Of State and Religion

Most europeans think of people placing observance of religion above observance of law as a bad fact.

However when looking at the details what they mean is that they are disturbed at immigrants of various backgrounds expressing their beliefs which can potentially contradict Western Laws. Were a law of their own country to contradict with their religious faith, few european would abide by this law. However Western laws have been forged by judeo-christians with some history around the Roman Catholic Church, the Lutheran Church, the Calvinist Church and the Jewish religion. Islam being a much more recent religion and recent immigration in Europe did not have the chance to participate in the process of law making across ages. For this reason, the common imaginary is clearly opposing muslims which have their law: Sharia to western (historical) residents which have their own law. There is no denial that western law is the basis of international organizations whether they relate to economy, to trade, to peace, to human rights or to relief. In the end, the universal reach of these laws have been more and more challenged by radical muslims and most notably during the famous case of the danish caricatures.

But limiting the debate to this superficial facts does not allow a clear understanding. Sharia is not a uniformly stated and applied law, we can even consider that there are as many Sharia laws as there are power to exercise it. So law like in Europe has variations that may fit or not a particular group and that is not different in this aspect. Assertiveness of the most radical versions of texts by the authority of some countries or some communities tends to hide how strong the relations between the religious law and the western law is. There is little doubt that the most developed legal systems of early historical times (Greek, Achaemenid, Roman, ..) influenced the establishment of islamic law. Some of these ideas will later travel back to Europe as part of the Enlightenment and also as part of colonial rule of large European Empires. The legal system is thus not far apart from "western" practice except in one aspect which is the divide between State apparatus and Church/Religion. In most countries with a muslim majority, the structure of government is rigid or archaic and not opened to a re-foundation of the authorities.

The problem is not, as people think spread to all muslims, but the very problem (the one of strategic concern to Western Powers) is that of State supervision of religion. On one side, Europe has grown across time an institutional relationship with various churches or representatives of their religion, outlawed some sects and defined the area in which religious intervention is accepted. On the other side, muslim countries do not have such uses and can be erratic in their approach of other religions (or of variations of the main branch of Islam of the country). Most muslim countries established during the 20th century through a democratic process have been able to establish some kind of separation and do not pretend to rule according to God's law. The "ruler" is not the voice of God but merely observant of the practices of people of the country (and so of their beliefs).

Observance of religion should thus be definitely separated of observance of the religious law from a migrant's home country. And this is the tendency that can be observed in all muslim populations in Europe and in non-Arabic countries. While the problems of some countries are not migrating with their population, the people still become more and more aware of such problems. The only way to solve such issues is to drive by example. This is where the relation between Turkey (the most secularist of the region) and Iran (the most theocratic of the region) has the potential to shift minds should their political interests become aligned.

Colonial army ?

The Turkish army has been paradoxically the most respected institution in Turkey while it has been at the heart of most of its problems.

At the establishment of Turkey (1923), the army was staffed with a foreign-oriented elite speaking fluently English or French. These officers were seeking to belong to European circles and were accompanying the reforms of Ataturk (sometimes called 'westernization') with enthusiasm. They often became at different level part of the administration. This is how their role of protector of state (by opposition to protector of the people) started to be entrenched in the minds and souls. This has been further relayed by foreign powers (at the beginning England and France and after 1945 the United States). With the rise of Russia, the army grew in an alignment with NATO that soon became a simple subordinate of Western Powers. Secret services were infiltrated and global aim was to keep the country as a reliable asset at any cost. Most countries were cooperating and discussing with Turkey mostly through army channels.
The objectives of the army and the objectives of the Turkish people have thus been very often divergent. This explains why military coups and instability of the youth have prevailed mostly when international tensions were high.
Since the fall of USSR and the end of Cold War, the opportunity to redesign the role of the army have constantly raised and with reforms driven by AKP, the core of the issue is about to appear. No country can afford an army that is more obedient to NATO influence than to members of its own executive. Army has also been one of the most conservative force and as any army is not preoccupied firstly by human-rights or rule-of-law issues which had became a signature of Turkey for decades. Only integration of Turkey in Europe has helped limiting this drive thanks to interests of European Powers to limit the influence of America in Turkey.
Now Turkey has a vivid economy (dynamic, with a lot of competition) and can only restore the place it should have kept by reinforcing the very foundations of the Republic : keeping Anatolia's fate under the direction of all the Turks.

Identity of Turkey

The troubles with Turkey in facing the world is lying in its own identity. In the end no one really understands what is Turkey.

While Turkish history is in part starting in the steppes close to the Ural Mountains for a part, another story starts with the first settlements in Anatolia.

