What's new

Will Islamic World Accept Turkey's leadership?

Zulkarneyn

BANNED
Joined
Dec 7, 2010
Messages
2,633
Reaction score
5
Country
Turkey
Location
Turkey
What do you think, will it?
RTX29WKK.jpg


http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/ori...-oic-summit-pitch-for-islamic-leadership.html
Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan used the recent Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) summit as a grandstanding opportunity to pitch his qualifications to lead the Islamic world.
Author Semih IdizPosted April 19, 2016
Erdogan hosted the OIC, which bills itself as the "Collective Voice of the Islamic World," in Istanbul for the April 14-15 summit. He used his opening address to blast the West again and to call on the Islamic world to unite to solve its own problems rather than relying on outsiders, who he said are only pursuing their own energy interests.

The gathering took place against a backdrop of sectarian violence in the Middle East that has resulted in bitter rivalry between Saudi Arabia and Iran, which was visible at the summit.

Diplomatic analysts were also quick to pick up on the message Turkey projected via the lineup in the traditional pre-summit portrait.

Erdogan, who is at the center of the picture, has Saudi King Salman bin Abdul-Aziz Al Saud to his right, while Iranian President Hassan Rouhani stands four down to his left, thus appearing to reflect the close ties Ankara is developing with Riyadh and its distance from Iran on various regional issues.

Erdogan's choice not to be flanked by Rouhani in the photo appeared to contradict the goodwill between Sunnis and Shiites he exhorted in his opening address later.

In his speech to more than 30 leaders — with the notable absentees being Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi and Jordan’s King Abdullah, who are critical of Turkey’s role in the Middle East — Erdogan pointed to the urgent need to surmount sectarianism among Islamic countries.

“My religion is not that of Sunnis, of Shiites. My religion is Islam,” Erdogan said.

Sectarian divisions were also apparent during the summit when Iran lashed out at Saudi Arabia for executing prominent cleric Nimr al-Nimr and other Shiite activists in January. In the final communique adopted at the end of the summit, Iran in turn was condemned for interfering in its neighbor’s affairs and for supporting terrorist groups.

The warm body language between Salman and Erdogan also played into the hands of those who argue that Turkey is turning its back on the West and increasingly looking to the Sunni world for new allies.

The OIC summit came just as the European Parliament issued a scathing report underlining that Ankara has not just slowed down the democratic reform process it committed itself to as part of its bid for European Union membership, but is backpedaling on reforms it had already enacted, particularly in areas such as freedom of the press and freedom of expression.

In his opening address, Erdogan did not waste the opportunity to blast the West, which seems to be his obsession. Pointing to the recent Nuclear Security Summit in Washington, Erdogan said the speakers there had referred to the terror attacks in Paris and Brussels but made no mention of similar attacks in Ankara, Istanbul or Lahore, although hundreds died in those attacks.

“This ambivalence is upsetting for us,” Erdogan said, going on to question why, as Islamic countries, they were expecting assistance from others (meaning the West) to solve conflicts and fight terrorism.

“If we don’t act, others do. But when they do, they do so for the sake of the oil there, not to bring harmony among us,” he added, calling for an Islamic arbitration organization and an Islamic version of Interpol to be established in Istanbul.


Erdogan also brought up another of his pet topics and railed at the composition of the United Nations Security Council, where he said there is not one permanent member to represent the Islamic world.

“It is essential for the UN to be reformed. It is our right to expect this if we want a just world,” Erdogan said. “It is not possible for a system that is based on injustice to contribute to global justice."

Erdogan’s address was noted for his references to “justice,” while making hardly any mention of democracy or the rights embodied in the UN’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights. His remarks were widely interpreted as referring to Islamic justice.

In their totality, Erdogan’s words to the OIC, whose presidency Turkey is taking over for two years, were taken as a pitch for the leadership of the Islamic world, a view supported and encouraged by the pro-government media in Turkey.

Journalist Kemal Ozturk, arguing in his column against what he said is a mistaken belief that unity cannot be secured in the Islamic world, said this view is “based on preconceptions that are usually bogged down under concepts such as treachery, ignorance, misery and sectarianism.”

Ozturk, a columnist for daily Yeni Safak, which supports Erdogan, pointed to the collective assets of Islamic countries that could be harnessed under strong leadership and indicated that this is a task for Turkey to fulfill.

