Tweet
Who is the Enemy of the US in Turkey?
By Sedat Laciner
Journal of Turkish Weekly
21 September 2006
Recently, there is an inflation of claims in Turkey arguing that
hatred against the US is surging and so-called anti-Semitism is on the
peak. In particular, after the Iraq War in 2003, some circles in the
US claim that Turkey is ruled by an Islamist government, and that the
government supports anti-American and anti-Israeli groups. According
to this view, Turkey is an obstacle in the implementation of the
American and Israeli policies in the Middle East. There are those
who maintain that the current government should be toppled in order
to overcome this situation.
First of all, one must admit that there has recently been a notable
reaction particularly in Turkey against the American and Israeli
policies. In the surveys conducted by our organization, ISRO (USAK),
in March 2005, we found the emergence of a reaction against the US and
Israel. The study found that 91 % of the Turkish public did not approve
the policies of US President George W. Bush. Those who support Bush's
policies was only 0,5 %. In the USAK's friend-enemy perception survey,
the US and Israel got the lowest ranking. However, these statistics
don't imply that Turkish people are exception in global trends. The
US' policies on Iraq and global terrorism are largely disapproved
by the world as well. Bush's policies are a subject of mockery even
in the US. The same survey also suggests that Turkish people don't
hate the US or Americans, and reactions are conjectural as a result
of current American policies. For example, 74 % of the respondents
still see the US as an ally of Turkey.
Those who state they hated the US were only 4 %. There is a fact that
Turks dislike Bush but appreciate Clinton very much. Same is true
for Israel. Turkey is one of the countries where anti-Semitism has no
historical roots. Turks and Turkey are against the Israeli policies,
but not Israel. In this sense, Turkey isn't more anti-Israeli than
any other country in the globe.
So, why is there an increasing concern in the US that Turkey is going
anti-American? Why are some people trying to give the impression that
Turkey has become an al-Qaeda base?
There are various reasons for that:
The Turkish government is blamed for the rejection of the proposal in
March 1, 2003 (tezkere), which would have allowed the US troops to use
Turkish territory for military passage to Iraq. Some neo-cons in the
US cannot accept this result. They think that they were betrayed by
Turkey. The US Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld is the most prominent
person in this group.
Rumsfeld has blamed the inability to gain permission to invade Iraq
through Turkey for the power of the insurgency that the US now
faces. (1) For Rumsfeld, had Turkey given the permission, the US
wouldn't have suffered this many of fatalities and Iraq would have
been a totally different country. Rumsfeld may be right on that
point in some degree. However, it can be seen that the US lacked
proper understanding of Turkey's importance before the March 1
voting. Before the war, the US thought that Turkey would definitely
approve the proposal, and in a way, confused Turkish Assembly with
the other ones in the Middle East.
Moreover, the approval became much less likely because of the
US' indifferent attitude. They treated the subject like a horse
trading. They were so arrogant in very minor topics that they
attracted great negative reaction from the Turkish public. Secondly,
it wouldn't be fair to blame the government for the rejection of the
proposal in the Assembly. It is true that the government did some
small mistakes. However, the Turkish PM Tayyip Erdogan still says that
"the proposal should have been approved". The government did its best
to get the approval from the Parliament.
As a matter of fact, all of those who voted for the approval were the
governing AKP's (Justice and Development Party) MPs, who were blamed
for being "Islamist" and anti-American. In addition, the proposal
was rejected with only a few vote-margin.
Besides, those who voted affirmative were more than those who voted
negative, but there was no simple majority due to abstentions. As
opposed to the general belief, it is the traditional leftist party,
CHP (Republican People's Party), which voted "no" collectively,
that caused the proposal to be rejected.
Even today, the party leader Deniz Baykal tells this story as one of
the party's biggest successes. Another reason of rejection was the
Army's implicit message a day before the voting that the result was
not very important for itself. The Turkish Army, expressing its views
in almost every case, did not make any statement in such a crucial
matter. In the National Security Council meeting which was held a day
before the voting, the Army's silence on the issue was perceived as
the Army was against the approval.
Some right-wing Jewish groups in the US see AKP and al-Qaeda
identical. These groups characterize governing AKP as "Islamist",
and claim that Turkey is leaning towards Islamism at the expense
of Westernism.
