Why Türkiye should rethink its relations with India

[Lincoln]

India's Abul Kalam Azad was a staunch supporter of Khilafat movement while Pakistan's Jinnah was not.

Ignorance is indeed a bliss. Nice to see your damage control mode on though.

Enjoy.

 

[BL33D]

Can Turkey-Indo relations stand while Turkey rightfully points out the Kashmir killings by India, and while India criticizes Turkey over Syrian operations, and joins hands with its opponents specially Armenia and Greece?

Are you unaware of our tumultuous relationship with our strategic partner USA ? They have done us worse.

 

[MayaBazar]

Ignorance is indeed a bliss. Nice to see your damage control mode on though.

Enjoy.

What damage control?

Khilafat movement in British India was started by Shaukat Ali, Mohammad Ali Jauhar, Hakim Ajmal Khan, and Abul Kalam Azad.

Jinnah was not part of Khilafat movement leadership/supporter in British India.

Shaukat Ali, Mohammad Ali Jauhar, Hakim Ajmal Khan died before we got Independence from the British in 1947.

Abul Kalam Azad was the only surviving leader of the Khilafat movement when we got Independence and He chose India over Pakistan.

These are indisputable facts.

 

[neosinan]

Actually I partially agree with OP. Pakistan and Turkey has special relations and This is based on Indian Muslim's really important contribution our War of Independence . And This wasn't only Pakistani help, It was also from India. Modi might not be ideal Leader for India. Far right/Populist movements We see from India to US wont last forever.

We need to lay ground works of After the Populist movement end. Israeli Turkish relations might never become what it was Once. But We can fix it, And Start Exporting to these countries, More. If We partially Normalize our relations with Israel, Egypt and Improve with countries like India, UAE and KSA. We can make profit from this.

We already have terrible relations with US but We are keep selling F35 parts for a Reason. We need to keep separate our Economic relations and Political ones as much as possible. And We should use it, If we can make real impact with it. But Keeping separate Doesn't mean We shouldn't use every legitimate political tool In Kashmir or in Palestine.

 

[Lincoln]

Actually I partially agree with OP. Pakistan and Turkey has special relations and This is based on Indian Muslim's really important contribution our War of Independence . And This wasn't only Pakistani help, It was also from India. Modi might not be ideal Leader for India. Far right/Populist movements We see from India to US wont last forever.

We need to lay ground works of After the Populist movement end. Israeli Turkish relations might never become what it was Once. But We can fix it, And Start Exporting to these countries, More. If We partially Normalize our relations with Israel, Egypt and Improve with countries like India, UAE and KSA. We can make profit from this.

We already have terrible relations with US but We are keep selling F35 parts for a Reason. We need to keep separate our Economic relations and Political ones as much as possible. And We should use it, If we can make real impact with it. But Keeping separate Doesn't mean We shouldn't use every legitimate political tool In Kashmir or in Palestine.

Once the Far Rightist party in India is gone, it will be a very easy job. Till then, there will always be compromises expected from your country. However, the far rightist party came in with a big majority two times in a row, and generally, it seems they will again.

What damage control?

Khilafat movement in British India was started by Shaukat Ali, Mohammad Ali Jauhar, Hakim Ajmal Khan, and Abul Kalam Azad.

Jinnah was not part of Khilafat movement leadership/supporter in British India.

Shaukat Ali, Mohammad Ali Jauhar, Hakim Ajmal Khan died before we got Independence from the British in 1947.

Abul Kalam Azad was the only surviving leader of the Khilafat movement when we got Independence and He chose India over Pakistan.

These are indisputable facts.

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/why-tuerkiye-should-rethink-its-relations-with-india.667865/page-3

post #43.

Are you unaware of our tumultuous relationship with our strategic partner USA ? They have done us worse.

The two things never went together at the same time though.

 

[Rana4pak]

By Grace of ALLAH we always fought our wars with ourselves.never depend upon any one we have brother (Turkey) and friend(China) but we don’t depend any one .only ALLAH is enough for us.so be it saudia.turkey or china when the time come for fight with idols (India) workshipper we are always ready.

