Such claims may make public appearance sometimes in a newspaper or journal, and sometimes in some so-called academic work. In these articles, penned by blending selected facts with unfounded and false claims, the basic argument is that Turkey, led by the AK Party, is no longer a reliable partner of the West. To what extent do these claims hold true? Can we justify perceiving conjuncture-based reactions as basic trends and, from there, arrive at big conclusions?The German Marshall Fund of the United States (GMF), which conducts surveys every year on transatlantic trends, made public the results of its latest survey on Wednesday, and it seems it can help us make up our mind in this connection. The fact that while the general questions are asked in 12 out of 13 countries, a separate part was allocated for Turkey and extra questions were asked is proof that GMF executives attach special importance to tendencies in Turkey.
The survey results indicate in particular that Turks' views of the US and the US administration have developed positively since the Bush administration period. Still, the GMF survey indicates that Turkey's perspectives differ considerably from those of its Western allies. These results face the risk of being abused or misused by the above-mentioned groups.
According to the survey, perspectives about the US improved considerably after Barack Obama, but the lowest favorability of the US is in Turkey. The divergence of perceptions of the Turkish people from their Western allies is particularly salient with respect to Iran. According to the survey, there was a sharp increase in Turkish willingness to accept Tehran having nuclear weapons during the last year. In 2007, only 16 percent of Turks found such an outcome acceptable if diplomatic pressure to end the Iranian nuclear program failed. However, 29 percent of Turks in 2009 said this result was acceptable, a 13-point increase. In stark contrast with Turkish perceptions, only 5 percent of Americans and EU members would accept an Iranian nuclear arsenal.
Despite these concrete figures, I still believe that it would not be possible to make sound assessments about Turkey's orientation based only on these results. In my opinion, the Turkish people, who have long experienced wars and instability in their immediate region, no longer want to see conflict or bloodshed in this region, and this is a major factor in these results. Moreover, Iran, with which Turkey has recently developed good relations, has long been rebuked for its nuclear efforts while the international community has not raised a single objection to Israel's having nuclear weapons in the same region, and I think this inconsistency of the international community has played a role in the Turkish people's eagerness to approve Iran's nuclear arsenal.
In the final analysis, Turks are not unreasonable people, and rational people are not expected to have no concern about the emergence of a nuclear power nearby. This is particularly so when it is estimated that the emergence of such a power will encourage other countries in the region to race to obtain nuclear weapons; this will further exacerbate instability in the region. Therefore, the figures that appear as Turkish support for Iran's nuclear efforts at the expense of a disagreement with its Western allies should be read and analyzed from another perspective. Thus, we can safely assert that this attitude of the Turkish people can be regarded as a reaction to the double standards the international community employs in response to Israel's nuclear presence.
The facts that refute the claim that Turkey is weaning away from the West and toward the East are abundant in the results of the GMF survey. In Turkey, the favorability of the US was at the lowest level at the time of the Bush administration, which made numerous blunders, but now, it has improved considerably. The fact that in 2009, 77 percent of the respondents in the EU and Turkey supported President Obama's handling of international affairs, compared with 19 percent of respondents who approved of the Bush foreign policy in 2008, implies that Western countries should take time to introspect in order to find out what went wrong. Despite Obama's April 2009 visit to Turkey, the fact that the trust felt by Turks in the US and their support for the US's global leadership and NATO are at the lowest levels of all countries in the study just means that the US has much more ground to gain in the path it has set out on.
The fact that Turkey's desire to enter the European Union despite increased opposition to this from EU nations -- rising by 6 percentage points since last year to 48 percent -- stands before us as a clear indication that Turks' tendencies cannot be explained by conjectural rises and drops.
In conclusion, I can assure you that Turkey has not changed and there is no reason to worry.
