DANIEL PIPES: Islamist Turkey vs. secular Iran

[CaPtAiN_pLaNeT]

PIPES: Islamist Turkey vs. secular Iran
Nations prepare to trade places in the Muslim pantheon

PIPES: Islamist Turkey vs. secular Iran - Washington Times

By Daniel Pipes

The Washington Times

5:42 p.m., Monday, November 29, 2010
MugshotIllustration: Turkey and Iran



Early in the 16th century, as the Ottoman and Safavid empires fought for control of the Middle East, Selim the Grim, ruling from Istanbul, indulged his artistic side by composing distinguished poetry in Persian, then the Middle East's language of high culture. Simultaneously, Ismail I, ruling from Esfahan, wrote poetry in Turkish, his ancestral language.

This juxtaposition comes to mind as the populations of Turkey and Iran engage in another exchange. As the secular Turkey founded by Ataturk threatens to disappear under a wave of Islamism, the Islamist Iranian state founded by Ruhollah Khomeini apparently teeters on the brink of secularism. Ironically,Turks wish to live like Iranians and Iranians like Turks.

Turkey and Iran are large, influential and relatively advanced Muslim-majority countries, historically central, strategically placed and widely watched. As they cross paths while racing in opposite directions, which I predicted back in 1994, their destinies will affect not just the future of the Middle East but potentially the entire Muslim world.

That is happening. Let's review each country's evolution:

Turkey: Ataturk nearly removed Islam from public life in the period 1923-38. Over the decades, however, Islamists fought back, and by the 1970s, they formed part of a ruling coalition. In 1996-97, they even headed a government. Islamists took power following the strange elections of 2002, when winning a third of the vote secured them two-thirds of the parliamentary seats. Ruling with caution and competence, they got nearly half the vote in 2007, at which point, their gloves came off and the bullying began, from a wildly excessive fine levied against a media critic to harebrained conspiracy theories against the armed forces. Islamists won 58 percent of the vote in a September referendum and appear set to win the next parliamentary election, due by June 2011.

Should Islamists win the next election, that likely will establish the premise for them to remain enduringly in power, during which they will bend the country to fit their will, instituting Islamic law (Shariah) and building an Islamic order resembling Khomeini's idealized polity.

Iran: Khomeini did the opposite of Ataturk, making Islam politically dominant during his reign of 1979-89, but it soon thereafter began to falter, with discordant factions emerging, the economy failing and the populace distancing itself from the regime's extremist rule. By the 1990s, foreign observers expected the regime to fail soon. Despite their populace's growing disillusionment, the increased sway of the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps and the coming to power of hardened veterans of the Iran-Iraq war, as symbolized by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, imbued it with a second wind.

This reassertion of Islamist goals also increased the people's alienation from the regime, including a turn away from Islamic practices and toward secularism. The country's growing pathologies, including rampant drug use, pornography and prostitution, point to the depths of its problems. Alienation sparked anti-regime demonstrations in the aftermath of fraudulent elections in June 2009. The repression that followed spurred yet more anger at the authorities.

A race is under way - except it is not an even competition, given that Islamists rule in both capitals, Ankara and Tehran. Looking ahead, Iran represents the Middle East's greatest danger and its greatest hope. Its nuclear buildup, terrorism, ideological aggression and formation of a "resistance bloc" present a truly global threat, ranging from a jump in the price of oil and gas to an electromagnetic pulse attack on the United States. But if these dangers can be navigated, controlled and subdued, Iran has a unique potential to lead Muslims out of the dark night of Islamism toward a more modern, moderate and good-neighborly form of Islam. As in 1979, that achievement likely will affect Muslims far and wide.

Contrarily, while the Turkish government presents few immediate dangers, its more subtle application of Islamism's hideous principles makes it loom large as a future threat. Long after Khomeini and Osama bin Laden are forgotten, I venture, Mr. Erdogan and his colleagues will be remembered as the inventors of a more lasting and insidious form of Islamism.

Thus may today's most urgent Middle Eastern problem country become tomorrow's leader of sanity and creativity while the West's most stalwart Muslim ally over five decades turns into the greatest source of hostility and reaction. Extrapolation is a mug's game; the wheel turns, and history springs surprises.

Daniel Pipes (DanielPipes.org) is director of the Middle East Forum and a visiting fellow at the Hoover Institution of Stanford University.

© Copyright 2010 The Washington Times, LLC.

 

[Jigs]

during which they will bend the country to fit their will, instituting Islamic law (Shariah) and building an Islamic order resembling Khomeini's idealized polity.

The only problem with this part is the people would run through the government if something like this happened. AKP knows how far they can push.