On one side, if Modern Turks are descendant of Nomadic Turkish Tribes that converted to Islam en route to Europe and finally conquered and freed Asia Minor from the influence of its western religion, we can expect this historic clash of forces to continue and Turkey to be an independent country with its alliances varying with its own objectives (usually to finance their "westward conquests" [economic markets nowadays]). There should also exist a prevalence of the religious aspect in the society and the rejection of minority rights.

On the other side, if Modern Turks are descendant of all the populations that inhabited Anatolia (or Roman Asia Minor), they form a mosaic of people that conflicted between themselves before emerging as large empires. The people that founded such grounds are: Hattis, Hittites, Hurrians, Assyrians, Lydians, Lyceans,Greeks, Romans. They finally formed the Byzantine Empire and later on the Ottoman Empire totalling an historically unrivalled one and a half millenium of sovereign rule over large territories. The fall of the Ottoman Empire has triggered the creation of Modern Turkey. From these times should remain the cultural crossroads of such empires and the embracing of progress. In the end this history should help creating an open society of knowledge where should exist a prevalence of the individual that contributes to the richness of the country.

Too much highlight has been made in recent times of Turkey on the first historic approach leading to a Top-down control of the society. If Turkey wants to join the European Union and participate in the modern world, the focus must definitely go towards the latest historic defintion of Turkey.
Turkish people, as the last to settle in Anatolia, are the last ingredient that compose this land. To move back in its history tracks, people of Turkey should realize the full extent of their history to build a better future.

Turkish historical roots

So now the entangled Turkey I have described in my last post is set to fight back the economical crisis. The economic leverage Turkey is looking at is lying as much in politics as in macroeconomics.

Turkey is a country born lonely in the cold of the battlefields. Its ennemies ranged from the western colonial powers to its more immediate neighborhood enraged with the frustration of some missed opportunities (territorial or political gains) and occupied with the necessities of nation-building ("we are not like them"). Many organizations, secret services, political or religious circles thus across time achieved to undermine the return of Turkey to its past strength (cf. GDP per capita numbers in the nearby graph). The idea of an obligated friendship has also long triggered the relations with NATO.

This amounted to various strategy and tactics which nurtured instability in the country (with the best example being kurdish and armenian terrorism) but also across the region. This has been done mostly by encouraging arms race with Greece, keeping hot spots in Cyprus or in Nagorno-Karabakh, setting up Israel as the policing authority of the Near-East.

These achieved holding back the political and economical development of Turkey. Now what has been brought back in order is that where the development of economy was limited by many of these factors, the ranking has changed for first initiating the development of politics and regional power before economy. Papers and news stories may be concerned Turkey is no more a western ally but this lies much in the comfort of the past relation. Turkey is reasserting stronger than ever that its political agenda will no more be set by external motives.

The risk lies in getting off-limit and over-reaching one's capacity. After the local elections, the time of internal diversions on the values of the society will probably pass to address the serious matters lying in the backgound. First comes the restarting of the relations with the EU then the relations with Armenia.

Timing on EU subjects can profit from the friendly presidencies of Sweden and Spain starting from this summer to start closing some chapters and opening new ones. Reform is more necessary than ever to ensure the capitals needed to soften the economic crisis. Armenia is another urgent subject since it is the last track for solving the genocide claims, the US are about to recognize. Having the US setting up the historian committee in charge of studying the facts and bringing its conclusions to the UN would be the best chance for all parties to agree.

And in the end, since this is the year of the conflict/aborted conflict with Iran, the foreign shuttle services will run vividly with however little control over the results. The important here being the ability to jump in a possible vacuum left behind a retracting iranian diplomacy (for adressing the internal stability of Iran).

Turkey in the forefront for taming Russia

Can Turkey once again act as the brake to the expansion of russian sphere of influence? There is no easy answer to this but we can see that the hotspots of active diplomacy more and more threatens turkish renewed interests in its own historical sphere of influence. Promises of better relations with Russia surface in many countries all around Turkey and it is necessary to act before Russia gets a too strong hand. It is very meaningfull that all the areas under trouble and mostly many frozen conflicts are linked or even maintained by Russia. Is Russia troublesome only to people wanting to avoid a multipolar world? No. Russia pretends to the old place that USSR once occupied and is ready to use all means for this.

It is significant that Turkey started to act to remove some energy keys from the hands of Russia by realizing the BTC, contracts with Iran and other projects aimed to reach the status of "energy hub". This is however temporary relief and does not mean the battles are over. We should see Turkey prove it can bring more than dangers to the regions of Caucasus and Central Asia. For this, a strong cultural activity would be the best way to relay the increase in economic interests known by the parties. Such an activity could also gets the interest of EU and it is possible to imagine cooperation between EU and Turkey to strenghten this traditional area of influence of Turkey. This is the time when it is possible to cool down the fireplaces and bring Russia closer to cooperation with the "West". Putin may be weaker that it has been and while his targets remain high, his realizations lack any more idea than reenforcing the status quo (or bringing back a form of USSR).

