by Daniel Pipes*
Only 13 years ago the Turkish and Syrian governments came close to war, a culmination of long-existing tensions over borders, terrorism, water, contending alliances, and domestic factors. From an account of mine about the mood in October 1998:
by Daniel Pipes*
To keep Kurds out of parliament, the military authors of the 1982 Turkish constitution instituted the unheard-of threshold of 10 percent, meaning that a political party that won less than that proportion of the total vote did not gain any seats. This rule has had a huge impact on Turkish political life, especially in 2002, when it transformed the AK Party’s third of the votes into two thirds of the seats. It has also caused the ruling AKP party, despite its increasing popular vote, to control a steadily smaller number of the 550 seats. Note in particular the bolded numbers:
By Barry Rubin
The gap between dominant Western perceptions of the Middle East and the region’s reality is dangerously wide. While the “Arab Spring” is celebrated as an advance for moderation and democracy, in fact the advance is going to revolutionary Islamists. Developments in Turkey and Egypt especially threaten to plunge the Middle East back into an era of conflict, instability, and the worst threats to Western interests in decades.
There are several things very much predictable about the future of the Middle East area during the next year. First, on June 12, 2011, Turkey will have an election. That election will probably be won by the government, whether or not it gets a two-thirds majority. The current rulers will interpret this as a signal to take a much tougher line toward Israel and the United States. It is possible that the extent of the increase of Turkey’s enmity toward Israel after that election will astonish the world.
by Daniel Pipes*
Turkey’s Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu grandiloquently proclaimed a few days ago that, “If the world is on fire, Turkey is the firefighter. Turkey is assuming the leading role for stability in the Middle East.”
by Daniel Pipes*
Unprecedented convulsions across the Middle East, from Morocco to Iran, prompt three reflections:
First, these rebellions fit into the context of a regional chessboard, what I call the Middle East cold war. On one side stands the “resistance” bloc led by Iran and including Turkey, Syria, Lebanon, Gaza, and Qatar; it seeks to shake up the existing order with a new one, more piously Islamic and hostile to the West. On the other side stands the status quo bloc led by Saudi Arabia and including most of the rest of the region (implicitly including Israel); it prefers things to stay more or less as they are.
by Damla Aras*
In June 2010, the deepening rift between Turkey’s ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) unexpectedly came to the public eye when seventy-two retired ambassadors and consul-generals issued a written statement protesting Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s lack of respect in dubbing them “mon chers” and criticizing the government’s foreign policy.[1] Why did the prime minister publicly snub his diplomats? By way of answering this question, this article reviews the ongoing rift between Erdoğan and his diplomats before carrying an English translation of the ambassadors’ statement and interviews with two retired senior diplomats.
A briefing by Lee Smith*
Lee Smith is a visiting fellow at the Hudson Institute and author of The Strong Horse: Power, Politics, and the Clash of Arab Civilizations. On December 28, Mr. Smith addressed the Middle East Forum via conference call on the implications of Wikileaks regarding the Middle East, and their significance for U.S. policy in the region, a topic he has focused on in recent articles.
by Daniel Pipes*
Early in the sixteenth century, as the Ottoman and Safavid empires fought for control of the Middle East, Selim the Grim ruling from Istanbul indulged his artistic side by composing distinguished poetry in Persian, then the Middle East’s language of high culture. Simultaneously, Ismail I ruling from Isfahan wrote poetry in Turkish, his ancestral language.
This juxtaposition comes to mind as the populations of Turkey and Iran now engage in another exchange. As the secular Turkey founded by Atatürk threatens to disappear under a wave of Islamism, the Islamist Iranian state founded by Khomeini apparently teeters, on the brink of secularism. Turks wish to live like Iranians, ironically, and Iranians like Turks.
