|
 NOV
5: A party with Islamic roots won a landslide victory in
Turkish elections, an unusual event in Turkey. As a result, Turkey will see the ascension of
an untested political party with an Islamist pedigree at a
moment in history when US military intervention in neighboring
Iraq looms as large as
Turkey's
imposing 6th century Byzantine fortress walls.
The Justice party, which has its roots in Turkey's Islamic
movement, sought to calm the public and markets by immediately
pledging support for secularism, Turkey's EU bid and an
International Monetary Fund austerity program. This was
an attempt to ease fears that Turkey, the crucial U.S. ally and
NATO's only Muslim member would undergo a radical shift toward Islam.
Justice party's success came as the United States sought
to showcase Turkey as an example of a secular, democratic
country that is overwhelmingly Muslim but has cast its future
with the West. Thus
the election results are a setback.
Recep Tayyip Erdogan
who
leads the Justice party, was banned by the elections
board from standing as a candidate because of a jail sentence he
served in 1999 for publicly reading a poem that a court deemed
anti-secular. Actually, Justice Party's roots in two banned
Islamic political parties has had Turkey's secular establishment
concerned enough to bar Erdogan,
its founder and chairman, from standing as a candidate for parliament himself.
But he
told the Western media "We have no intention to challenge the world,''
"Under our government, Turkey will be in
harmony with the world.''
This nation of 68 million straddles East and West, Islam
and secularism. Some Turks, specially the military, fear the Justice party may eat away
at the country's strict secular laws, imposed with vehemence by Kemal Ataturk, founder of modern-day Turkey.
The last time a leader from the Islamic movement led a
government was in 1996, when Necmettin Erbakan became the first
pro-Islamic premier. He was forced out in 1997 under strong
pressure from the military. At the time, Erdogan was a member of
Erbakan's party and mayor of Istanbul.
In 1997, Erdogan gave a political speech in which he
quoted from a poem of one of the country’s nationalist
patriarchs, Ziya Gkalp. The poem also happens to be among
the education ministry’s recommended reading for middle
school students. However, due to the poem’s religious
undertones, Erdogan was removed from office, sentenced to
10 months in prison, and served four.
|
The success of Justice party in Turkish election is as alarming
to the West, as is MMA's success in Pakistan's October 10 elections.
Turkey's election – coming on the heels of gains by Islamic
parties in Pakistan in October and in Morocco in September – is
seen by some analysts as a sign that more Muslims worldwide are
turning to religion-based political movements.
Given Turkey's unique position in the geo-strategic
constellation of the West, it is understandable if the West feels uncomfortable with
its
recent election results. It could mean a turning point in Turkey's political
history with undercurrents of Islamic renaissance in a land which has
traditionally served as a levelling ground for Islamic values.
Turkey is diplomatically important, representing the
geographic and cultural gateway between the West and the Islamic
world. Its military regards itself as the guardian of Turkey's
80-year tradition of secularism and has led three coups. The
military has made no comments since the elections.
But what about Pakistan? Pakistan's position is not as unique as
Turkey's is. In the short term strategic objectives of the West,
more specifically the present anti-terrorism war, Pakistan may
be enjoying a relatively comfortable position on the West's strategic chess
board. Beyond that, its importance may be as far off as the
proposed 1700 km Centgas pipeline thru Turkmenistan and
Pakistan!
Why is it that Turkey and Pakistan both are seeing a semblance
of
Islamic renaissance, so much so that the masses of both the
countries seem to be converting their votes into something more sublimal
than Adam Smith's dollars and cents.
There's a perception of a post-Sept. 11 polarization between Islam and the West. Voters also are being
drawn to a better vision than the one they've heard from secular
politicians. Some observers say that the war
in Afghanistan and US plans for military intervention in Iraq,
have had an impact on how many Muslims – Turks included – view
their place in the world.
The military junta of both Turkey and Pakistan, have the backing
of the West, who supply and therefore control their unlimited appetite for
military hardware, ambitions and adventurisms.
The net result is that both Turkish and Pakistani military
establishments continue to present themselves as the
guardian of their country's perceived secularistic idelogies
and in the process come out strongly as the
bastions of political power.
Inspite of this, the masses of both these countries seem to be
moving forward towards an "Islamic" phenomenon, and keep translating their grievances into a religious
agenda no matter how tangential they may be to the real issues.
In short, the "powers to be" in both these countries appear to
be getting out of sync with the ground realities.
Isn't it thus fair to say that the military establishment in both
Turkey and Pakistan should either accept the ground realities,
or mitigate its effects before they become unavoidable
variables in the logirithm of their respective country's real politiks.
Gen. Pervez Musharraf spent part of his
childhood in Turkey and became a fan of Kemal Ataturk, the
father of Turkish secularism. Both countries have powerful
militaries that could step in if Islamists are perceived as
going too far. Pakistan has dealt with Muslim politics by trying
to show that it is the real guardian of Islam, while Turkey has
shown the last group of Islamist politicians – most recently in
1997 – that if they get too ambitious they will be shown the
door.
"Pakistan is a military government, while Turkey is a civilian
government backed by the military or a military watchdog, so
they're not that different in terms of limits for political
activity," says Dr. Emad Shahin, an expert on
Islamic political movements at The American University in Cairo,
Egypt.. "They allow
political expression, but it's within a well-calculated
political game. It's like a soccer match, the regimes are the
referees, and they're allowing the players to play."
That means they could call a time-out, or take them out of
the game altogether. Knowing that, most think that the Justice
Party will not try to anger the referees, at least not
initially.
But what about Pakistan? The irony is that
Musharraf repressed the very parties that might have not only
supported his "Turkish plan" but could have strengthened his
hands in completing his government's U-turn from Taliban
infested politics.
Unfortunately, he has to dance on thin ice! In Turkey, it
is Erdogan who has to do so!
|
E-mail this article to a
friend