As Turkish hopes for EU membership fade with French President Sarkozy and German Chancellor Merkel continuing to oppose it - arguing that its 72 million relatively poor and mainly Muslim people do not reflect Europe’s “shared values” - Turkey has increasingly asserted an independent line in both regional and global affairs. While this should not surprise anyone acquainted with regional history, it does raise the question: “Quo vadis Turkey?”
Two schools of thought have rapidly emerged: Alarmist, and realist. Both agree on basics.
Despite its Ottoman history and Islamic traditions, Kemal Ataturk and his successors have created a modern secular Turkish republic that clearly separates state authority from its Muslim faith. Benefitting from its firm Cold War anchor in the Western alliance system, an economically vibrant Turkey has become the 15th largest global economy and a member of the G-20. Finally, there is agreement that Turkey, located at the crossroads of three continents and given its military capability and proximity to the energy rich Middle East and Central Asia, is vital to the calculations of competing great powers in what is arguably the most politically volatile region of the world.
But from this point on analysts seriously part ways.
Alarmists emphasize danger signs that Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan and the Islamist Justice and Development party (AKP) are turning away from Turkey's post World War II Western orientation; gradually neutralizing the power of Turkey's secular establishment (the army, the courts, the bureaucracy and big business) while pursuing a hidden agenda that will eventually turn Turkey into a theocratic autocracy.
To support their argument, they cite Turkey's 2003 refusal to permit American use of its strategic space to facilitate Saddam Hussein’s overthrow in Iraq, Erdogan's negotiation - along with Brazilian President Lula da Silva - with Iranian President Ahmadinejad on a way of handling Iranian nuclear enrichment, Turkey’s UN Security Council vote against enhanced sanctions against Iran, his government's contacts with radical Islamic organizations such as Hamas and Hezbollah and plans for a referendum on constitutional changes that opponents say will undermine the secular state. Some even argue that Turkey deliberately provoked Israel by sending a Turkish-registered freighter to test the Gaza blockade - which resulted in tragic deaths and near rupture of Turkish-Israeli relations.
Realists retort that alarmist fears - as we have seen elsewhere in the Middle East - have a way of turning into self-fulfilling prophecies. They argue that Turkey must be helped to fulfill its strategic vision of joining the European Union while pursuing the clearly auxiliary objectives of a multidimensional foreign policy that remains institutionally anchored in the Western world. Realists are fully aware that Turkish prospects for EU membership any time soon are dim, given the Union's current economic travails and what is commonly referred to as "enlargement fatigue."
But the realists encourage U.S. policy makers to support Turkey's EU membership and keep its Western orientation alive. They also believe that some of Erdogan's actions are part of the runup to the general elections scheduled for 2011. In light of the AKP’s poor showing in March’s local elections, they argue it is likely that domestic political considerations will play an even more prominent role in his and the AKP’s calculations.
The irony of the current situation is that increasingly independent Turkish regional initiatives in fact support American and Western objectives by demonstrating that a balancing intermediary role is possible. In the Middle East, there is long history of an intermediary (waseet in Arabic) both engaged and trusted by all parties in a dispute who is able to assist them in reaching compromise.
If not seen as an American pawn, by engaging independently with Israel, Palestine, Hamas and Hezbollah, Turkey may be able to play this broker role and help guide renewed progress on a two-state solution. Since the Obama administration appears unable to deal with Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu’s recalcitrance because of American domestic pressures, a more direct Turkish role can be an effective alternative - and may already be having an effect, as Israel has relaxed the Gaza blockade and appears more open to resuming peace talks.
Long at the crossroads of trade and culture, Turkey is even more vitally placed amid today’s web of oil and gas pipelines from Russia, Central Asia and the Middle East that criss-cross the region. With a well-educated and growing middle class, a lively parliamentary democracy despite its history of military interventions, arguably the region’s largest and best trained armed forces (bar Israel’s) and extensive cultural and linguistic ties through Central Asia as well as the Middle East, Turkey has the presence and the assets to exercise increasing regional influence, including with its historical rival, Iran.
