by Michael Rubin*

The legal case against the AKP is an affirmation of democracy rather than an assault upon it. Democracy rests upon the rule of law and constitutionalism. Neither plurality support nor a majority in parliament should place any politician or party above the law.

The AKP deserves credit for the economic growth that has occurred under its stewardship and for supporting Turkey’s accession into the European Union. There is no doubt that the AKP has revolutionized Turkish politics. In the 2002 election, it trounced the more established parties by out-campaigning them. The AKP has earned its reputation for serving its constituents.

(more…)

by Michael Rubin*

Few U.S. policymakers have heard of Fethullah Gülen, perhaps Turkey’s most prominent theologian and political thinker. Self-exiled for more than a decade, Gülen lives a reclusive life outside Philadelphia, Pa. Within months, however, he may be as much a household a name in the United States as is Ayatollah Khomeini, a man who was as obscure to most Americans up until his triumphant return to Iran almost 30 years ago.

(more…)

By Phyllis Chesler

Why has the NY Times published an article today (“Veiled Democracy”), written by Harvard law professor Noah Feldman, in which Feldman explains that if Turkey allows Muslim women to wear the Islamic headscarf in universities, that Turkey will be that much closer to a liberal democracy?

Pinch me. I must be dreaming.

(more…)

By Barry Rubin

In a sense, no country has tried harder to get out of the Middle East than Turkey–by way of achieving membership in the European Union–yet Turkey does have an important role to play in the region. At the same time, though, this situation is complicated by divergences over Turkey’s identity, interests, and internal politics.

(more…)

by Michael Rubin*

On a strictly emotional level, U.S. support for Iraqi Kurdistan makes sense.¹ In the wake of World War I, the Kurds missed their opportunity for statehood when other peoples gained their independence. Today, they remain the largest ethnic group without a country. They have suffered greatly at the hands of others. But while Iraqi Kurdistan has come far, the unreliability of its leadership makes any long-term U.S.-Kurdish alliance unwise. Rather than become a beacon for democracy, the current Iraqi Kurdish leadership appears intent on replicating more autocratic models. Rather than become a regional Nelson Mandela, Iraqi Kurdish president Masud Barzani now charts a course to become a new Yasser Arafat. Despite lofty rhetoric about its suitability as an ally, Iraqi Kurdistan’s actions suggest that it is far from trustworthy.

(more…)

by Michael Rubin*

It’s been nearly two months since the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) sparked an international crisis with a major attack inside Turkey, and more than six weeks since President Bush promised Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan that Washington would aid Turkey’s fight against terrorism. Heady talk of intelligence sharing and cooperation followed and, indeed, may have been a factor in this weekend’s Turkish air strikes on PKK targets in Iraqi Kurdistan.

Yet at the same time the Bush administration — more precisely its increasingly assertive State Department — has embraced an ill-advised diplomatic strategy toward the PKK that will likely backfire on our long-standing NATO ally, and could serve to undermine what is left of President Bush’s “global war on terrorism.”

(more…)

by Daniel Pipes*

“Far from being the source of anti-Americanism in Turkey, the AKP represents an ideal partner for the United States in the region.” So asserts Joshua W. Walker, a former Turkey desk officer at the State Department now studying at Princ­eton University, referring to the Justice and Development Party (known as the AKP). Writing in The Washington Quarterly, Walker supports his thesis by noting the constructive Turkish role in Iraq, praising “how carefully the AKP has guarded the [U.S.] alliance and tried to work with the Bush administration, partic­ularly when compared to other European nations.”

(more…)

by Daniel Pipes*

About 100,000 Turkish troops, backed by aircraft and tanks, are poised to enter Iraq for counterterrorism purposes. But once there, they might just stay permanently, occupying the Mosul area, leading to dangerous regional consequences.

To understand this danger requires a refresher in Turkish irredentist ambitions harking back to the 1920s. The Ottoman Empire emerged from World War I on the losing side, a predicament codified in 1920 by the Treaty of Sèvres imposed on it by the victorious Allies. The treaty placed some Ottoman territory under international control and much of the rest under separate Armenian, French, Greek, Italian, and Kurdish control, leaving Turkish rule to continue only in a northwest Anatolian statelet.

(more…)

By Heymi Bahar*

The July 2007 Turkish parliamentary elections were a major victory for the governing Justice and Development Party (AKP), entrenching it in power. By the same token, the historic center-right parties virtually disappeared, the left stagnated, and the number of nationalist MHP and independent Kurdish members increased. This article lays out the reasons both for the AKP’s success as well as the performance of other forces.

