Our goal was to establish closer relations with the Lebanese media and exchange ideas, interviewing politicians if possible. The elimination of visa requirements as a result of warm relations between the two countries gave us the courage to travel by ground transportation. And on this trip we would be able to see things we would not had we flown. Had we not travelled by land, we would never have been able to visit the grave of one of the greatest military commanders in Islamic history, Khalid ibn al-Walid, and we would not have been able to visit the mosque Ottoman Sultan Abdülhamit II built in his honor.
Apart from two minor glitches, the trip was perfect. The first problem took place when entering Syria. The lifting of the visa requirement had helped the entry of ordinary citizens immensely; however, there was an oversight when it came to journalists. It turns out that the Ministry of Information had to be notified in this case and it took one-and-a-half hours for the well-intentioned Syrian officials to communicate with Damascus and receive a green light. The second problem occurred at the Sahl ‘Akkar (Plain of ‘Akkar) border gate when entering Lebanon. We didn’t require a visa and the officials were extremely understanding, but there was a great deal of disorganization at the gate which led to a pileup and a stampede. While speaking to journalists in Lebanon, we asked that they bring this matter to their country’s agenda. Other than these two problems, the quality of the ground travel was fantastic. We were not stopped by the police even once.
Thanks to this trip we learned that Damascus and Beirut are really not as far away as we had made ourselves believe. We may have lost 10 hours, but had the border posts worked more efficiently and had we experienced no problems, it would have taken a maximum of three to four hours. This is akin to traveling from İstanbul to Abant.
The most surprising scene we witnessed upon entering Beirut was the Turkish flags hanging on the windows of homes and business. Perhaps for the first time in 100 years Turkey was being viewed in a positive and sympathetic light. Upon turning on the TV in our hotel rooms, we zapped through the channels to find popular Turkish shows such as “Kurtlar Vadisi” (Valley of the Wolves) and “Gümüş” (Noor). Later on, while drinking tea at the Bayrock Cafe, we learned that a waiter named Ali would name his soon to be born son Erdoğan.
These sentiments that people on the street, ordinary people, had towards Turkey -- and Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan in particular -- were quite amazing. But how do intellectuals and journalists view Turkey’s increasing influence in the region? Their views in Lebanon, the springboard for Arab nationalism in the face of the Ottomans and one of the Middle East’s most effective locations in the area of media, arts and culture, is important to us.
For one, they are extremely interested in Turkey. Half-hour appointments can turn into two-hour sessions due to the deluge of questions. They don’t stop at being informed on the Justice and Development Party (AK Party) and Ergenekon; they are even aware of the events that unfolded at the latest Felicity Party (SP) congress.
Lebanese of all faiths and sects are happy that Turkey is playing the role of mediator in national Lebanese politics. Iran’s increasing influence and the US’s decreasing popularity as well as the fact that Egypt is, to quote them, “in a coma,” has made Turkey’s role a necessary one.
Of course, they have concerns and criticisms that are not reflected in their writings. One of their basic concerns is regarding the longevity of Turkey’s new political direction. They question what will happen if somehow the AK Party leadership changes. They wonder how long Turkey’s internal stability will allow for it to maintain its current political direction. Because they don’t see satisfying explanations, other than the “zero problems with neighbors” policy, they have concerns over whether Turkey is conducting politics rooted in Islam or exerting efforts towards reviving the Ottoman Empire.
While Turkey can stand as an example for the Islamic world in many domains -- from democracy to economic development and the empowerment of civil society -- they don’t find it right that the AK Party leadership is in the limelight for being at the forefront of the Palestine issue. Even though they blame Israel for the Mavi Marmara scandal, they think Turkey’s relationship with both the West and Israel is to the advantage of the Arab world. They ask whether it is possible to have a more balanced stance towards Iran in nuclear politics. They draw our attention to the trouble this would create, noting that the Middle East is in need of Turkey’s balancing, rational and cool-headed politics, not those based on emotion.
These people, who look to Turkey with a great deal of hope and warmth and state their concerns, are representative of the “Arab mind” that intellectual Muhammad Abd al-Jabiri refers to. I tried to give a clear picture and keep my summary brief. I am of the opinion that we will be more successful if we lend an ear to both compliments and criticisms. We can ignore the applause, but criticism must be noted. And how the leaders evaluate this is, of course, left to their own discretion.
