By David Martin Abrahams
Jan 17, 2010
The
complex relationship between Turkey
and Europe has been occupying statesmen, politicians
and commentators for several years already. In the last months, we identify an
ever growing breach between Turkey
and Israel, a problematic
trend that last week, after the public insulting of the Turkish ambassador in Israel, seems
to turn into an avalanche. Substantial as it is, Turkey is a country filled with
contradictions. The importance of Turkey
to international relationship in general, and especially to the Middle East, is
invaluable; but one cannot understand Turkey before comprehending the
main factors that shake the Turkish boat.
Since
the establishment of the modern Turkish state as a secular entity on the ruins
of the religious Ottoman Empire, and especially in the last decade, Turkey is torn
between East and West. Thus, state secularism and the Western-oriented
political & military elite did not succeed in reducing the Islamic
sentiment of the lion's share of the population. This has led to the election
of the pro-Islamic "Justice and Development Party" headed by PM
Erdogan. On the other hand, the sincere efforts of Turkey to join the EU have been
encountering fierce opposition of many European politicians, on the pretexts of
human rights violations and cultural gaps, covered with a veil of racism.
Turkey is a key state in the regional state
system of the Middle East. Due to its sheer
size, its geographic location between Europe and Asia, and its unique blend of
democracy and Islam, Turkey can – and does – communicate
both with European democracies and Middle Eastern totalitarian regimes. Indeed,
the growing internal tensions have pushed Turkey
to adopt pro-Islamic policies, warming its relationship with Iran and Syria.
The
harsh resentment towards Israel
was triggered after the last operation in Gaza
one year ago, deteriorating ever since. Nevertheless, the Israeli responses,
culminating in the "ambassador incident", are missing the point:
first, criticism on Israeli policy towards the Palestinians –as harsh as it may
be – should be heard when it comes from a friendly state like Turkey. Second, this criticism must
be analyzed in its right context: the Turkish public opinion is in general
pro-Islamic, thus pro-Palestinian, and PM Erdogan – as all politicians in
democratic states – must always nurture his electorate. Moreover, some
commentators point at Erdogan's disappointment from Israeli PM Olmert, who
launched the Gaza operation just a few days
after intensive Turkish efforts to mediate between Israel
and Syria,
took place. Finally, Turkey
is still interested in joining the EU, and it understands that a successful
mediation in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict might be an excellent entry
ticket.
Turkey
is a moderate, pragmatic state with strong checks and balances system (though
it leans heavily on military power). Its ability to communicate with bitter
enemies such as Iran and Israel makes it
an important regional player. Therefore, Israel
should continue to treat Turkey
as a friend, not a foe. Both countries can turn the current crisis from
crescendo to catharsis: that is, to fence the points of disagreement regarding
the Palestinian issue and to discuss them in a discreet way; and at the same
time, to focus on the mutual interests in the fields of homeland security,
military cooperation, commerce and tourism.