Following the Turkish Parliament’s failure to select a new president in an April 27, 2007 session, the decision was made that early elections be held on July 22, 2007 (rather than in October). The governing Justice and Development Party (AKP) had named Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul as its candidate, rejecting proposals by the opposition Republican People’s Party (CHP) to choose a non-partisan, mutually accepted figure. Following the decision of CHP and other parties to boycott the voting session, the issue was taken to the Turkish Constitutional Court. CHP leader Deniz Baykal argued that there had not been 367 members present to start the first round of voting. While the court agreed with Baykal, some charged that this was a political rather than judicial decision^[1].

(more…)

By Andrew L. Jaffee

Turkey’s Islamist ruling party is trying to edit the country’s constitution, redefining “women as a vulnerable group needing protection:”

…The current constitution in Turkey obliges the government to ensure equality for all - a clause that women’s groups fought hard to include.

The new draft removes that, describing women instead as a vulnerable group in need of special protection. …

Turkish women’s rights groups are protesting, but I’m not sure they’ll be able to prevent the changes:

(more…)

By Barry Rubin

Turks of every political position tell me the same story to explain their situation: to cook a live frog you don’t put it in a pot on a high flame. You put it in cool water and raise the temperature very slowly. This is what’s happening in Turkey.

International media coverage of the July 22 Turkish parliamentary election repeats endlessly that the victorious Justice and Development (AK) party is really moderate now. Despite Islamist roots, they say, it is now a centrist party mainly concerned with Turkey becoming a European Union (EU) member and having a prosperous economy.

Certainly, such is the image the party has projected for its five years in power. Precisely because half of Turkish voters were convinced that AK had no Islamist intentions they voted for it. The economy is doing well. Turkey might benefit from having a system more balanced regarding religion.

(more…)

By Barry Rubin

*Is the Justice and Development Party (AK Party) going to make Turkey Islamist or not?

Which path the victorious party of the July 22 voting will take the country down is the main question Professor Barry Rubin asks while evaluating the situation after a suspenseful election process.

Rubin, director of the Global Research for International Affairs Center, a research center located at the Interdisciplinary Center, Herzliya (IDC), said the AK Party, which won 47 percent of the vote in the July 22 election and will have almost two-thirds of the seats in Parliament, is a pragmatic, conservative and business-oriented moderate party despite its roots as an Islamic-oriented one.

However, he added that in societal terms, the party probably is up to transforming Turkey from a secular into a more Islamic society.

(more…)

By Barry Rubin

Answer A: In political terms, the Justice and Development (AK) party which won 47 percent of the votes in Turkey’s July 22 elections and will have almost two-thirds of the parliament seats is a pragmatic, conservative, business-oriented moderate party despite its roots as an Islamic-oriented one.

Answer B: In societal terms, the Justice and Development (AK) party is probably transforming Turkey from a secular into a more Islamic society, with a big effect on the status of women, the situation of minorities, and Turkey’s foreign policy.

Both statements are true. And this is the point many observers are missing in the great change signaled by the election results.

(more…)

By Linda Michaud-Emin and Heymi Bahar

Having won Turkey’s July 22 parliamentary elections, the ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) is set once again to form a single-party government. This triumph is especially impressive as it is the first time in a half-century that a government party wins reelection. Ironically, this means that while the July 22 elections have taken place amidst so much controversy they are in fact producing the most stable government in many years.

In recent years, the Turkish government has been plagued by an on-going battle between Deniz Baykal’s opposition socialist Republican People’s Party (CHP) and the AKP on the issue of secularism. When it was time for parliament to choose a president on April 27, 2007, the AKP selected its number-two leader, Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul, for the post. In turn, the CHP boycotted the balloting, thus blocking it. As a result, parliamentary elections were moved up to an earlier date. With street demonstrations protesting AKP’s Islam-oriented program, it seemed as if the opposition might seriously challenge the government. Instead, the government did very well.

(more…)

by Kamal Said Qadir*

Many Western commentators say Iraqi Kurdistan is a beacon of democracy in an otherwise uncertain Iraq.[1] As much of the rest of Iraq descends into violence if not civil war, it is tempting for U.S. officials to point to the placidity of northern Iraq as a rare success. In many ways, Iraqi Kurdistan’s progress since 1991 is remarkable. But while Kurdish officials and their growing coterie of U.S. consultants praise the region’s progress, an increasing culture of corruption, nepotism, and abuse-of-power has both eroded democracy and, increasingly, stability.

(more…)