybody in the American government tries to do something decent or good, some call it treason, and others call it stupid. Realpolitik is the art of sweeping unspeakable evil under the rug, eh, Dave?
The Armenians are entitled to some recognition of the suffering they have undergone at the hands of the Turks - by the cowardly Israeli government that is insisting on kissing Turkey's ass, the cowardly Jewish American organizations that have as much courage as the traitors they support, and by the American government that seems always to back the assholes in the world and shun those who have any decency in them....
8 - Franco
RJ:
Well said, I think you’re right on.
Treason? I don’t know yet.
Proof that it has put US troops in harms way needlessly is were it will rest. If it becomes clear that US troops die for any reason as a direct result, Congress is going to find it more then impossible to maintain their current faults cover of piety as there true motivational reasoning, when considering the seriousness of what many in high places are saying right now who object the timing of Congress on this matter.
And of equiel importance, if I were Armenian, even though I would be glade the atrocities of 1915 were finally recognized as genocide, I would know in my heart that all those who suffered and died and were killed in 1915, were not, in and of themselves, enough reason alone to carry this act of Congress.
9 - Franco
Ruvy #8
"The comments here from RJ and Dave show that when anybody in the American government tries to do something decent or good, some call it treason, and others call it stupid. Realpolitik is the art of sweeping unspeakable evil under the rug, eh, Dave?"
Foul! Uncalled for Ruvy. No one is advocating sweeping unspeakable evil under the rug.
What RJ, Dave and myself included are concered with is the timming of Congress on the measure. The question is why right now. And the answer Ruvy, has nothing to do with addressing evil for evils sake, no one is disputing that. The question is why now after all these years. Could is measure not have waited for a more appropiate time so its merrits could and would stand on their own apart from having politicly prostitued?
Ruvy, you have some good insites on several matters conceing the Middle East and its complexities. So stay on subject. What is the real reason for Congress acting now, and what serious life threatening fallout, anywhere, if any, do you see possalble as a result?
10 - bliffle
The Turks will decide what Turkey will become. If they decide to go Islamic there is little we can do to prevent it. And even if we could change their course by some stunt, ala CIA, it would be a violation of sovereignty and eventually backfire. Witness the 1956 overthrow of Mossadegh. IMO it's unknowable whether the Turks will follow some reason-based course and weigh all the pros and cons of being a religious state and alienating a number of western countries that have made strong allies and aides for them, or whether they will follow a faith-based course and just sweep secularism out with blind fervor for Islam.
So, maybe the best US strategy is to plan without depending on them.
If we make a plan that reduces Turkeys importance in our strategy it becomes useful to us to support the Kurds and the Armenians, two outfits that traditionally irritate the Turks. Why not? In that light the Armenian declaration by congress is a very useful bargaining chip.
Perhaps it's time to abandon the notion that Turkey is so essential to our strategy that we must cater to their every whim. Remember, when GWB wanted to invade Iraq the Turks wouldn't let him go in from their area.
In that light the congressional resolution is a good harassing attack on a fitful ally. It's a good flanking move. And at worst it becomes a good bargaining chip.
In fact, if this administration had any real strategic brains they would have initiated the resolution. But they don't. They have no capability or incentive to plan beyond the end of their noses. Everything they do is reaction, and usually the reaction of a petulant child. I wonder why?
11 - Franco
#10 " REMF
I understand you point. It would be interesting in hearing your view of Congress's timing in pushing this issue into the face of Turkey at this exact moment in time, and what, if any, increased dangers it could force upon those brave enough to actually put their words into action by serving over there.
12 - Martin Lav
The spread of Islamism is a direct result of US aggressive policies towards Muslim countries in Muslims eyes. If GWBush has stayed the course in Afghanistan and leveraged the good will that kind-hearted Muslims felt after 9/11 (even Iran) then we wouldn't have so many taking the Democratic Train non-stop to conservatism. After all the worst thing that could happen with Turkey acknowledging their past atrocities would be for them to take a typical guilt ridden liberals position and start to treat their minorities, poor and woman folk like equals/welfare state.
Eh Dave?
13 - moonraven
Excuse me, rube mcboobs, but Turkey is NOT being admitted to the EU precisely BECAUSE the Turks refuse to admit to the genocide committed against 1.5 million Armenians in 1915.
That particular crime against humanity gave rise to the first usage of the term HOLOCAUST.
It was not a few Little Eichmanns we are talking about here.
The US had damn well better hold the Turks accountable for genocide, or face an increasing downward spiral of credibility in Europe.