Turkey moves in too many directions

As Turkey integrates in its geopolitical surroundings with a strong hand, it seems to forget its strategy.
Positive developments on the Kurdish issue, on cooperation with Israel, Syria, Iran or Georgia should not make Turkey bet on making a pause in its accession process. It is exactly the right time to take bold measure to catch up with the pace of reforms that once amazed the EU commission. There is still some areas of improvement to build an opened, democratic and liberal Turkey. The judiciary, the military, the transportation and the job market are all keys to the development of Turkey to a closer integration with EU. The road is setup but the driver shouldn't hesitate in taking it. As we know, Turkey aims to become a bridge between civilizations, religions, economies and a facilitator in many subjects. To do this, a regional focus would kill the chicken in the egg. No! Turkey needs to reach a global scale and when times are harsh with EU, it should both

• prove it is a reliable and trusted partner for the EU, surpassing expectations and estimates
• reach to the group of countries that Turkey is starting to be part of (the famous BRIC Brazil/Russia/India/China)

In fact, Turkey shares many things, in its structure, culture, ambitions and could share much with countries like India. Turkey should achieve better results in the sectors of finance and information technology and strengthen its already strong industrial and construction sector by favoring SMEs, startups and R&D thus allowing more niche players (high added-value). The fact that countries with big potentials have little interest in products coming from Turkey can be a concern as the current trade deficits show.

With all these card in their hand there is no reason Turkey couldn't transcend its consolidated regional power. It is however still necessary to make strong choices to deliver on this potential.

Turkey's wording issues

Turkey has a lot of problems with the words used for labeling political matters linked with the fall of the Ottoman empire.

First is the use of "Kurdistan" by the terrorists of the PKK organization or also by the Kurdistan Regional Government. This upsets turkish politicians and nationalists since there is no way they may accept that a Turkish Kurdistan exists (like an Iraqi Kurdistan exists). This combat on words is very archaic since the variables of this old debate had considerably changed and that the first city of the kurds (in number) is Istanbul. There is little use of combating the words while installing the facts. There are some incentives that could be developed with the leaders of Northern Iraq to create cultural exchanges with Turkey. In fact there is a lot of ignorance in the relation between turks and iraqi kurds, including between turkish kurds and iraqi kurds (who speak and write different dialects). This does not mean independence should be recognized but positive outlook of Iraqis on Turkey would favor taking into account some sensitivities beyond the "Kurdistan" word. The first aim Turkey should have is to help lowering the corruption in Northern Iraq.

Same can be said about the famous "genocide" word. A fight for words that has helped little to understand the positions of the participant to the heated debate. There is no highlight that labeling the facts, crimes of intent should require some grounds. That the armenian of Istanbul and Jerusalem should logically have been also targeted. That population destabilizing the eastern front line were risking the existence of a threatened empire. That some armenian were engaged in political activities and propaganda (publishing mostly in Europe). That armenian lobbies often slips to territorial claims, to competition in the horror, to hatred for turks (no crime - whichever - should be answered by a crime). Yes, little remains of all these facts except a denial of genocide.

Let's make Turkey move to the content of the debates. Let's make it no longer a problem to use "sensitive" words. Let's make ideas more free and sharing information easier..

Armenia : Dark Age or New Age ?

After the murder of Agos editor in chief Hrant Dink, the place has opened for renewed exchanges between Turkey and Armenia. His sound approach to the problems in Turkey wether they are related to his armenian descent or not should be highlighted. He was in no doubt that his beloved country was engaged on a much better way for the respect of his thoughts and writings than Armenia would be. This is a trigger on how vigilant we should be to not let any situation deteriorate and that Armenia should be brought closer to Turkey and the EU, not that Turkey should copy the backward mentalities that corrode the political life in Armenia. So let's hope for a Turkey ready to invest on its relation with Armenia and an Armenia investing on democracy (in coming elections - 12th of May). The exchanges between armenian and turks have always been fruitful and have a long background of shared culture and values. The armenian diaspora should not disturb this process and lower their hateful rhetoric to help each country in the steps that are unavoidable. The EU is not welcomed in this process since they failed so many times in solving anything in this area from Georgia to Karabakh and they tend to impose views that are all but helping progress on this issue.

