The Turkish model: cliché or reality?

The Open Society Foundation has just published a report prepared by Yousef Al Sharif of Al Jazeera/Turkey and Samir Salha of Kocaeli University examining how commentators in the Arab world and the Muslims of the Indo-Pakistan Subcontinent view Turkey's attempts to integrate with Europe. It shows that perceptions have evolved greatly in recent years, and support for Turkey increased tremendously.

Ankara's EU bid was initially dismissed as a move that would confirm Turkey's break from the Muslim world and a full Westernization of its identity. The arrival in power of the Justice and Development Party (AK Party) and the reform drive in its early years in government showed that Turkey could become more democratic while maintaining its own identity as a secular but mainly Muslim country.

The rejection, by the Turkish Parliament, of US demands in the lead-up to the Iraq war, Turkeys' mediation efforts between Syria and Israel and Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu's “zero problem” approach to the neighborhood as well as Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan's famous “one minute” outburst in Davos earlier this year have all contributed to changing Turkey's image in the Muslim world.

Neocons, of course, would argue that Turkey is drifting away from the West with these moves, but this is not how the Muslim world perceives recent developments. Quite the opposite: Turkey is increasingly seen as a valid intermediary and the notion of a bridge between East and West seems to have moved from tired cliché to something closer to reality.

Although the official line in some of the less liberal countries in the region used to be the same as the one adopted by Turkey's anti-EU nationalists -- namely that even if Turkey complied with EU criteria, it would always be rejected by the European “Christian Club” -- improvements in Turkey's human rights, legal reforms and economic growth, seen as results of the accession process, appear to have inspired hope in the region. The report points out for instance that 200 Arab journalists followed the December 2004 EU summit when the start of the accession process was officially approved.

At a time when the enmity toward the West was on the rise and the Muslim world felt particularly frustrated and helpless, Turkey's success was seen as a “defining moment for relations between Europe and the Islamic world,” the OSF document states.

Turkey is increasingly seen as providing proof that Islam and democracy are not mutually exclusive and that balancing diplomatic ties with the West and with the East is possible. A growing number of Arab tourists and 17 Turkish TV series are further contributing to making Turkey more popular in the Muslim world. By following Turkey's EU adventure, Arab readers have also gained a better understanding of the EU, its goals and its institutions.

The end of the honeymoon period with the EU in 2005 has therefore largely been blamed on European shortsightedness, without much mention of Turkey's flagging appetite for reform, the report suggests. The focus in the Arab media is on European untrustworthiness, and the strong support Arab writers offer to Turkey contrasts with the general attitude a decade earlier, when Ankara was itself viewed with great suspicion. In Pakistan and in Muslim India, Turkey's EU bid appears to be viewed more squarely through the prism of religion, although Turkey is seen as having an identity quite distinct from other Muslim states.

This report will hopefully be read carefully in European capitals. It suggests that Turkey's progress toward the EU and the rapid legal, economic and social changes that accompany it, are a source of inspiration in the region. By being more supportive of Turkey's democratization efforts, European leaders could send positive signals to the Muslim world and make a strategic investment whose benefits would extend well beyond the borders of this country.