Tweet
The New Anatolian, Turkey
May 16 2005
No alternative in foreign policy?
View: Professor Huseyin Bagci
[email protected]
Turkey is currently further debating the Ocalan case while terrorists
from the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) again cause great military
and psychological damage to Turkish politics. Since the decision
declared by the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), more than
10 soldiers have lost their lives in southeastern Anatolia and the
common perception is that more uneasy days for Turkey are on the way.
The expected nationalist tendencies are rising, and this is exactly
what strikes fear amongst the Turkish public. Statements made by Gen.
Yasar Buyukanit that large amounts of C4 explosives have been smuggled
into Turkey through the Iraqi border indicate that new bloodshed
is to be expected. The Turkish Army must undertake urgent measures
to protect its borders. Homeland security is therefore of primary
importance in Turkey.
The debate over whether Ocalan should be or will be put on trial again
is, as some say, a new hindrance to Turkey's stability. Until now
the government's position has been very calm and they're currently
looking to coordinate all state institutions on the matter in order
to share responsibility. This is why Justice Minister and government
spokesman Cemil Cicek has said that it's not a government but more
of a state issue. Indeed, his statement is right. It became a state
issue and neither the Justice and Development (AK) Party government
nor any other future government can solve this issue alone. The fear
however is that if it's a state issue then it will take on a different
dimension, leading to much harsher reactions and military policies.
Prime Minister Erdogan's meetings with many European statesmen today
and tomorrow in Warsaw at the Council of Europe meeting will show to
what extent European politicians share the views of the ECHR.
Interestingly, the Armenian issue has also changed in direction after
some new documents were published. The Algerian government's claims
that France has to recognize events in Algeria in the late '40s and
'50s has been rejected by French Foreign Minister Michel Barnier,
stating that one should leave such issues to historians. Of course
it should be left to historians, but why not the same approach
for the Armenians' claims too! The main problem today is that in
this post-Sept. 11 world, the entire history of the issues will be
reevaluated. Europe is also responsible for these debates or to put
it bluntly, the East is responding for the first time with the same
methods as the West. Historian Bernard Lewis wrote of the impact of
the West on the East in his book, while clearly stating how Europe
is currently facing political and ethical challenges from the East,
and that the world is no longer interpreted in the same manner as
that of the 19th century.
Turkey's AK Party government has a very interesting mission in this
respect. Both in the Islamic and the Arab world, the AK Party's
policies will be praised. Turkey is indeed now experiencing a new
interpretation of history which is no longer "Eurocentric." But in
Turkey the entire teaching of history has been Eurocentric until the
present day. This is again why Professor Ahmed Davudoglu, adviser to
Prime Minister Erdogan, will be strongly criticized. He's the main
architect of this new interpretation of history, including Turkish
history. The element of Islam is now increasingly integrated with
today's events and challenges, and the search will be manifested by
looking at events from the Islamic and Eastern ways of interpreting
history. In other words, the Eurocentric interpretation of history
and the Islamic interpretation of history are now clashing. This
is reason enough to confuse those with an interpretation of history
that lies somewhere between the two. The main parameters of Turkish
foreign policy aren't changing yet, but are getting a more and more
eastern look.
The AK Party government's policy has been criticized but at the
moment are there any other policy options or other applicable
political alternatives. The main challenge that remains however is
that Turkish-EU relations will not be conducted in the same way as
before. The compromise policy adopted by the AK Party seems currently
to be the only one. They don't know what else they could do. Never
before has Turkey been in such situation where no other alternatives
exist.
May 16 2005
No alternative in foreign policy?
View: Professor Huseyin Bagci
[email protected]
Turkey is currently further debating the Ocalan case while terrorists
from the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) again cause great military
and psychological damage to Turkish politics. Since the decision
declared by the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), more than
10 soldiers have lost their lives in southeastern Anatolia and the
common perception is that more uneasy days for Turkey are on the way.
The expected nationalist tendencies are rising, and this is exactly
what strikes fear amongst the Turkish public. Statements made by Gen.
Yasar Buyukanit that large amounts of C4 explosives have been smuggled
into Turkey through the Iraqi border indicate that new bloodshed
is to be expected. The Turkish Army must undertake urgent measures
to protect its borders. Homeland security is therefore of primary
importance in Turkey.
The debate over whether Ocalan should be or will be put on trial again
is, as some say, a new hindrance to Turkey's stability. Until now
the government's position has been very calm and they're currently
looking to coordinate all state institutions on the matter in order
to share responsibility. This is why Justice Minister and government
spokesman Cemil Cicek has said that it's not a government but more
of a state issue. Indeed, his statement is right. It became a state
issue and neither the Justice and Development (AK) Party government
nor any other future government can solve this issue alone. The fear
however is that if it's a state issue then it will take on a different
dimension, leading to much harsher reactions and military policies.
Prime Minister Erdogan's meetings with many European statesmen today
and tomorrow in Warsaw at the Council of Europe meeting will show to
what extent European politicians share the views of the ECHR.
Interestingly, the Armenian issue has also changed in direction after
some new documents were published. The Algerian government's claims
that France has to recognize events in Algeria in the late '40s and
'50s has been rejected by French Foreign Minister Michel Barnier,
stating that one should leave such issues to historians. Of course
it should be left to historians, but why not the same approach
for the Armenians' claims too! The main problem today is that in
this post-Sept. 11 world, the entire history of the issues will be
reevaluated. Europe is also responsible for these debates or to put
it bluntly, the East is responding for the first time with the same
methods as the West. Historian Bernard Lewis wrote of the impact of
the West on the East in his book, while clearly stating how Europe
is currently facing political and ethical challenges from the East,
and that the world is no longer interpreted in the same manner as
that of the 19th century.
Turkey's AK Party government has a very interesting mission in this
respect. Both in the Islamic and the Arab world, the AK Party's
policies will be praised. Turkey is indeed now experiencing a new
interpretation of history which is no longer "Eurocentric." But in
Turkey the entire teaching of history has been Eurocentric until the
present day. This is again why Professor Ahmed Davudoglu, adviser to
Prime Minister Erdogan, will be strongly criticized. He's the main
architect of this new interpretation of history, including Turkish
history. The element of Islam is now increasingly integrated with
today's events and challenges, and the search will be manifested by
looking at events from the Islamic and Eastern ways of interpreting
history. In other words, the Eurocentric interpretation of history
and the Islamic interpretation of history are now clashing. This
is reason enough to confuse those with an interpretation of history
that lies somewhere between the two. The main parameters of Turkish
foreign policy aren't changing yet, but are getting a more and more
eastern look.
The AK Party government's policy has been criticized but at the
moment are there any other policy options or other applicable
political alternatives. The main challenge that remains however is
that Turkish-EU relations will not be conducted in the same way as
before. The compromise policy adopted by the AK Party seems currently
to be the only one. They don't know what else they could do. Never
before has Turkey been in such situation where no other alternatives
exist.