However, AKP leadership totally rejects "Islamism" idea. The AKP leader
Recep Tayyip Erdogan, with an inspiration from Christian Democrats,
defines his party as Muslim Democrat. One can also say that AKP,
like the early years of ANAP (Motherland Party), is an umbrella party
embodying many different groups, including liberals and leftists. But
claiming that Turkey has become an Islamist state during the AKP
rule is a quiet exaggerated assessment. During this period, Turkey
has achieved the most notable reforms in its history in the fields
of democratization and Westernization, also thanks to the EU process.
Negotiations for full membership have begun with the EU, and the
Turkish economy has achieved a dramatic growth in integration with
the Western economies during this period ironically called by some
Islamist.
The third important reason is the claim that Turkey has shifted
towards an anti-Israeli posture with the AKP government. It is true
that the PM Erdogan has harshly criticized Israel. In one of his
speeches, Erdogan went as far as asserting that Israel has had some
conducts which might be termed as "state terrorism". However, this
firm attitude against Israel is not peculiar to AKP's Erdogan. His
predecessor Bulent Ecevit, a leftist politician, also blamed Israel
for committing "genocide" against the Palestinians. Similarly, the
leftist opposition party CHP's leader Deniz Baykal also makes very
harsh statements criticizing Israel. The far leftist and rightist
parties in Turkey all also criticize Israel sharply. In other words,
we cannot say that the Turco-Israeli relations have deteriorated
during the AKP government. On the contrary, the Israeli Ambassador to
Ankara, Pinhas Avivi, has stated that the good relations between the
two countries have reached its peak in history during the current
Turkish government. Delivering a speech at ISRO (USAK) on September
6, 2006, the Ambassador said that the economic relations between two
countries have for the first time passed $10 billion and described the
relations as "strategic". In other words, the relations are getting
stronger and stronger regardless of the discourses. In this context,
one should remember that it was the Turkish leftists which opposed
most outspokenly to the Galataport investment project in Istanbul
by the Israeli businessman Ofer, and it was leftist CHP which
initiated campaigns to cancel this deal. On the other hand, it is
interesting to see that Prime Minister Erdogan, who was accused of
being "Islamist", warned the left-wing parties "not to act like the
economic anti-Semitics".
The fourth, and maybe the most important, reason is the complaints
to the US from Turkey. Those who cannot win the elections or who
doesn't trust his personal or institutional influence in Turkey think
that the road to power passes through the US. For this reason, many
politicians and bureaucrats (civilian or not) have recently visited
the US. During these visits, the most prominent argument of the
groups opposing AKP government was that there was a polarization of
Islamists vs. secularists in Turkey. Stressing that this government
was "Islamist" and "anti-Western", these opposition groups asked for
American support to topple the government. The visitors from Turkey not
only talked to officials but also paid visits to the ethnic-religious
and political lobbies to share their views. The effects of these
groups perhaps are much more influential than anything else in the
emergence of an anti-Turkish atmosphere in the US.
The Turkey experts of Turkish origin in the US: Some of the Turkey
experts of Turkish origin, who have difficulty in maintaining their
posts or maintaining their posts with some preconditions, are trying
to retain their posts by giving an impression in the US that there is
a strong polarization in Turkey. The extension of their contracts is
conditioned to defend certain views, and these contracts are usually
offered by groups which see Turkey as we defined above. In addition,
the institutions in the US only want to hear what they want to hear
and ignore criticisms of the US, and this keeps the Turkey experts
under grave pressure. Because of this, many "experts" have to defend
the views which they don't approve just to maintain their projects and
grants. Some other Turkish experts, who are less in number, present
their personal ideological positions as the views reflecting Turkey.
Who is the Enemy of the US in Turkey?
It is clear for many that there has been a strong anti-Americanism
in Turkey since the World War II. The US Congress' support to the
Armenian radicals and also its support of the Greek side in the Cyprus
issue are some of the reasons for the Turkish dislike of the US.
The most important reason undermining the image of the US in
Turkey was the arms embargo imposed on Turkey in the 1970s with
the influence of the Greek lobby in the US. In the following years,
the PKK terror and the Kurdish issue in Turkey have been the main
problems in Turco-American relations. It is noteworthy to see that
it has been the Jewish lobby which defended Turkish interests in the
Congress during this period. Another striking point is that, contrary
to the general belief in the West, the basis of anti -Americanism in
Turkey is not Islamist movements, but secular leftist ideologies. The
anti-Americanism and -Westernism in Turkey is, generally, a leftist
movement. What is more, one can even say that being a leftist, being
anti-Israeli and anti-American are almost synonymous.