By Barry Rubin
It is true that the passage of the referendum in Turkey with 58 percent of the vote can be seen as a victory for the AKP regime. But that point shouldn’t be exaggerated. The bad feature of the reforms–in terms of consolidating the Islamist government’s power–is to strengthen the regime’s control over the courts and to limit further the autonomy of the Turkish army.
At the same time, though, there were many other provisions that the overwhelming majority of Turks wanted, expanding freedoms and civil liberties, reining in the possibility of military coups which those left of center have opposed in the past. Moreover, it was sold as a step toward Turkish entry into the European Union, still a prime goal though something that’s never going to happen.
by Aymenn Jawad Al-Tamimi*
Where is Turkey heading under Erdogan’s ruling party, the AKP? The question becomes urgent following the approval of a constitutional referendum on 12 September with a majority of 58% in favor as opposed to 42% against.
In theory, the referendum is in many ways an advancement of liberal democratic rights in compliance with membership requirements of the European Union (EU). For instance, the revision of article ten upholds the principle of gender equality, whilst article twenty now ensures the protection of personal data and the right to privacy. It was for these reasons that the Enlargement Commissioner of the EU, Stefan Fule, praised the constitutional reforms as “a step in the right direction … towards fully complying with the accession criteria.” Meanwhile, the European Parliamentary deputy Richard Howitt affirmed that the referendum was a “sign of the population’s support for reforms that will prepare the country for European Union membership.”
by Aymenn Jawad Al-Tamimi*
With the official end of U.S. combat operations in Iraq, what bodes for Iraq’s future in terms of its relations to other nations in the Middle East? One useful way to examine this question is through the lens of what Daniel Pipes describes as the present “Middle Eastern Cold War.”
This new Cold War represents the current ideological division in the Middle East between the “revolutionary bloc,” led chiefly by Iran, Syria, and more recently Turkey, and the “status-quo bloc,” led by Saudi Arabia and Egypt. While most Sunni Arab states align themselves with the “status-quo bloc,” there are notable exceptions in that Qatar and Oman back the “revolutionary bloc,” while Libya simply sits on the sidelines.
by Phyllis Chesler
Imperfect, tiny Israel is truly a “light unto the nations.” If only “the nations” would see it this way!
Israel is attacked by Turkey — and Israel, not Turkey, launches an investigation into the role its military played in defending their country. Yesterday, Prime Minister Netanyahu took “overall responsibility” for what happened. He said that although professional mistakes were made at intelligence and operational levels, the killings were justified.
Turkey has yet to admit its genocidal massacre of the Armenians; we are still waiting for Turkey to launch its own internal investigation — and for the United Nations to demand that they do. … Continue reading…
By Barry Rubin
This article is based on one commissioned and published by PajamasMedia. I have added additional material to this more extensive version. Turkish readers: see a special note to you at the end.
Why have Israel-Turkey relations gone from alliance to what seems to be the verge of war?
The foolish think that the breakdown is due to the recent Gaza flotilla crisis. The merely naive attribute the collapse to the December 2008-January 2009 Israel-Hamas war in the Gaza Strip.
By Andrew Whitehead
The modern State of Israel recently attempted to peacefully dissuade a flotilla of ships from landing “humanitarian” supplies at the blockaded Gaza Strip. The flotilla was invited several times by the Israeli government to offload the supplies in Israel proper where the supplies would be delivered once they had been inspected for contraband. The flotilla was determined to run the blockade and was boarded by elements of the IDF.
There is indisputable video evidence of how murderous the Jihadist occupants of the Turkish ship Mavi Marmara planned to become as they attacked an IDF boarding party. As they were boarding the ship, the leading element of IDF Commandos who were carrying non-lethal paintball guns were immediately and viscously attacked and beaten by men wielding clubs, steel rods, knives, wrist-rocket slingshots and other instruments meant to maim and kill. The IDF soldiers were given permission to use their sidearms only after one of them was thrown 30 feet from the upper to lower deck.
You are currently browsing the archives for the Turkey category.
Articles/Entries