Anti-Americanism

The score that was circulated in the press was so high (82 percent) that the issue not only begs a fair analysis but also affirmative action to curb it.

Although official Turkish circles remain silent and indifferent to this poisonous atmosphere, Americans are apprehensive. The newly appointed Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice as well as former Undersecretary Strobe Talbot, who both have visited Turkey in the last couple of weeks, have voiced the United States’ concern. Then came The Wall Street Journal article written by Robert L. Pollock on Feb. 16 whereby Turkey was labeled as the “Sick Man of Europe – Again.” A recently published book in Turkey titled “Metal Storm” preceded this insulting article. Two young men, Orkun Uçar and Burak Turna, authored this instant bestseller. The book is a political fiction based on a scenario whereby U.S. troops stationed in Iraq clash with a Turkish military unit, leading to an all-out war between the United States and Turkey. While Turkey is bombarded and invaded by the U.S. Army, a Turkish spy retaliates by detonating two briefcase-sized nuclear bombs in Washington D.C. and New York City. The book is not only selling much better than expected, it is also received as a possible scenario, a political manifesto that satisfies the psychological mood and desire of Turks to vent their sentiments against American politics in their part of their world where words of morality and action do not fit. Indeed, Turks are suspicious of American political and military intentions in the Middle East as well as their own country. They feel indignant because of the insulting and highbrow attitude of American diplomats since the rejection of the resolution by the Turkish Parliament to allow the passage of American troops into Iraq through Turkey, back in March of 2003.

It was only a few years ago when president Bill Clinton visited Turkey following the devastating earthquake that shook the country and took the lives of thousands of people. Commentators went as far as to claim that if Clinton ran in the coming Turkish national elections he would have won. There was no obvious anti-Americanism at the time, at the popular level, although there were differing groups who were traditionally anti-American, but now this obtuse sentiment is widespread and shared by groups other than the “usual suspects.” Why?

First of all, criticism of present American foreign policy, born out of unilateralist intervention without knowing the local complexities that cause more instability than status quo ante; regime change by military means due to threat perception, legitimized by intentions expressed as “liberation, liberalization and democratization,” while oil-rich or friendly despotisms are nurtured, must be noted. Different circles in Turkey (elite or non-elite) have begun to think that sooner or later regime change and the re-mapping of the region will affect their country. Secondly, the naivety of removing rough if not rogue regimes and expecting democracy to take their place has been interpreted by local populations as an excuse for American domination and exploitation of regional and national natural resources that the United States could not do under previous dictatorships.

It is hard for Americans to understand these points when they believe their administration when it states that military intervention is a surgical operation performed to remove obstacles to democracy and underdevelopment, and that bombing is done in order to restore popular will. However, when whole cities are bombed, not only the military forces of the dictatorial regime are knocked off, innocent people die as well. Military facilities as well as municipal facilities are destroyed. When “liberators” torture individuals, a whole nation is defiled in its own homeland. When oppressors are punished people expect consistency not leniency in favor of America’s friends in the region, but these are the realities of distant lands for Americans who only see supporting their president and their boys fighting for the liberty and deliverance of a captive people halfway around the world.

These factors may explain the indifference of Americans to the actions of their administration, as well as the rise of a considerable degree of anti-American feelings in Europe, Latin America and elsewhere. But they do not explain why anti-Americanism is most rampant in Turkey especially when the past record of U.S.-Turkish relations is considered: Turkey was taken under U.S. and later NATO protection when Stalinist Russia began to claim territory from Turkey after World War II. This protection continued until the end of the Cold War. The United States influenced international monetary and financial organizations to help Turkey overcome the deluge of bankruptcies caused by the constant depletion of its economic resources by its corrupt politicians and bureaucrats in legal and illegal partnerships with businessmen. American diplomats acted as lobbyists in European centers for years on end to get a date for Turkey to start membership talks with the EU, consistent with their government’s policy to back Turkey in her EU aspirations. The American intelligence community tracked down Turkey’s “public enemy number one,” Abdullah Ocalan, leader of the notorious PKK and delivered him to Turkey. Furthermore, if Turkey is getting a part of the oil distribution scheme (Baku-Ceyhan pipeline) regarding oil from the Caucuses, it will be with U.S. backing. What then?