Diplomatic moves: Learning slalom

On Cyprus, Turkey has learned to move more smoothly across the troubled EU waters. Previously, on the path to EU, when issues were faced by Turkey, the classical situation was an escalation of incomprehension, the definition of red lines and the accusation of unfair or unbalanced treatments. Turkey is moving more easily and is getting experienced with the tough process awaiting it. Result is that even if the move created uneasiness at home, the turkish hand has been stronger and Europe mainly sticked to European Commission recommendations.

Most important is that Republic Of Cyprus has been incited to move for a settlement for the long lasting dispute on the island. The idea of reciprocity of efforts on both parts of the island is making its way and it will be harder in the coming years to maintain status quo. Greece has given up trying anything with Cyprus, EU is pushing both sides to get closer economically but has no power and legitimity to solve political problems and ultimately UN is fed up with trying to separate spoilt local powers of this tiny island from spitting to eachother face. So this can be a turning point in the Cyprus Problem and Greek Cyprus will whether defend the current state of affairs in the wait of the "European Solution" whether it will review its strategy and look for an Annan plan with improved implementation phases and calendars.

So in a similar way Turkey can take a tremendous step on the armenian genocide claims
by voting a law stating the following :

"The Ottoman Empire on the verge of its implosion under the external pressure of the greatest military powers of the XXth century, ordered in 1915 a migration of the local armenian communities in order to keep the control of its supply lines, and avoid clashes among ethnic lines. The relocation has been run into a failure and the empire could not protect these citizens that contributed so much to many ottoman achievements. Thus, Turkey recognizes that in the Ottoman Empire a genocide by negligence has taken place."

This implies that the recognition of their suffering asked by many armenians is clearly worded as they desired. However, any legal action is not helped with this formulation since :

1. No author is labeled

2. A genocide according to UN resolutions cannot be the consequence of a negligence

This position is a compromise solution that allows to move out of the debate on words and denial. This is a true challenge for Turkey but bold steps on such issue would better integrate Turkey in the EU-Caucasus axis and maybe even help resolve the Nagorno-Karabakh dispute.

Where is the European Commisssion heading ?

One month ago, the European Commission the core of the European machinery, criticized Turkey for its slowing pace of reforms and for a change in its will to move forward. The recommendations issued at that time were in order to avoid the 'train crash' between the EU and Turkey, meaning a stop of the harmonization process and of the integration of Turkey in the EU.

Under political pressure, the European Commission is now advising that the negociations with Turkey should "slow down" ! Probably, when things are not moving fast enough, everybody is required to use its energy to impose speed limits. That trick is quite unwise but however the negociations will continue with less chapters having the green light to be opened and closed. Furthermore like every six months only one subject of focus will be in the mouths of the paralyzed EU leaders: Turkey (and Cyprus). Their only way to evolve the EU seems to try to force Turkey to make concessions on Cyprus... I think there is clearly no relation between the future of EU and Cyprus. If EU ever cared about Cyprus as something else than a puppet at the hands of Greece, Cyprus would have not entered EU by creating 300 000 outlaws. This Turkish Community of the island are European Citizens labelled as Out Of Control. When you can create such situations and ask others to solve it, there is a limit to reason.

So that is what it comes to, a few political leader have decided to play the Cyprus card against Turkey but this masquerade can easily slips out of hands since Cyprus has a right of veto on EU decisions. Cyprus is for example imposing with its deemed 'veto strategy' that the United Nations stay at distance with the island problems. This is clearly leading to two possible exits: the partition of the island in a Greek and a Turk Republic of Cyprus or the merge of the Turkish Community in the 'Republic Of Cyprus'. When the EU leaders will have played enough with Turkey for electoral gains, they will come back to the world realities and will want to have again closer relations with Turkey may it be for the energy supply lines, for the democratization of Georgia, for coutering the Iran rise in the region, for middle east peace intiitatives, etc. Wether the situation in Cyprus had evolved or not, there will still be a member (a Greek Republic Of Cyprus or any kind of Republic Of Cyprus with a Greek Cypriot majority) that has a hate relation with Turkey. Any decision by the EU on Turkey would be vetoed.

How can the EU fix its mess? There is only one option, wich is to pressure the Greek Cypriots to accept a new version of the Annan plan engaging in the creation of the United Cyprus. What is the best pressure to apply on the Republic Of Cyprus ? There is a main option that is the improvement of socio-economic conditions in the Northern part Of Cyprus (that is officially part of the EU territory). Seeing that their turkish neighbours could live by themselves without their help and without restrictions, will change the look of Greek Cypriots on the Turkish Community. Let's hope the EU will understand where its interest as well as the interest of all the citizens of Cyprus is.