 

[Lincoln]

By Grace of ALLAH we always fought our wars with ourselves.never depend upon any one we have brother (Turkey) and friend(China) but we don’t depend any one .only ALLAH is enough for us.so be it saudia.turkey or china when the time come for fight with idols (India) workshipper we are always ready.

This is what matters.

 

[Arulmozhi Varman]

And why do we want Turkey to sell us lethal weapons in the first place? I mean having good relationships are all fine and many Turks have less idea on Kashmir as they have their own issues in their neighborhood to deal with.
But except for drones and LHD's and probably few communication equipments there is nothing that Turkey does that India doesn't do. I mean we have ballistic missiles, SAM's and they don't have it doesn't mean they will buy it from India. They are integrated with NATO and being part of it has its own advantages.
As for relationships, India has to improve her Economy and become a inseparable part of any global supply chain. With money countries will come talking. India Turkey relationship can grow on its own speed. No hurries here.

 

[Brar]

Kind of hilarious that people in 2020 still use words like "idol worshippers"!

 

[Ace of Spades]

 

[what]

I am all for good relations with India, but our relations with Pakistan rule out any deep defence relations. At least not until India and Pakistan have resolved their issues. That being said, Turkish companies are investing in India and Indian weddings have become common in Turkey.

 

[MayaBazar]

No only with the hindu modi and the Islamist erdogan go away than the Indian Turkish relationship may improve

Surprisingly (not), (Hindu) Modi and (Islamist) Erdoğan have just completed a major defense deal.

India green lights $2.3B tender to build naval ship with Turkish consortium

https://www.dailysabah.com/business...r-to-build-naval-ship-with-turkish-consortium

 

[Naofumi]

View attachment 635064
View attachment 635065

Not something you would find from the Indian leaders during Khilafat Movement and the subsequent abolishment.



Tell that to your Government. It is the Indian Government which rebukes any and everyone for having an opinion on Kashmir, and breaks off relations. So, your message should really be directed towards Modi, not Turks. If Turks can have diplomatic and defense ties with Israel, they can also engage on higher levels with India, but like others already said, that won't be at the behest of shutting down their opinions and adventures.

I am not here dictating, I am only pointing out the obvious.

This argument is weak though; Iqbal desired an Islamic revival, he saw Turkey among others like Amanullah's Afghanistan as light of hope but as can be seen from the text, he is not entirely sure of the "reconstruction", in fact in his other works he disapproved of "Ijtihad" largely and even took abolition of Caliphate very negatively.
THAT IN TIMES OF DECADENCE STRICT CONFORMITY IS BETTER THAN FREE SPECULATION
IQBAL AND THE RECONSTRUCTION OF ISLAMIC LAW
Further see this,

It is promulgated nowadays by certain Pakistani elite, primarly to justify their agenda of secularization of the Pakistani state, to argue that Muhammad Iqbal was a supporter of the policies of Kemal Ataturk. Considering this view is propounded by the moderators of Naseeb Vibes without allowing for rebuttal, I thought it wise to take this point to my journal. I would like to add further, despite me being raised in the States my whole life, that such assertions by them are based upon an inferiority complex, and clearly evidences that have no pride in their heritage. Ths is substantiated by the fact that they willingly censor whatever position doesn't suit their agenda. They are sell-outs, plain and simple. They would rather twist the views of their own people to satisfy their own petty lusts in the name of 'patriotism' and 'love of the motherland'.

It is true that Muhammad Iqbal praised Kemal Ataturk in the beginning. It was primarily the result of his military actions to protect Turkey from the military onslaught of the Western powers that earned him the praise of not only Iqbal, but the Muslim world in general at the tme. He turned what was almost an impending defeat during the Balkan Wars of 1912-13 into a sudden victory. Not only that, he provided an admirable defense at Gallipoli during WWI against heavy odds. He also frustrated the Greeks, who were supported by the British. Iqbal makes a poignant reference to Ataturk's patriotism in his poem Tulu Islam, when he says,

"Stability of life in this world is bestowed by firm faith
The Turanian has proved even longer lasting than the German."