For example, the demonstrations protesting the arrival of the US
6th Fleet in Turkey in the 1960s has been one of the legends of the
Turkish left. On the other hand, Turkish right-wing has always been
willing to improve the relations with the US. As a matter of fact,
it is not coincidence to see that the most noticeable improvements
in relations with the US have taken place during the conservative
rightist governments (Menderes, Demirel, Ozal etc.) in Turkey.
Even the far rightist groups such as Islamists and nationalists have
never been as critical as the leftists about the US. Both groups
criticize the US and Israeli policies as a populist method to draw
support from the masses during election campaigns.
However, when any of these parties were in power, they refrained
from any action which could harm the relations. Furthermore, the
Islamist governments, in their coalition governments, improved
relations with the US and Israel just because they were concerned
with secular reactions to their political leanings. It is striking
to note that the most significant security agreement between Israel
and Turkey was signed by the government of Necmettin Erbakan, known
to be an Islamist, in 1996.
However, anti-American and anti-Israeli stand has been an important
part of CHP, the centrist and moderate leftist party. Many MPs in
CHP take the issue back to the Turkish War of Salvation (1919-1922)
and claim that the West still wants to divide Turkey. For CHP,
the PKK is supported by the Western powers, and there is a Western
bloc against Turkey in Cyprus and Armenian problems. CHP also sees
the US' Middle East policies as conspiracies to divide Turkey. CHP
opposes not only political liberalism, but also economic one, and it
has been the political party which resists privatization the most. In
particular, the sale of Turkish state companies to Israel and the US is
unacceptable to CHP. Its strong opposition to the investments of Ofer,
an Israeli businessman, in Turkey and its campaign to prevent these
investments are indications of CHP's posture on this issue. Not only
CHP, but DSP, another left-wing party, is also very critical of the US
and Israel. The campaign "no sale of Turkish property to foreigners"
initiated by Rahsan Ecevit, one of the most influential figures of the
party, is the peak of distrust against Israel and the West. According
to Ecevit, Israeli citizens are buying large areas of land from the
southeast of Turkey and this will be a process which will eventually
lead to the division of Turkey.
The anti-Americanism is much more sharper in far leftist groups,
and this may turn into terrorist activities as in the case of DHKP-C
(The Salvation Party-Front of Revolutionary People). The far leftist
Worker Party, led by Dogu Perincek, is quiet sure that the US and
Israel wants to divide Turkey. Perincek strictly opposes privatization,
liberal economy, Turkey's NATO membership, its cooperation with the
US and Israel, and even sees all of these as treason.
For some groups in the US, the Turkish President Ahmet Necdet Sezer
acts as a balance against the so-called Islamist government in its
anti-Israeli and -Western policies. First of all, the MPs of Erbakan's
Islamist party gave full support to Sezer's election in 2000.
So to say, Sezer was elected thanks to the votes of the "Islamist
MPs". It is true that Sezer is a fanatic secular, and his radical
stand against Islamism is evident. However, it is impossible to
say that President Sezer is pro-Israeli and -Western, and that he
counterweighs Erdogan on this issue. In fact, Sezer's anti-Westernism
is incomparably stronger than that of Erdogan's. His close relationship
with the Syrian President Beshar al-Assad, his views that Turkey should
establish regional alliances and should improve relations with Iran and
Russia instead of the US and the EU indicate that he is closer to the
"ulusalcilar" (leftist-nationalists). Sezer's skepticism towards the
West is so strong that he has serious reservations regarding Turkey's
full membership process in the EU. His opposition to privatization
and market economy are also noteworthy.
In 2005, he insisted to visit Syria challenging the US' open
warnings. In brief, one cannot say that President Sezer is a
pro-Israeli and -American. In this sense, Erdogan's government is
closer to the US, the EU and Israel than Sezer is.
Though less in number, another voiceful group is "ulusalcilar"
(leftist-nationalists). This group, which sometimes cooperate with the
right-wing nationalists, is perhaps the forerunner of opposition to
the US and Israel. This group is anti-Israeli and hostility against
the US is at the center of their policies. They cannot even get 1%
of the votes in the elections, yet they are still influential to some
extent on the President and some media companies.