We must not forget that Turkey is the largest OIC country, its natural leader and older brother. Therefore, the task of reviving the unity of this organization and strengthening it falls foremost on Turkey,” Ozturk wrote.

It remains an open question, of course, whether all the countries in the Islamic world are supportive of the idea of Turkish leadership.

Political scientist and columnist Nuray Mert, an acerbic Erdogan critic, is pessimistic about the potential of the Islamic world, at least as represented by the OIC, for positive change that is in tune with the modern world.

In her critique of the OIC summit, Mert pointed out that “any claim to political legitimacy with reference to a religion is problematic.”

“It is the political power elite that defines and manipulates ‘Islam’ in terms of their interests. Political manipulation of religious legitimacy hinders criticism and accountability,” Mert argued. She noted that almost all OIC members are authoritarian states ranking low in human rights and high in corruption.

“Although they pose as if they are fighting against violence and radicalism, the religious political power of Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states is legitimized by radical and exclusionist interpretations of Islam [and] their support of radical Islamist groups for their respective interests,” Mert said.

“They themselves use violence as a political tool to suppress opposition and minorities, while most of them manipulate sectarianism — which they appeared to criticize at the summit — as a political tool."


Is the Muslim world ready to accept the return of the leadership of Turkey?
 
Last edited:
If the Muslim world accepted Egypt and Pakistan's role of being the leaders of the Islamic world in the past; then i'm sure they will openly accept Turkey as the Islamic World's leader.
 
What do you think, will it?
RTX29WKK.jpg


http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/ori...-oic-summit-pitch-for-islamic-leadership.html
Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan used the recent Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) summit as a grandstanding opportunity to pitch his qualifications to lead the Islamic world.
Author Semih IdizPosted April 19, 2016
Erdogan hosted the OIC, which bills itself as the "Collective Voice of the Islamic World," in Istanbul for the April 14-15 summit. He used his opening address to blast the West again and to call on the Islamic world to unite to solve its own problems rather than relying on outsiders, who he said are only pursuing their own energy interests.

The gathering took place against a backdrop of sectarian violence in the Middle East that has resulted in bitter rivalry between Saudi Arabia and Iran, which was visible at the summit.

Diplomatic analysts were also quick to pick up on the message Turkey projected via the lineup in the traditional pre-summit portrait.

Erdogan, who is at the center of the picture, has Saudi King Salman bin Abdul-Aziz Al Saud to his right, while Iranian President Hassan Rouhani stands four down to his left, thus appearing to reflect the close ties Ankara is developing with Riyadh and its distance from Iran on various regional issues.

Erdogan's choice not to be flanked by Rouhani in the photo appeared to contradict the goodwill between Sunnis and Shiites he exhorted in his opening address later.

In his speech to more than 30 leaders — with the notable absentees being Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi and Jordan’s King Abdullah, who are critical of Turkey’s role in the Middle East — Erdogan pointed to the urgent need to surmount sectarianism among Islamic countries.

“My religion is not that of Sunnis, of Shiites. My religion is Islam,” Erdogan said.

Sectarian divisions were also apparent during the summit when Iran lashed out at Saudi Arabia for executing prominent cleric Nimr al-Nimr and other Shiite activists in January. In the final communique adopted at the end of the summit, Iran in turn was condemned for interfering in its neighbor’s affairs and for supporting terrorist groups.

The warm body language between Salman and Erdogan also played into the hands of those who argue that Turkey is turning its back on the West and increasingly looking to the Sunni world for new allies.

The OIC summit came just as the European Parliament issued a scathing report underlining that Ankara has not just slowed down the democratic reform process it committed itself to as part of its bid for European Union membership, but is backpedaling on reforms it had already enacted, particularly in areas such as freedom of the press and freedom of expression.

In his opening address, Erdogan did not waste the opportunity to blast the West, which seems to be his obsession. Pointing to the recent Nuclear Security Summit in Washington, Erdogan said the speakers there had referred to the terror attacks in Paris and Brussels but made no mention of similar attacks in Ankara, Istanbul or Lahore, although hundreds died in those attacks.

“This ambivalence is upsetting for us,” Erdogan said, going on to question why, as Islamic countries, they were expecting assistance from others (meaning the West) to solve conflicts and fight terrorism.

