The Arab Turkey

Ninety years ago, the Ottomans left our region, as a result of the political and military collapse of the Sultanate, and amid great joy by the Arab nationalists at the time, over their victory against “Turkification”.

Editorial Keydmedia Online
15 December 2011

The latter’s slogans in fact reflected hostility against everything Arab, be it their ethnicity, language or culture.

But the Turks are currently gaining back important footholds in the Arab world. The Arab rebels and the new regimes in their counties are welcoming the Turkish role in supporting revolutions and defending the kind of democratic rule that those new regimes are calling for.

However, the Turkish comeback is being achieved to the tune of a rhythm that is different from the one that had caused them to leave. They are coming back in conjunction with a wide Western approval of the “model” that they are supposedly trying to export to the Arab region, i.e. that of moderate Islam, which is not at odds with the current day and age and which holds no grudges against the dominant Western culture.

This kind of Islam does not think of religion as an excuse for snubbing modern cultural values. But this Western endorsement of the new Turkish role completely contradicts the part played previously by the West, especially Britain, in nurturing Arab national sentiment, which the Turks, when they wrote their history, considered as hostile to the hundreds of years of historical relations between them and their Arab “subjects”, under the old and longstanding empire.

The Arabs require Turkish support, and they see in Turkey a model that they ought to follow in order to catch up with the present day and age. At the same time, they are expressing their disappointment at those regimes that have ruled them in the name of Arab nationalism, from the day their countries gained their independence. Since then, these regimes brought the Arabs nothing but pompous slogans and grandiose promises that only yielded collapses on the ground, on the level of the economy, education, administration, services, and infrastructure.

This is not to mention the systematic oppression that, in some countries, reached the extent of state terrorism against the citizenry. Things reached such an extent that these populations started comparing their situation in the time of freedom, independence and nationalistic slogans to their situation during the time of colonization and the mandates. And in fact, the comparison often turned out not to be in favor of the regimes in question, in all aspects.

In addition to all that, there was the utter failure in the confrontation with Israel and in restoring Palestinian rights, despite the fact that a whole century has passed since the start of the conflict in Palestine, and 65 years since the creation of the state of Israel. While Arab armies were bracing for the so-called “liberation” battle, they were suffering defeats and losses on these fronts, while force was only being shown against internal opponents.

The Arabs’ efforts at following the model of the Turkish Justice and Development party and its patron, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, can only be understood through this historical evaluation.

Arab history has come full circle and now its compass is pointing in the direction of Istanbul. As much as this is a victory tinted with some Schadenfreude on Turkey’s part, it is also a cultural and political defeat that the Arabs must no doubt be sensing as they are heading back once again towards a Turkish aegis.

This is the powerful Turkey on the political, military, and economic levels. It is the Turkey that can stand up to Israel, impose its terms on NATO and represent a successful commercial partner for the European Union. It is also ruled by an Islamic party that deals with the Western parties and Christian blocs from the position of an equal.

This is the model that is being followed by the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and Syria, the supporters of the Nahda in Tunisia, and the Islamists of Morocco and Libya. This is a model that is making Turkey turn “Arab” as never before, even under its Ottoman sultans.

In the meantime, this model represents a source of concern for Iran, the “exports” of which to the Arab region merely consisted of interfering with the affairs of the region’s countries and imposing tutelage over them, and supporting the regimes and parties that are rejected by their own populations.

This is not to mention adding one more partner to the list of local partners who are exploiting the Palestinian cause, without achieving anything for the Palestinian people.

Elias Harfoush