Finally, the Turkish Army, claimed to be a balancer against
the current government, has no obvious anti- or pro-Western
attitude. Traditionally, the Turkish Army sees the future of Turkey
in the West. However, this affiliation can be defined as locating
Turkey in the West despite the West, i.e., it is based on never
fully trusting the West. Regarding Israel, it is seen that there is
a considerable distrust against Israel within the Army and this has
been growing recently.
Many military officers think that the US and Israel plan to
strengthen PKK and found a Kurdish state in North Iraq. In addition,
the anti-imperialist thoughts are still strong within the Army, which
originate from the Turkish War of Salvation. The most important reason
for Turkey's 'passivity' to cooperate with the US during the Iraq
War has been the Army's indetermination or skepticism. Had the Army
shown its willingness in favor of the proposal to involve in Iraq War,
the proposal would definitely have been approved in the Turkish Grand
National Assembly (TBMM). The Army's unwillingness to send troops to
Lebanon was also observed by many circles. It is also quiet meaningful
to see that the Chief of General Staff, Gen. Yasar Buyukanit, rejected
at once the NATO's request to send more troops to Afghanistan, without
even consulting to the government. In the Gulf War in 1991, the Army
also strongly opposed the decision of President Turgut Ozal to act
together with the US. The then-Chief of General Staff, Necip Torumtay,
did not want to take side with the US in Iraq in a moment when almost
the entire world was acting together with the US. Eventually, the
Chief of General Staff had to resign due to the disagreement.
To sum up, we must admit that the anti-American sentiments in Turkey
have been on the rise. However, this trend is not in contrast with the
world. The general tendency in Turkey is quiet similar to that in, say,
France, Germany or Egypt. In addition, it is not possible to define
the current government as Islamist or anti-Western. Furthermore,
the AKP government even has had no serious opposition in any of the
decisions concerning Israel or the US. The government every time
voted in favor of the policies adopted by the US and Israel. Hence,
it can be said that there is a significant illusion and manipulation
in the US towards Turkey.
21 September 2006
Trns. by Noyan OZKAYA; USAK
By Sedat Laciner
Journal of Turkish Weekly
21 September 2006
Recently, there is an inflation of claims in Turkey arguing that
hatred against the US is surging and so-called anti-Semitism is on the
peak. In particular, after the Iraq War in 2003, some circles in the
US claim that Turkey is ruled by an Islamist government, and that the
government supports anti-American and anti-Israeli groups. According
to this view, Turkey is an obstacle in the implementation of the
American and Israeli policies in the Middle East. There are those
who maintain that the current government should be toppled in order
to overcome this situation.
First of all, one must admit that there has recently been a notable
reaction particularly in Turkey against the American and Israeli
policies. In the surveys conducted by our organization, ISRO (USAK),
in March 2005, we found the emergence of a reaction against the US and
Israel. The study found that 91 % of the Turkish public did not approve
the policies of US President George W. Bush. Those who support Bush's
policies was only 0,5 %. In the USAK's friend-enemy perception survey,
the US and Israel got the lowest ranking. However, these statistics
don't imply that Turkish people are exception in global trends. The
US' policies on Iraq and global terrorism are largely disapproved
by the world as well. Bush's policies are a subject of mockery even
in the US. The same survey also suggests that Turkish people don't
hate the US or Americans, and reactions are conjectural as a result
of current American policies. For example, 74 % of the respondents
still see the US as an ally of Turkey.
Those who state they hated the US were only 4 %. There is a fact that
Turks dislike Bush but appreciate Clinton very much. Same is true
for Israel. Turkey is one of the countries where anti-Semitism has no
historical roots. Turks and Turkey are against the Israeli policies,
but not Israel. In this sense, Turkey isn't more anti-Israeli than
any other country in the globe.
So, why is there an increasing concern in the US that Turkey is going
anti-American? Why are some people trying to give the impression that
Turkey has become an al-Qaeda base?
There are various reasons for that:
The Turkish government is blamed for the rejection of the proposal in
March 1, 2003 (tezkere), which would have allowed the US troops to use
Turkish territory for military passage to Iraq. Some neo-cons in the
US cannot accept this result. They think that they were betrayed by
Turkey. The US Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld is the most prominent
person in this group.