This poem was originally written in the early 1920s, BEFORE Ataturk ended the khaleepha. One should also not forget the fact that Ataturk, during this tme, was assisted by many religious Muslims, and the Turks put up a UNITED front against these invasions. The statements of praise of Iqbal are made during this time, and are not to be confused with statements regarding his policies and reforms. To argue in this manner would be like arguing that Iqbal favored the reforms of Mussolini when he praised his powerful leadership. Nobody in their right mind would take this statement to argue Iqbal favored fascism, only that he was pointing to the powerful leadership of the General. In fact, we know from other statements of Iqbal his hatred for the policies of Mussolini. t was the dynamic action of Ataturk that drew admiraton from Iqbal.

Muhammad Iqbal's ideas are further manipulated by those that wish to push the secularist agenda when they refer to Iqbal's speeches regarding Turkey in his Reconstruction of Religious Thought in Islam. His statements regarding the Nationlist Party agenda to place the State above religion is taken totally out of context. As Iqbal, in a few sentences from where these people stop argues, there is some truth to the statement, but the misconception rises in an understanding that is Christian, and that is view of the bifurcation of the body and the spirit, i.e. they are two opposing realities. This is why he says "The State, from the Islamic standpoint, is an endeavour to transform those ideal principles into space-time forces, and aspiration to realize them in definite human organization. It is in this sense alone that the State in Islam is a theocracy, not in the sense that it s headed by a representative of God on earth who can always screen his despotic will behind his supposed infallibility. THE CRITICS OF ISLAM HAVE LOST SIGHT OF THIS IMPORTANT CONSIDERATON." He then goes on to argue that the "TURKISH NATIONALISTS ASSIMILATED THE IDEA OF SEPARATION OF THE CHURCH AND STATE FROM THE HISTORY OF EUROPEAN IDEALS." Their platform, according to him, is misleading, and he further praises the Religious Reform Party headed by Said Halim Pasha. The discussion could continue in this direction, but the main point of emphasis is already established. Iqbal is clearly manipulated by these people.

As far as secularism goes, Iqbal has said very poignantly in his Iblis ke Majlis Shoora, "The Devil's Parliament":

We ourselves have dressed kingship in the garb of democracy,
When man has grown to be a little self-cosncious and self-observant.

To even argue that Iqbal favors secualrism is on the border of sheer lunacy, considering his countless statements against it. In fact, he said that one man possessed with khudi is better to lead a nation, than 100 donkeys. According to the great thinker, secularism is the greatest evil propounded in today's age, and his critique on capitalism is so visionary, that to argue he was JUST a man of his times, is ridiculous. This does not mean Iqbal was a proponent of socialism either. In fact, in the same poem he considers the proponents of it possessors of incoherent speech. To make a long story short, we can end with Iqbal's own remarks regarding Ataturk, after the khaleepha was abolished, in 1924:

"The imprudent Turk has torn the cloak of Divine Khaleepha,
Look at the Muslims' simplicity at other's cunningness also look."

("Hilal-i-Eid", the Eid Cresent)

http://www.naseeb.com/journals/muhammad-iqbal-ataturk-and-the-secularist-lie-93974
@Cliftonite

 

[Rollno21]

As long as the Turkish govt poked it's nose on Kashmir,I would say no .infact if they do we should also start talking about Kurdistan.
otherwise we have no issues with turkey.

 

[MayaBazar]

I am all for good relations with India, but our relations with Pakistan rule out any deep defence relations. At least not until India and Pakistan have resolved their issues. That being said, Turkish companies are investing in India and Indian weddings have become common in Turkey.

We can start with cultural and economic relations.

Turkish boy sings Awara Hoon: So adorable