Yet, it is hardly unrealistic. A complacent West could very well be asking, “Who lost Turkey?” at the end of 2007.In case you think this is all too depressing, just look at the current situation in Turkey. For the first time in its modern history, the Turkish Republic is seriously at odds with both the United States and the European Union. In the past, Ankara could always rely on its partnership with Washington in case things went wrong with Europe. Today, such an alternative no longer exists. The war in Iraq has radically altered Turkey’s relations with Washington. Even former Turkish ambassadors who served in Washington believe that America wants to create a Kurdish state in Iraq. Making matters worse is the hopelessness on the European front. It has become impossible to find someone optimistic about Turkey’s chances of joining the EU. As a result, Turks are increasingly estranged from both Washington and Brussels. This is a first in our history.
What went wrong? Some circles in Washington have a convenient scapegoat. They want to blame everything on Turkey’s alleged Islamic turn. Nothing could be further from the truth; Turkey’s frustration with Europe and America has nothing to do with Islamization. Let’s be honest; the so-called Islamists have done much more than previous “secular” Turkish governments in terms of improving the country’s chances of joining the EU. It is sufficient to look at all the major reforms over the last four years and the democratic courage the Justice and Development Party (AKP) displayed in its Cyprus policy. Today, the problem Turkey faces is not Islamization. Instead, the predicament is growing “nationalist” frustration with the United States and Europe. A diminishing majority of Turks still want to see their country anchored in the West. But their patience is wearing thin because of what they perceive as European double standards and American neglect of Turkish national and security interests.
This creates a tremendous nationalist backlash, at the heart of which is the Kurdish question. One has to carefully listen to the messages given by Chief of General Staff Gen. Yaşar Büyükanıt last week during his visit to Washington. “Never since the inception of the republic in 1923 have we faced such serious threats and risks,” declared Büyükanıt to an overjoyed crowd during his speech at a Turkish Embassy reception. Büyükanıt emphasized that Turkey will continue working with the international community in dealing with its challenges. Yet, a certain level of resentment against both the EU and Washington was evident in his tone. And this highly reflects the mood the whole country is in.
In the political vacuum created by inept politicians, both in power and in opposition, the General Staff is once again filling a void and increasingly becoming a barometer of Turkey’s stance. If current trends continue, Turkey will have to fundamentally reconsider its relations with Washington and Europe because of the Kurdish question. The alternative? Estranged from Washington and Brussels, Ankara will have to put more eggs in the Eurasian basket. More of Russian President Vladimir Putin’s anti-NATO speeches will be posted in official Turkish websites and more Turkish officials will flirt with the Shanghai Cooperation Agreement. Turkey’s model of governance could very well become like that of France under Charles de Gaulle, with Ankara leaving the military wing of NATO in order to follow a more “independent” Kemalist foreign policy. As I said, the AK Party is not to blame for Turkey’s Islamization. Yet, it is fully to blame for jumping on this nationalist bandwagon. This nationalist wave is turning into a major tsunami tide and the AK Party may soon become its first victim. Before the West asks, “Who lost Turkey?” it is about time for AK party to urgently ask: “Who is losing the West?”