After all, Germany is the strongest country in that union--and it has had to admit to genocide.
It is not--oh redneck oracles of the east--going to let Turkey off the hook and into the EU.
14 - Franco
#12 " bliffle
You have made some interesting points bliffle. But I can not see Congress as having any of your points in mind as motivation when they choose NOW, to push this in Turkey's face. So the question remains. What do you think is Congress’s real motivation for doing this now.
15 - bliffle
Congress? Well, congress, the institution, has no real incentive to pass such a resolution since it diminishes their power, once again, to the benefit of the executive. Not a good thing for the congress. However, there is no proof that congress-critters have enough intelligence to fathom that truth, so they often succumb to the opportunity to shift blame to the executive (they hope, usually in vain) while confining their herculean efforts to fleecing the electorate with chimerical pork projects. We all know the routine. It's non-partisan.
The dems, however, have a real interest in further embarrassing this administration which has already fulsomely humiliated itself with it's stupendous blunders. It's called "piling on".
The True Patriot might recoil at another increment of International Hostility being heaped on the USA, but it's small potatoes, really, compared to all the other sins we will be held responsible for.
And it may mitigate that International Hostility by appealing to International Righteousness, you know, human rights and all that.
16 - Franco
#17 " bliffle
You’ve described a very seriously dysfunctional Congress, uniquely void of even basic distinction, let along greatness. All at a time in our history when we need it in spades.
They say a picture is worth a 1000 words. It would be appropriate to have a picture of Nancy Pelosi, and her cohorts in today Congress, found under the definition of the “Peter Principle”.
17 - bliffle
Anyway, seems to me Bush ought to respond to the current posturing by various Turks in the method he knows best: reflect the criticism back. Complain about the Turks recent transgressions against the US. Like fighting the Kurds, disallowing Turkey staging for the Iraq Invasion, backsliding on secularism, etc.
18 - bliffle
Anyway, seems to me Bush ought to respond to the current posturing by various Turks in the method he knows best: reflect the criticism back. Complain about the Turks recent transgressions against the US. Like fighting the Kurds, disallowing Turkey staging for the Iraq Invasion, backsliding on secularism, etc.
19 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
"The question is why now after all these years. Could this measure not have waited for a more appropriate time so its merits could and would stand on their own apart from having politically prostituted?"
Franco,
There is a basic point you seem to miss. Politics is, among other things, the art of prostituting issues for economic political or military gain. That principle applies generally. Applying this concept to the instant case, then the Democrats pushing Armenian genocide are attempting to stick Bush and friends (including the traitorous regime in Jerusalem and the yapping Yids who invest their ego in it, like the ADL) in the embarrassing corner of having to defend genocide - which is exactly what he is busy doing. Thus they gain.
If the Turks attack in "free" Kurdistan as a result of this, or more precisely because they feel more free to defy America in the light of their genocide being hung out to stink in public, the Turks look like shit, and the Democrats will do their best to take advantage of this.
I'd say you should look for Greek money going in contributions to important Democrats in the American congress, Franco.
20 - bliffle
Anyway, seems to me Bush ought to respond to the current posturing by various Turks in the method he knows best: reflect the criticism back. Complain about the Turks recent transgressions against the US. Like fighting the Kurds, disallowing Turkey staging for the Iraq Invasion, backsliding on secularism, etc.
21 - bliffle
Don't be stupid Franco. It doesn't start with Pelosi. Perhaps it's time to cease allowing political predispositions to cloud your vision
and stop being a trumpet for ideologues.
22 - Joe
bliffle - Don't be stupid Franco. It doesn't start with Pelosi. Perhaps it's time to cease allowing political predispositions to cloud your vision
and stop being a trumpet for ideologues.
Damn boy, you've posted that three times. How drunk are you? Drunk enough, obviously, to think the Pelosi and the dems don't have a political agenda driving this incredibly stupid decision.
23 - RJ
Read this:
WASHINGTON " The Bush administration is concerned that Turkey could block vital U.S. supply routes to Iraq.
Seventy percent of the fuel and air shipments to the U.S. military in Iraq are currently routed through Turkey.
Officials said the Defense Department and U.S. military believe Ankara could retaliate to a U.S. House resolution that blamed Turkey for the killing of 1.5 million Armenians in World War I. They said Ankara could block weapons and supplies to the U.S. military in Iraq.
"I think we all recognize there were mass murders 95 years ago, 1915," Defense Secretary Robert Gates said. "The problem that we have is that this is clearly a very sensitive subject for one of our closest allies, and an ally that is incredibly important to the United States in terms of our operations in Iraq."