Rumsfeld has blamed the inability to gain permission to invade Iraq
through Turkey for the power of the insurgency that the US now
faces. (1) For Rumsfeld, had Turkey given the permission, the US
wouldn't have suffered this many of fatalities and Iraq would have
been a totally different country. Rumsfeld may be right on that
point in some degree. However, it can be seen that the US lacked
proper understanding of Turkey's importance before the March 1
voting. Before the war, the US thought that Turkey would definitely
approve the proposal, and in a way, confused Turkish Assembly with
the other ones in the Middle East.
Moreover, the approval became much less likely because of the
US' indifferent attitude. They treated the subject like a horse
trading. They were so arrogant in very minor topics that they
attracted great negative reaction from the Turkish public. Secondly,
it wouldn't be fair to blame the government for the rejection of the
proposal in the Assembly. It is true that the government did some
small mistakes. However, the Turkish PM Tayyip Erdogan still says that
"the proposal should have been approved". The government did its best
to get the approval from the Parliament.
As a matter of fact, all of those who voted for the approval were the
governing AKP's (Justice and Development Party) MPs, who were blamed
for being "Islamist" and anti-American. In addition, the proposal
was rejected with only a few vote-margin.
Besides, those who voted affirmative were more than those who voted
negative, but there was no simple majority due to abstentions. As
opposed to the general belief, it is the traditional leftist party,
CHP (Republican People's Party), which voted "no" collectively,
that caused the proposal to be rejected.
Even today, the party leader Deniz Baykal tells this story as one of
the party's biggest successes. Another reason of rejection was the
Army's implicit message a day before the voting that the result was
not very important for itself. The Turkish Army, expressing its views
in almost every case, did not make any statement in such a crucial
matter. In the National Security Council meeting which was held a day
before the voting, the Army's silence on the issue was perceived as
the Army was against the approval.
Some right-wing Jewish groups in the US see AKP and al-Qaeda
identical. These groups characterize governing AKP as "Islamist",
and claim that Turkey is leaning towards Islamism at the expense
of Westernism.
However, AKP leadership totally rejects "Islamism" idea. The AKP leader
Recep Tayyip Erdogan, with an inspiration from Christian Democrats,
defines his party as Muslim Democrat. One can also say that AKP,
like the early years of ANAP (Motherland Party), is an umbrella party
embodying many different groups, including liberals and leftists. But
claiming that Turkey has become an Islamist state during the AKP
rule is a quiet exaggerated assessment. During this period, Turkey
has achieved the most notable reforms in its history in the fields
of democratization and Westernization, also thanks to the EU process.
Negotiations for full membership have begun with the EU, and the
Turkish economy has achieved a dramatic growth in integration with
the Western economies during this period ironically called by some
Islamist.
The third important reason is the claim that Turkey has shifted
towards an anti-Israeli posture with the AKP government. It is true
that the PM Erdogan has harshly criticized Israel. In one of his
speeches, Erdogan went as far as asserting that Israel has had some
conducts which might be termed as "state terrorism". However, this
firm attitude against Israel is not peculiar to AKP's Erdogan. His
predecessor Bulent Ecevit, a leftist politician, also blamed Israel
for committing "genocide" against the Palestinians. Similarly, the
leftist opposition party CHP's leader Deniz Baykal also makes very
harsh statements criticizing Israel. The far leftist and rightist
parties in Turkey all also criticize Israel sharply. In other words,
we cannot say that the Turco-Israeli relations have deteriorated
during the AKP government. On the contrary, the Israeli Ambassador to
Ankara, Pinhas Avivi, has stated that the good relations between the
two countries have reached its peak in history during the current
Turkish government. Delivering a speech at ISRO (USAK) on September
6, 2006, the Ambassador said that the economic relations between two
countries have for the first time passed $10 billion and described the
relations as "strategic". In other words, the relations are getting
stronger and stronger regardless of the discourses. In this context,
one should remember that it was the Turkish leftists which opposed
most outspokenly to the Galataport investment project in Istanbul
by the Israeli businessman Ofer, and it was leftist CHP which
initiated campaigns to cancel this deal. On the other hand, it is
interesting to see that Prime Minister Erdogan, who was accused of
being "Islamist", warned the left-wing parties "not to act like the
economic anti-Semitics".