“If we don’t act, others do. But when they do, they do so for the sake of the oil there, not to bring harmony among us,” he added, calling for an Islamic arbitration organization and an Islamic version of Interpol to be established in Istanbul.


Erdogan also brought up another of his pet topics and railed at the composition of the United Nations Security Council, where he said there is not one permanent member to represent the Islamic world.

“It is essential for the UN to be reformed. It is our right to expect this if we want a just world,” Erdogan said. “It is not possible for a system that is based on injustice to contribute to global justice."

Erdogan’s address was noted for his references to “justice,” while making hardly any mention of democracy or the rights embodied in the UN’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights. His remarks were widely interpreted as referring to Islamic justice.

In their totality, Erdogan’s words to the OIC, whose presidency Turkey is taking over for two years, were taken as a pitch for the leadership of the Islamic world, a view supported and encouraged by the pro-government media in Turkey.

Journalist Kemal Ozturk, arguing in his column against what he said is a mistaken belief that unity cannot be secured in the Islamic world, said this view is “based on preconceptions that are usually bogged down under concepts such as treachery, ignorance, misery and sectarianism.”

Ozturk, a columnist for daily Yeni Safak, which supports Erdogan, pointed to the collective assets of Islamic countries that could be harnessed under strong leadership and indicated that this is a task for Turkey to fulfill.

We must not forget that Turkey is the largest OIC country, its natural leader and older brother. Therefore, the task of reviving the unity of this organization and strengthening it falls foremost on Turkey,” Ozturk wrote.

It remains an open question, of course, whether all the countries in the Islamic world are supportive of the idea of Turkish leadership.

Political scientist and columnist Nuray Mert, an acerbic Erdogan critic, is pessimistic about the potential of the Islamic world, at least as represented by the OIC, for positive change that is in tune with the modern world.

In her critique of the OIC summit, Mert pointed out that “any claim to political legitimacy with reference to a religion is problematic.”

“It is the political power elite that defines and manipulates ‘Islam’ in terms of their interests. Political manipulation of religious legitimacy hinders criticism and accountability,” Mert argued. She noted that almost all OIC members are authoritarian states ranking low in human rights and high in corruption.

“Although they pose as if they are fighting against violence and radicalism, the religious political power of Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states is legitimized by radical and exclusionist interpretations of Islam [and] their support of radical Islamist groups for their respective interests,” Mert said.

“They themselves use violence as a political tool to suppress opposition and minorities, while most of them manipulate sectarianism — which they appeared to criticize at the summit — as a political tool."


Is the Muslim world ready to accept the return of the leadership of Turkey?
If Turkey embraces Islam and gets its hands on being the largest force with Nuclear Weapons No doubt,Muslim world will.But It will only get itself into trouble nothing else.
 
If the Muslim world accepted Egypt and Pakistan's role of being the leaders of the Islamic world in the past; then i'm sure they will openly accept Turkey as the Islamic World's leader.
Muslim world doesn't have to come under our leadership per se. But many muslim majority countries can learn a great deal from our example in political institutions, infrastructure, health, education, economy.
Currently Turkey is the wealthiest Muslim nation even though our revenue and exports don't consist of energy. We have come to understand the value of discipline, work hard with the sweat of our brow and unition with effort for many decades after losing the first world war alongside Germany.

Currently what Muslim countries should focus on is national consciousness and development in national stage. On this forum i've repeatedly underlined the importance of islamic calvinism, how it progresses societies, if you want an example of this look up Turkey and anatolian tigers, and their place in Turkey's rising economy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anatolian_Tigers
http://www.globalinvestormagazine.com/Article/3374077/Rise-of-the-Anatolian-Tigers.html
http://www.thehindu.com/news/intern...-turkeys-silent-revolution/article3364873.ece

In short the recent (last couple decades) huge economic success occured simoultanously with sunni values that we hold dear in Turkey: Discipline, honesty, punctuality and being strenuous in your job.

This is just the economic aspect. I hope people know Max Weber's hugely influential thesis on the protestant ethic and capitalism. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Protestant_Ethic_and_the_Spirit_of_Capitalism
In the book, Weber wrote that capitalism in Northern Europe evolved when the Protestant (particularly Calvinist) ethic influenced large numbers of people to engage in work in the secular world, developing their own enterprises and engaging in trade and the accumulation of wealth for investment. In other words, the Protestant work ethic was an important force behind the unplanned and uncoordinated emergence of modern capitalism.