Gates said 70 percent of the U.S. air cargo to Iraq flies through Turkey. He said 70 percent of the fuel requirements of the U.S. military in Iraq also moves through neighboring Turkey.
Officials said Turkey also serves as the route for new U.S. armored vehicles to Iraq. They cited the Mine Resistant Ambush Protected, or MRAP, vehicles, designed to withstand improvised explosive devices.
"For those who are concerned that we get as many of these Mine Resistant Ambush Protected heavy vehicles into Iraq as possible, 95 percent of those vehicles today are being flown into Iraq through Turkey," Gates said on Oct. 12.
Another concern was that Turkey would limit the U.S. use of the Incirlik air force base near Iraq. The United States has sought to expand its use of Incirlik, now reserved for training and logistics missions.
But none dare call it treason...
24 - Muslims Against Sharia
Muslims Against Sharia commend House Democrats and Speaker Pelosi for pressing ahead with an Armenian genocide bill. Republican opposition to the bill is pure manifestation of moral relativism.
Muslims Against Sharia condemn Turkish government for refusing to acknowledge Armenian genocide and recalling its US ambassador in response to the bill.
Source: AFP
Post
25 - Franco
#19 " Ruvy in Jerusalem
There is a basic point you seem to miss. Politics is, among other things, the art of prostituting issues for economic political or military gain. That principle applies generally.
Cut the crap, you know I know this. You should be asking yourself, why I asked the question.
Democrats pushing Armenian genocide are attempting to stick Bush and in the embarrassing corner of having to defend genocide - which is exactly what he is busy doing. Thus they gain.
You’re not going deep enough Ruvy. Bush is not now, nor has he ever defended the Armenia genocide. Bush wants desperately to properly recognize the tragic suffering of the Armenian people. Bush’s record concerning his position on this issue goes back many years in support of it. And there is no one here on this site, or anywhere else who can dispute it. So what else could it be? Lets MoveOn.
If the Turks attack in "free" Kurdistan as a result of this, or more precisely because they feel more free to defy America in the light of their genocide being hung out to stink in public, the Turks look like shit, and the Democrats will do their best to take advantage of this.
You have it backwards. The PKK Rebel Kurds are far from being in the class of Armenian victims Ruvy. I am sure the Democrats have already prepared for this event and would be supportive of the Turks and blame Bush for not supporting them all along.
It’s not embarrassment of Bush or Greek money that constitutes that main objectives of the new Democratic Congress. Embarrassment of Bush is always a cherry on the cake, but it’s not the cake in this issue. And money, the Greeks can not match the American taxpayer Ruvy.
The playing of the Armenian genocide card at this moment in time is strictly a back-door effort at curtailing US involvement in Iraq by cutting off supply military access routes for the war through Turkey. If Congress’s plan fails to get Turkey to stop US access, and Turkey continues its cooperation with US war efforts, Congress will say, you see, all the fuss was for not. It’s a win / win stacked deck. But then they have to go back to the drawing board.
What’s really disproportionate about all of this is that the Democrats, while all they do is claim the Republicans war plan is a failure, they themselves do not have a viable plan for Iraq at all. They simple do not have one because they do not want one. All they have ever advocated is getting out now and letting the Iraqis deal with it, which is the same thing as saying let it implode.
The Democrats can not only not admit the war effort (the surge) has signs of working, they can’t allow it to work at all or their plan goes to shit.
(1) That is why they had to sabotage General Petraeus, before-during-and after his testimony before them.
(2) That is way they must get Turkey to cut off supply roots to the Bush war effort.
(3) That is way they are clamping down on PMC’s actions to make it too difficult and dangers to maintain the level of assertiveness that keeps them and they protected occupants alive. The Democrats have known all along about the PMC’s actions and mode of operation, and they have known all along that the PMC's total personnel on the ground in Iraq out number military troop levels in Iraq. So hamstring the PMC’s puts more pressure and strain on the military, who they hope will not be getting resuppled via Turkey, which they hope will kill any benefits the surge has produced. etc, etc.
The Demarcates in the US Congress are focused on seeing this all through. If they succeed Ruvy, they let Iraq implode, Iran swallows it up with their ideologies, Syria is jubilant and helps Iran with Iraq and Hamas, Lebanon slides from the pressure, Turkey could give a shit, terrorists around the world and inside the US now and in the further carry with them and their evil deeds the shared blessing of the Democratic Congress……It’s all Bush’s fault.