He forgets to mention 16 million voted no in the referedum.

He also said Ataturk removed Islam from public life and that is false. He removed it from political life.

 

[Abii]

Some people here questioned my intentions when I said that some people are moving away from Islam in Iran. I am one of them (converted to Zoroastrianism). Again, I am not saying that Islam will disappear, far from it. Islam will always be in Iran. However the younger generation in Iran is EXTREMELY liberal, even more so than many westerners.
look at Iranians in the West. Only 2/5 of Iranians in the West consider themselves muslim (survey done in the US).

The truth is somewhere in between. But one thing is for sure, Iran won't stay an "Islamic Republic" forever.

 

[Majnun]

Turkey is not being run by Islamists. In most Muslim countries with functioning democracies, the AKP would be known as moderates, not Islamists. That's just relative to the other dominant party in Turkish politics, CHP. There is no chance of the AKP installing Shariah law in the country. Most Turks would never accept such an extreme measure, and in fact, most members of the government would not accept it either.
The West has a with-us-or-against-us attitude towards Turkey (and nations such as Pakistan) and most Westerners are fretting about Turkey turning its back on them. This is nonsense. Firstly, not everything is in black and white, Turkey is not turning its back on the West, its just taking advantage of the influence it can wield as a balance between East and West.
Another organization that has played a role in this shift has been the European Union. The EU is using public xenophobia and irrationally blocking Turkey from further talk vis-a-vis accession into the EU. This will turn more and more Turks away from the West as they are making Turkey bend over backwards to appease them and still not allowing them to get any closer to talks. They are the ones who are forcing Turkey to react and its a good thing Turkey hasn't reacted any more, as most nations would have.

 

[Desert Fox]

i highly doubt Turkey will ever become a "Isamised" country.

 

[Simorgh]

Iran will not become a secular country, at least not in our lifetime, this is not what Iranian general public want. Criticizing the government is not equal to wanting abolishment of the system. Foreigners don't understand this when looking at Iran and its people. In retrospect, when they look at riots in the streets of France that call for taking Sarkozy down, the burning of millions of cars (literally), 25% unemployed (see latest news), a huge part of the country in strike, they call it a mild disturbance by hooligans that will be over soon.

When looking at the world, it is important to not loose oneself in ones hopes, this is something many people, especially westerners have not learnt in the past 30 years looking at Iran. This includes many fled away Iranians. In fact, until the very last moment before the revolution succeeded, when hundreds of people were being shot down in the streets of Iran, and the shah had fled, the US president was still talking about how nothing was going on, how calm it was, and how much control the Shah has.

Don't let hopes/wishes blind you. Iranian people are not secular in nature.

As for Turkey. I don't know what "Islamist" is, however, I'd really have to put glasses on to identify Erdogan's and his party's goals as Muslim, let alone seriously consider anything in this article. Maybe under Turkish definitions where any kind of faith has become taboo for any official, he is considered a 'radical', but among us, he'd be considered a liberal. Too liberal for my taste in fact.

 

[Kambojaric]

Utter rubbish, what else can one expect from Pipes. Some Zionist Jew who makes his living by bashing Islam and Muslims.

 

[Abii]

Iran will not become a secular country, at least not in our lifetime, this is not what Iranian general public want. Criticizing the government is not equal to wanting abolishment of the system. Foreigners don't understand this when looking at Iran and its people. In retrospect, when they look at riots in the streets of France that call for taking Sarkozy down, the burning of millions of cars (literally), 25% unemployed (see latest news), a huge part of the country in strike, they call it a mild disturbance by hooligans that will be over soon.

When looking at the world, it is important to not loose oneself in ones hopes, this is something many people, especially westerners have not learnt in the past 30 years looking at Iran. This includes many fled away Iranians. In fact, until the very last moment before the revolution succeeded, when hundreds of people were being shot down in the streets of Iran, and the shah had fled, the US president was still talking about how nothing was going on, how calm it was, and how much control the Shah has.

Don't let hopes/wishes blind you. Iranian people are not secular in nature.

As for Turkey. I don't know what "Islamist" is, however, I'd really have to put glasses on to identify Erdogan's and his party's goals as Muslim, let alone seriously consider anything in this article. Maybe under Turkish definitions where any kind of faith has become taboo for any official, he is considered a 'radical', but among us, he'd be considered a liberal. Too liberal for my taste in fact.

take this guy's words with a grain of salt
no offense bro, but you're a regime supporter. I admitted to my bias but I don't see you doing the same. We all have our opinions and they're all based on how we were cultured. I grew up in an extremely liberal/secular family and in a very liberal city (shiraz). You on the other hand might have grew up under diff circumstances. What you described above is only half true.