The fourth, and maybe the most important, reason is the complaints
to the US from Turkey. Those who cannot win the elections or who
doesn't trust his personal or institutional influence in Turkey think
that the road to power passes through the US. For this reason, many
politicians and bureaucrats (civilian or not) have recently visited
the US. During these visits, the most prominent argument of the
groups opposing AKP government was that there was a polarization of
Islamists vs. secularists in Turkey. Stressing that this government
was "Islamist" and "anti-Western", these opposition groups asked for
American support to topple the government. The visitors from Turkey not
only talked to officials but also paid visits to the ethnic-religious
and political lobbies to share their views. The effects of these
groups perhaps are much more influential than anything else in the
emergence of an anti-Turkish atmosphere in the US.
The Turkey experts of Turkish origin in the US: Some of the Turkey
experts of Turkish origin, who have difficulty in maintaining their
posts or maintaining their posts with some preconditions, are trying
to retain their posts by giving an impression in the US that there is
a strong polarization in Turkey. The extension of their contracts is
conditioned to defend certain views, and these contracts are usually
offered by groups which see Turkey as we defined above. In addition,
the institutions in the US only want to hear what they want to hear
and ignore criticisms of the US, and this keeps the Turkey experts
under grave pressure. Because of this, many "experts" have to defend
the views which they don't approve just to maintain their projects and
grants. Some other Turkish experts, who are less in number, present
their personal ideological positions as the views reflecting Turkey.
Who is the Enemy of the US in Turkey?
It is clear for many that there has been a strong anti-Americanism
in Turkey since the World War II. The US Congress' support to the
Armenian radicals and also its support of the Greek side in the Cyprus
issue are some of the reasons for the Turkish dislike of the US.
The most important reason undermining the image of the US in
Turkey was the arms embargo imposed on Turkey in the 1970s with
the influence of the Greek lobby in the US. In the following years,
the PKK terror and the Kurdish issue in Turkey have been the main
problems in Turco-American relations. It is noteworthy to see that
it has been the Jewish lobby which defended Turkish interests in the
Congress during this period. Another striking point is that, contrary
to the general belief in the West, the basis of anti -Americanism in
Turkey is not Islamist movements, but secular leftist ideologies. The
anti-Americanism and -Westernism in Turkey is, generally, a leftist
movement. What is more, one can even say that being a leftist, being
anti-Israeli and anti-American are almost synonymous.
For example, the demonstrations protesting the arrival of the US
6th Fleet in Turkey in the 1960s has been one of the legends of the
Turkish left. On the other hand, Turkish right-wing has always been
willing to improve the relations with the US. As a matter of fact,
it is not coincidence to see that the most noticeable improvements
in relations with the US have taken place during the conservative
rightist governments (Menderes, Demirel, Ozal etc.) in Turkey.
Even the far rightist groups such as Islamists and nationalists have
never been as critical as the leftists about the US. Both groups
criticize the US and Israeli policies as a populist method to draw
support from the masses during election campaigns.
However, when any of these parties were in power, they refrained
from any action which could harm the relations. Furthermore, the
Islamist governments, in their coalition governments, improved
relations with the US and Israel just because they were concerned
with secular reactions to their political leanings. It is striking
to note that the most significant security agreement between Israel
and Turkey was signed by the government of Necmettin Erbakan, known
to be an Islamist, in 1996.
However, anti-American and anti-Israeli stand has been an important
part of CHP, the centrist and moderate leftist party. Many MPs in
CHP take the issue back to the Turkish War of Salvation (1919-1922)
and claim that the West still wants to divide Turkey. For CHP,
the PKK is supported by the Western powers, and there is a Western
bloc against Turkey in Cyprus and Armenian problems. CHP also sees
the US' Middle East policies as conspiracies to divide Turkey. CHP
opposes not only political liberalism, but also economic one, and it
has been the political party which resists privatization the most. In
particular, the sale of Turkish state companies to Israel and the US is
unacceptable to CHP. Its strong opposition to the investments of Ofer,
an Israeli businessman, in Turkey and its campaign to prevent these
investments are indications of CHP's posture on this issue. Not only
CHP, but DSP, another left-wing party, is also very critical of the US
and Israel. The campaign "no sale of Turkish property to foreigners"
initiated by Rahsan Ecevit, one of the most influential figures of the
party, is the peak of distrust against Israel and the West. According
to Ecevit, Israeli citizens are buying large areas of land from the
southeast of Turkey and this will be a process which will eventually
lead to the division of Turkey.