Another essential aspect is how religion itself is viewed and operated by the state. On this i wrote a segment on PDF many years ago. https://defence.pk/threads/islamic-and-western-thought-in-turkey-a-problem-yet-not-solved.163606
 
That is a very silly question. Muslim world will accept Turkey as a 'leader' if Turkey doesn't want to use that power for its own geopolitical ambitions. While Turkey is very popular among Muslim countries and it surely is a natural leader, it also must know that other Muslim states will not take kindly to any attempt to turn Turkey into a Islamic version of USSR. If Turkey really wants to lead and if the Muslim state really want to accept its leadership a comprehensive power sharing formula must be drawn. For example, the Muslim states are not going to be comfortable with all "Institutions" which will be created as a result of such a Confederation being centered in Turkey. Turkish military dominance will also not be taken with ease. In other word, if such a Confederation is to be created its powers need to be distributed equitably to a number of Muslim states for it to succeed.
 
Al Nusra certainly appreciates Turkey's leadership
Dude let us manipulate and use these fringe groups as we want for the sake of our interest. You do the same, in the game of realpolitik we are not totally oblivious, we know the game and how it is supposed to be played ;)
 
Turkey and Pakistan are two powerful Muslim states that all Muslims admire. In the east Indonesia has the potential but it has issues that need to be addressed. If she comes nearer to Malaysia and BD then Indonesia will emerge as the leader of eastern Muslims.
 
That is a very silly question. Muslim world will accept Turkey as a 'leader' if Turkey doesn't want to use that power for its own geopolitical ambitions. While Turkey is very popular among Muslim countries and it surely is a natural leader, it also must know that other Muslim states will not take kindly to any attempt to turn Turkey into a Islamic version of USSR. If Turkey really wants to lead and if the Muslim state really want to accept its leadership a comprehensive power sharing formula must be drawn. For example, the Muslim states are not going to be comfortable with all "Institutions" which will be created as a result of such a Confederation being centered in Turkey. Turkish military dominance will also not be taken with ease. In other word, if such a Confederation is to be created its powers need to be distributed equitably to a number of Muslim states for it to succeed.
We have taken this role in the past. Naturally time's are changing and new mediums the likes of internet and television are changing people as well. Certain things stay as they are, we as a people are conscious of our potential, not just the potential of the turkic speaking world, but the potential of the muslim world, exactly the same way as European Union or United States.
What i'm suggesting is not our leadership where the power is distributed unevenly, nope, but a union that can materialize in the form of connecting countries with highways, fast rail tracks, airhubs, ship routes and so on. In time when potential economic powers like Pakistan, Nigeria makes it pass 10K$ GDP per capita, with heavy correct form of investment coalescing interests making most of our potential as a possible federation. In my opinion this is not far fetched at all. This is very possible with leaders whose sights are stretching pass their toes. Democracy is not a precurser for this form of federation/union, shared human values are.

I don't think the question is silly, i think it is a necessary question, because things are going slow as hell right now and things need to happen soon. Elect or get leaders that can communicate with our leaders and invest in what's vital: infrastructure, health, education etc.
Our universities need to establish connections to your universities and colloborations need to happen on a larger scale with common centres of knowledge and science like CERN, we can't continue on sending our brightest brains to the US
 
Muslim world doesn't have to come under our leadership per se. But many muslim majority countries can learn a great deal from our example in political institutions, infrastructure, health, education, economy.
Currently Turkey is the wealthiest Muslim nation even though our revenue and exports don't consist of energy. We have come to understand the value of discipline, work hard with the sweat of our brow and unition with effort for many decades after losing the first world war alongside Germany.

Currently what Muslim countries should focus on is national consciousness and development in national stage. On this forum i've repeatedly underlined the importance of islamic calvinism, how it progresses societies, if you want an example of this look up Turkey and anatolian tigers, and their place in Turkey's rising economy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anatolian_Tigers
http://www.globalinvestormagazine.com/Article/3374077/Rise-of-the-Anatolian-Tigers.html
http://www.thehindu.com/news/intern...-turkeys-silent-revolution/article3364873.ece

In short the recent (last couple decades) huge economic success occured simoultanously with sunni values that we hold dear in Turkey: Discipline, honesty, punctuality and being strenuous in your job.

