Hard Turkey or soft Turkey?

Proponents of reforms and democracy are generally silent, silenced or inactive, whereas supporters of the status quo, which is the bureaucracy-dominated regime in Turkey, are extremely vocal in Washington. Many think tanks fall into the second category. Here is a common train of thought in those circles: Preserving ties with the powerful generals -- along with their ideological clones among the elite -- is more important than promoting democracy, because the military is still key to many strategic US goals. Furthermore, democracy in the current context would only help the majority -- religious minded Turks -- who are a potential threat for the US and Israel. Therefore, democracy should not be defended in a fashion that would intimidate and undermine the secular old guard, first and foremost the military.

It's a pity when a Western capital that rightfully yearns for reforms in the Muslim world is fed with such narrow and old-fashioned analysis. Democracy and reforms are working against the old Turkish guard. They want to reverse that direction to make sure they don't lose their privileges. They are committed to protecting the management of the state, which they often treat as their personal property, from major portions of the nation, such as religious and non-Turkish citizens. And they can use nasty tactics to that end. Among them, trying to shut down a mainstream ruling party (see the legal case against the Justice and Development Party, AK Party) and engaging in plots (often violent) to lay the ground for direct and indirect military interventions (as evidenced in the Ergenekon case). Turkey, thanks to both these cases, is at an historic juncture where it must make a choice between bureaucratic oligarchy and democracy. So are Turkey's friends and allies.

Why do I think the civilized world does not have the luxury of watching this game like subdued spectators? Because Turkey's democratic stability -- not your grandfather's Cold War stability at the expense of democracy -- is crucial for everyone. Especially with the challenges of the post-Sept. 11 era, Turkey's soft power has become no less a strategic asset than its hard power for the West. People who are comfortable with huge blows to soft Turkey for the sake of short-term tactical bargains from hard Turkey (say in regards to Iran policy) are dead wrong. Although hard Turkey might really make things easier for Washington in the short run on some fronts in exchange for consent regarding their anti-democratic designs, they cannot be trusted overall because they are increasingly at odds with Western values and interests. If nothing else, the Ergenekon organization alone proves that.

No matter how much some outspoken Turkey observers in Washington try to downplay what the illegal Ergenekon organization represents, these people who are deeply rooted in the old guard are no less an enemy of the US and Europe than the AK Party and its 47 percent election mandate. I don't understand why any American should have problems with a well-grounded criminal case against a gang of people that includes retired top military officers when it's obvious -- from their own writings and statements -- that they envision a Turkey more in tune with regimes like Russia and China, rather than the EU and US. That's also true for their connections in the media, such as nationalist and neo-fascist Cumhuriyet newspaper. The risk of Turkey becoming increasingly authoritarian like Russia or China is more real than its eventually turning into theocratic Iran or semi-secular Jordan, as some in Washington wrongly argue.

True, a friendly authoritarian regime can sometimes be easier to work with than a competitor democracy. You only have to convince a few people there and strike a deal. Democracies can be unpredictable and may at times produce chaos. But as friends they are definitely preferable to oppressive regimes. Strong faith in democracy and not being suspicious of its outcome are the best ways to avoid authoritarianism, be it religious or secular. Unlike the publicly unaccountable oligarchic bureaucracy, which aspires to fix everything except itself, a system based on democratic rule of law can fix itself and deal with domestic and international issues more effectively. That's the kind of Turkey its democratic allies should press for.

I do not expect to hear such arguments from certain special interest groups and their patrons in Washington. Obviously they are accustomed to working with the old hard Turkish establishment and they fear the will of soft Turkey. But I am very disappointed with the indifferent public attitude of relatively independent democracy advocates, such as the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), National Democratic Institute (NDI) and International Republican Institute (IRI). Not to mention the US Congress, and especially the Helsinki Commission, which is supposed to monitor whether US allies comply with Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) commitments.

Ladies and gentlemen, please wake up and make it clear whether you like Turkey hard or soft.