These points are all true and under normal circumstances the United States would be the most favored country among Turks, but three things have converged to change this:

1- Diverse and conflicting groups converged on the criticism of American policies. A) Turkey’s officials have never been so critical of the United States. The military bureaucracy is very much offended by the insulting treatment of Turkish Special Forces officers by the American rangers in Suleimania, in northern Iraq. Those officers who avoided an armed conflict that could have evolved into an uncontrolled one, much like the one mentioned in the fiction titled “Metal Storm,” were later scolded for complacency. However, the insult has never been forgotten and it is doubtful that it will ever be. The army is larger-than-life in Turkey and it is the bearer of national honor. The event has showed that American priorities may be diametrically opposed to Turkey’s priorities and the second will always be sacrificed to the first. B) The majority of the military bureaucracy in Turkey is critical of U.S. aid and support of the Kurds of Iraq with the rationale that eventually a Kurdish state will emerge and be manipulated as an American protectorate. Such a state sooner or later will lure Turkey’s Kurds. When Turkey’s Kurds are mobilized, the likelihood of a civil war will not only divides Turkey, but will also create overarching instability in the whole region. C) At no time has the Turkish Ministry of Foreign Affairs have been so vocal in its critique of U.S. policies. U.S. Turkish diplomats find American policies in the Middle East unresponsive to local circumstances; military/security oriented rather than human and diplomatic oriented. They see American policies to be too high browed, insolent at times and less flexible because it is supported by military muscle. They believe that the United States is endangering Turkey’s security as well as sewing the seeds of future conflict in the Middle East, thinking they are acting on behalf of their own country’s interests.

2- The right wing is divided into two: nationalists and religionists. Once the nationalists were very much pro-American because of the communist threat. Today they are far from their old position. The nationalist right believes that the United States is adamant to create a Kurdish state that will eventually be carved out of eastern Turkey. The fact that several thousand PKK militants are able to live in the mountains of north Iraq is blamed on the United States and its intentions to keep them there as a trump card against Turkey if she gets too unruly or threatens the newly created Iraqi administration in north Iraq. Furthermore, the United States does not need the right any more to suppress leftist movements and has stopped aiding them. The religious right has never been pro-American because it has never been pro-West. Their leaning is to religion (Islam) and their religious brethren in the Middle East. So what happens to the Iraqis and to the Palestinians is their main concern without distinguishing acts of terrorism, which they see as acts of national liberation. Islamists live in an intellectual world that allows no affinity to different value systems other than their own. Temporary deviations from this position are only for reasons of expediency.

3- The secularists come as leftists and rightists. The basic political reflex of the left in Turkey has always been anti-Americanism because of their socialist and past pro-Soviet stance. Although the latter has disappeared, they still label the United States as imperialist and base their worldview on that steadfast ideological position. The secular right-wingers are very much offended by some of the American officials’ statements that Kemalism has served its historical purpose and Turkey should move on. Turkish secularists believe that in the framework of creating moderate Islamic regimes to reconcile with the Islamic world, the United States hopes to convert Turkey into a moderate Islamic country. The proof of this, they believe, is the United States’ support of the AKP and Prime Minister Erdoğan, whose platform is the offspring of an Islamic legacy. From the secularists’ point of view, this perceived motivation and U.S. support threatens the very essence of the Turkish Republic. Additionally, unwavering Pro-Israeli U.S. policy has alienated secular and non-secular right-wingers equally because they identify with the misery of the Palestinians and they blame Israeli intransigence on unfaltering U.S. backing. They see an obvious moral flaw in U.S. support of Israel that breeds anti-American feelings. All of these groups have, for the first time, converged on one political agenda: suspicion of and resistance to American policies.

Each of these groups has a social hinterland and they wield considerable influence. This power is not only in the form of emulation but rather constant indoctrination that keeps the flame of anti-Americanism burning. That is the reason why anti-American feelings are higher here than any place else in the world except, of course, for the war zones where the United States is combatant. This is dangerous and unhealthy for a people and government who have to reconcile with the United States and vice versa.

What can be done? Starting from the government, leaders of all social formations, civilian or official, must be aware that if they do not reverse their systematic negative influence (indoctrination for some of them) on their followers, anti-Americanism may reach pathological levels. This would not only isolate Turkey but would weaken her hand in her relations with the EU as well. Turkey’s sensitive economic balance that could be struck with so much misery and hardship can be easily disrupted again. Conversely, the U.S. administration must turn to itself and ask why its policies have alienated even the most loyal and grateful of its allies, including most of the European countries, and start making some amendments. Morality cuts both ways. What is morally right and legitimate for the Americans may be quite the opposite for others. This is the dilemma that the present American administration must see and share with its people. Otherwise, this socio-pathology may lead all of us to intractable conflicts and balkanization of the North Atlantic Alliance at a time when the world needs more sanity, understanding and solidarity.