The anti-Americanism is much more sharper in far leftist groups,
and this may turn into terrorist activities as in the case of DHKP-C
(The Salvation Party-Front of Revolutionary People). The far leftist
Worker Party, led by Dogu Perincek, is quiet sure that the US and
Israel wants to divide Turkey. Perincek strictly opposes privatization,
liberal economy, Turkey's NATO membership, its cooperation with the
US and Israel, and even sees all of these as treason.
For some groups in the US, the Turkish President Ahmet Necdet Sezer
acts as a balance against the so-called Islamist government in its
anti-Israeli and -Western policies. First of all, the MPs of Erbakan's
Islamist party gave full support to Sezer's election in 2000.
So to say, Sezer was elected thanks to the votes of the "Islamist
MPs". It is true that Sezer is a fanatic secular, and his radical
stand against Islamism is evident. However, it is impossible to
say that President Sezer is pro-Israeli and -Western, and that he
counterweighs Erdogan on this issue. In fact, Sezer's anti-Westernism
is incomparably stronger than that of Erdogan's. His close relationship
with the Syrian President Beshar al-Assad, his views that Turkey should
establish regional alliances and should improve relations with Iran and
Russia instead of the US and the EU indicate that he is closer to the
"ulusalcilar" (leftist-nationalists). Sezer's skepticism towards the
West is so strong that he has serious reservations regarding Turkey's
full membership process in the EU. His opposition to privatization
and market economy are also noteworthy.
In 2005, he insisted to visit Syria challenging the US' open
warnings. In brief, one cannot say that President Sezer is a
pro-Israeli and -American. In this sense, Erdogan's government is
closer to the US, the EU and Israel than Sezer is.
Though less in number, another voiceful group is "ulusalcilar"
(leftist-nationalists). This group, which sometimes cooperate with the
right-wing nationalists, is perhaps the forerunner of opposition to
the US and Israel. This group is anti-Israeli and hostility against
the US is at the center of their policies. They cannot even get 1%
of the votes in the elections, yet they are still influential to some
extent on the President and some media companies.
Finally, the Turkish Army, claimed to be a balancer against
the current government, has no obvious anti- or pro-Western
attitude. Traditionally, the Turkish Army sees the future of Turkey
in the West. However, this affiliation can be defined as locating
Turkey in the West despite the West, i.e., it is based on never
fully trusting the West. Regarding Israel, it is seen that there is
a considerable distrust against Israel within the Army and this has
been growing recently.
Many military officers think that the US and Israel plan to
strengthen PKK and found a Kurdish state in North Iraq. In addition,
the anti-imperialist thoughts are still strong within the Army, which
originate from the Turkish War of Salvation. The most important reason
for Turkey's 'passivity' to cooperate with the US during the Iraq
War has been the Army's indetermination or skepticism. Had the Army
shown its willingness in favor of the proposal to involve in Iraq War,
the proposal would definitely have been approved in the Turkish Grand
National Assembly (TBMM). The Army's unwillingness to send troops to
Lebanon was also observed by many circles. It is also quiet meaningful
to see that the Chief of General Staff, Gen. Yasar Buyukanit, rejected
at once the NATO's request to send more troops to Afghanistan, without
even consulting to the government. In the Gulf War in 1991, the Army
also strongly opposed the decision of President Turgut Ozal to act
together with the US. The then-Chief of General Staff, Necip Torumtay,
did not want to take side with the US in Iraq in a moment when almost
the entire world was acting together with the US. Eventually, the
Chief of General Staff had to resign due to the disagreement.
To sum up, we must admit that the anti-American sentiments in Turkey
have been on the rise. However, this trend is not in contrast with the
world. The general tendency in Turkey is quiet similar to that in, say,
France, Germany or Egypt. In addition, it is not possible to define
the current government as Islamist or anti-Western. Furthermore,
the AKP government even has had no serious opposition in any of the
decisions concerning Israel or the US. The government every time
voted in favor of the policies adopted by the US and Israel. Hence,
it can be said that there is a significant illusion and manipulation
in the US towards Turkey.
21 September 2006
Trns. by Noyan OZKAYA; USAK