‘Strategic vision’

Former CIA Chief Robert Gates wrote in his memoirs that the American intelligence services supported the opposition fighters in Afghanistan six months before the Soviet invasion. In an interview in 1998, Brzezinski said they did not encourage the Russians to invade, adding that it was the perfect idea to support the Islamic fighters in Afghanistan. Did he ever regret it? Brzezinski responded to this question as follows: “Regret? For what? This secret operation was a perfect idea. The plan forced the Russians to take action in Afghanistan. The day the Soviets crossed the border, I wrote to President Carter: ‘Now we have the chance to make sure that the USSR experiences their own Vietnam War. Moscow had to fight a war in this country for 10 years; and this has contributed to the collapse of the Soviet Union.”

But did he ever regret that they supported the Islamists who happened to become terrorists later on. The response that Brzezinski gave to this question is extremely important for a better understanding of the international geopolitics and current events: “Which one is more important for the history of the world? The Taliban or the collapse of the Soviet Empire? Some angry Muslims or the emancipation of Central Europe and the end of the Cold War?”

Brzezinski is 85 years old now and wants to become one of the architects of the new century. In the last century, the US, in reliance on his ideas, ended the existence of the Soviet Empire and the Cold War. But it seems that things will not be easy in the new century. I realized that the media opted to discuss this book where he offered his ideas on the new century with academics rather than politicians. There was no politician who drafted the basic policies of Turkey in any discussion.

I am afraid that at a time where the roles of global actors are being redefined in the Middle East and other parts of the world, the strategic vision issue will remain something that only the academics will discuss.

Don’t get me wrong; it is an extraordinary development that academia, the universities and competent scholars are assuming a greater role in the intellectual life of Turkey and are making further contributions. Of course private universities have played a leading role in this. Scholars are no longer extremely dependent upon state universities. The public universities are no longer the only institutions that generate ideas and plans. In such delicate issues as the Kurdish issue, minority issues and issues over religious beliefs, which have been avoided in university discussion up until recently, there are now many academic works as well as discussion of ideas and opinions. If you compare the current Turkey to Turkey 10 years ago, you would see huge differences in terms of academic autonomy and the influence of change.

There are now many scholars who discuss the constitution, the Kurdish issue, the Alevi question, militarism and its associated violence as well as the fundamental issues of foreign policy. They now offer their ideas and reservations about addressing these problems.

There are also many academics who write columns in the media and actively participate in TV programs to express their views and ideas; this is just wonderful.

The era of academic timidity, reluctance to address thorny and controversial issues, reliance on official ideology and prosecution of those who express alternative views is over. But there is still something missing. Political actors are not sufficiently active in this new environment; and they do not adequately participate in the discussions.

I wonder how many politicians have read Brzezinski’s new book.