This is just the economic aspect. I hope people know Max Weber's hugely influential thesis on the protestant ethic and capitalism. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Protestant_Ethic_and_the_Spirit_of_Capitalism
In the book, Weber wrote that capitalism in Northern Europe evolved when the Protestant (particularly Calvinist) ethic influenced large numbers of people to engage in work in the secular world, developing their own enterprises and engaging in trade and the accumulation of wealth for investment. In other words, the Protestant work ethic was an important force behind the unplanned and uncoordinated emergence of modern capitalism.

Another essential aspect is how religion itself is viewed and operated by the state. On this i wrote a segment on PDF many years ago. https://defence.pk/threads/islamic-and-western-thought-in-turkey-a-problem-yet-not-solved.163606

Calvinism has had very little influence here. More so in Holland/Belgium.
Lutheranism is the important factor.
 
Muslim world doesn't need a leader, what it needs is a steep decrease in number of stupid people. Does EU have a leader? NO, but they have learned to solve their difference without killing each other, of course, after killing millions of each other.

When Muslim countries understand neither west nor east simply don't give slightest shit about them and won't shed a single tear of all Muslims are buried alive, when they stop looking up to rest of the world, they can achieve something.
 
Muslim world doesn't need a leader, what it needs is a steep decrease in number of stupid people. Does EU have a leader? NO, but they have learned to solve their difference without killing each other, of course, after killing millions of each other.

When Muslim countries understand neither west nor east simply don't give slightest shit about them and won't shed a single tear of all Muslims are buried alive, when they stop looking up to rest of the world, they can achieve something.
EU does have an "undeclared leader".
And yes, the Muslim world does not need a leader, a country in South Asia cannot understand a country in the ME, and vice versa, it is wiser to have Co-operation organizations, which deal with specific regions, North Africa, Gulf, Middle-East, South Asia, Central Asia and East-Asia. These organizations should focus on boosting trade and commerce, medicine and technology things dire for the Muslim world, plus keeping organizations different for each region prevents escalation of hostilities and/or rivalries between nations.
 
You didn't answer my question. Let's say we create the Islamic Union (IU) tomorrow and its Capital is Ankara. It will require 'Institutions' to run the administrative elements of this rather gigantic confederate union (It will not be a federation). Those institutions will run the newly created IU. If Turkey is home to all of those institutions, its going to give Turkey too much power on other member states. For instance Turkey will control its Banking, Courts, Currency maybe even the Military. That kind of power concentrated in one country is not going to work nor other member states are going to accept it. We can have free border trade, logistical infrastructure, similar education system from school level up to postgraduate level and so on. These elements are doable but my point remains that concentration of power in Turkey is not going to work. We would have to divide the institutions among other member states so they too have a genuine stake in the union instead of Turkey controlling most of it. That said, OIC's combined GDP (PPP) is about 15 trillion dollars among them are nations with very high GDP/Capita income, they will not be willing to share their wealth with other member states.

We have taken this role in the past. Naturally time's are changing and new mediums the likes of internet and television are changing people as well. Certain things stay as they are, we as a people are conscious of our potential, not just the potential of the turkic speaking world, but the potential of the muslim world, exactly the same way as European Union or United States.

What i'm suggesting is not our leadership where the power is distributed unevenly, nope, but a union that can materialize in the form of connecting countries with highways, fast rail tracks, airhubs, ship routes and so on. In time when potential economic powers like Pakistan, Nigeria makes it pass 10K$ GDP per capita, with heavy correct form of investment coalescing interests making most of our potential as a possible federation. In my opinion this is not far fetched at all. This is very possible with leaders whose sights are stretching pass their toes. Democracy is not a precurser for this form of federation/union, shared human values are.

I don't think the question is silly, i think it is a necessary question, because things are going slow as hell right now and things need to happen soon. Elect or get leaders that can communicate with our leaders and invest in what's vital: infrastructure, health, education etc. Our universities need to establish connections to your universities and colloborations need to happen on a larger scale with common centres of knowledge and science like CERN, we can't continue on sending our brightest brains to the US
 
I like Turkey and Turkish food plus they seem more liberal and secular but they are not the guardians of the holy sites which is Saudi Arabia so therefore I can't see them taking a lead.
 

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom