Snowsuits and Headscarves

A free, throw-away commuter newspaper made its debut in Istanbul during the past week and its timing could not have been more auspicious. As far as this observer is aware, the paper's debut has coincided with an event that has not occurred since the Czarist Russian offensive through the Caucasus during WWI - the last time Turkish soldiers were thrown into a mountainous winter campaign beyond the borders of Anatolia. Turkish military sceptics, including this observer, were generally surprised to learn that the military had chosen to undertake a winter operation in light of the added level of difficulty. The Turkish media has accordingly taken great pains to capture the exploits of the military's adventure into snowy northern Iraq. Photos of Turkish soldiers wearing white snowsuits have been the highlight of the media's coverage partly to emphasize the operation's degree of daring and surprise, but also due to the simple fact that the Turkish military has not allowed sufficient media access for the creation of alternative images.

The winter surprise attack on PKK positions in the Qandil Mountains region in northern Iraq has thus far yielded two main story lines in the international media and in the Turkish media to a lesser extent. First, there appears to be a general level confusion concerning what the Turkish military has actually accomplished. While body counts of dead "terrorists" as well as Turkish "martyrs" are provided in order to give the public a sense of progress, there does not exist a single source beyond the Turkish military's website or a press conference with General Büyükanıt to corroborate or qualify such statistics. (What delicious irony that the Turkish military, the country's staunchest defender of secularism, has appropriated an Islamic term to describe its combat dead.)

In addition, there appears to be a second point of confusion surrounding the question of why the Turkish military has maintained such a media freeze over the operation. This is particularly bewildering in light of the military’s comments that the operation has specific objectives, which are supposed to be limited in duration. It is unclear what the military has to gain from this approach.

It is still quite likely that the Turkish military will reveal the scope of military achievements for its latest operation once Turkish forces begin to conduct their pullout. The military seems to have so far maintained the view that it is turning the winter elements to its advantage with the added help of the element of surprise. The snow will hamper the Turkish forces, but it will also impede PKK fighters from fleeing the scene of attack. However, this observer also wonders whether PKK forces have truly decided to sit around the camp fire holed up in the snowy Qandil mountains for an entire winter season, as opposed to settling at lower and warmer elevations for the winter while waiting for the Turkish military to venture out in the spring. Whatever is the case, the Turkish military will undoubtedly label its operation a success whenever the time comes to make such announcements.

Another point worthy of consideration is to question whether Turkey’s winter offensive was truly intended to have decisive military implications. Rather, it seems quite possible that it was conceived for sheer political convenience. This view comes to mind when one considers the dominant fashion statements plastered across the entire spectrum of the Turkish media over the last eight days - either soldiers in white snowsuits or female university students wearing headscarves.

Combat operations against the PKK have always functioned as a unifying mechanism in Turkish society. This is no more apparent than when viewing the constant footage on all national news broadcasts that depicts the official funeral ceremonies or the grieving families of the Turkish combat dead. Faced with the incredible degree of polarization that has resulted from their successful initiative to legalize headscarves for women attending Turkish universities, it seems logical for Erdoğan and Gül to have encouraged the military to trudge around in the snow for a few weeks. A winter operation would distract the public away from its social crisis since it would remind them that there exist more critical and immediate threats to the livelihoods of the Turkish people compared to the headscarf. Judging by the fact that combat operations have been constantly featured as the lead story on the evening news during the past week, their tactic seems to have worked.

Further Reading: Headscarves, generals, and Turkish democracy

The following article is an exhausting, yet extremely comprehensive, sketch of the most important issues in contemporary Turkish society. The author, Niels Kadritze, is the editor of the German edition of Le Monde Diplomatique. While Mr. Kadritze's essay is somewhat lacking in terms of the organization of ideas, the quality and range of his observations are absolutely first rate.

www.eurozine.com/articles/2008-02-01-kadritzke-en.html

Turkey's Next Economic Horizon: reviewing financial indicators

At the beginning of this past week, the world was gripped by the imminent possibility of global financial Armageddon. While the global markets have encountered and overcome small patches of turmoil over the last eight months, only this most recent turn of events has caused the Turkish media, government and upper-classes to immerse themselves in an open round of soul searching. What was once a whisper or secondary thought is gradually becoming the palpable hum of financial anxiety - a reality with which Turkey is extremely familiar.

Over the past few years, Turkey has emerged as one of the global stars of foreign direct investment (FDI). The Turkish lira has reached unprecedented levels of strength, allowing Turks to better cope with rising energy prices, experience unprecedented buying power in the form of cheap goods from China and for wealthier Turks, it has given them more confidence to purchase foreign delicacies such as sunglasses from Gucci. Whether one is a bus driver in Malatya or a bank employee in Izmir, Atatürk's famous saying Ne Mutlu Türküm Diyene (How happy is he who says "I am a Turk") has acquired a new meaning for today's Turkish consumer.

Turkey's AKP-led government continues to maintain a very confident demeanor. The World Bank released a very favorable review of Turkey's GDP prospects in 2008 and investors still show interest despite the looming global financial turmoil. While this observer does not mean to suggest that Turkey's economy will abruptly dive into utter chaos as a result of a global economic downturn, it is important to remember that multiple years of robust growth have produced a lot of fat, which a downturn will ruthlessly trim away. It is only after this inefficient excess has been exposed and removed, that one can truly evaluate the AKP-administered economic renaissance in Turkey.

The following are a number of noteworthy Turkish financial statistics and remarks for consideration. Many of the initial comments were taken from this TDN article.

Year-to-date current account deficit: Rises by 11.6% to $32.758bn in November 2007. The figures for the January-October period were adjusted from $29.06bn to $29.48bn.

12-month trailing current account deficit: Rises to $35.74bn in November from $35.16bn in October 2007 according to Türkiye Ekonomi Bankası (TEB).

Sertan Kargın, chief economist at TEB, said, “We are not concerned about the current account deficit thanks to robust Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) stock, record high foreign exchange reserves, and solid non-debt creating capital inflows.”

TEB key factors driving the current account deficit: “The widening trade gap was mainly due to higher import substitution in intermediate goods, the overvaluation of the Turkish lira, record high oil and commodity prices, private sector capital investments, and the spillover impact of fiscal loosening on domestic demand.”

Global slowdown according to Kargin of TEB: Global growth conditions are the key risk for Turkey’s current account outlook, according to Kargın. "In our view, a consumption-led global slowdown is creating a risk on the current account balance as Turkey’s foreign demand sensitive export industries account for 60% of total exports," Kargın said. "Furthermore, exports are highly sensitive to foreign demand rather than the exchange rate."

FDI in 2006: Almost $20bn in FDI in 2006.

Projected FDI for 2008:
Kargın of TEB: “In 2008, we expect Turkey to raise an additional $20bn to $25bn through FDI, and $4bn to $5bn via global investors’ equity and Turkish lira debt instrument purchases.”

Özgür Altuğ, chief economist, Raymond James, Istanbul: Turkey will probably get $23bn of FDI in 2008. That will finance less than half of a current account gap that’s likely to swell to more than $50bn.

Government Assets and FDI: The recipient of almost two-thirds of foreign investment will likely be the sale of government assets, such as banks, power generation and distribution companies according to Altuğ.

It has also been reported in recent months that the government is trying to accelerate the pace of privatizations.

Sovereign Wealth Funds and FDI: "In the wake of these developments, Economy Minister Mehmet Şimşek traveled to Dubai yesterday to encourage the Saudi Arabia Public Investment Fund and other sovereign wealth funds to increase their investments in Turkey." (For more, please click here.)

"Government officials had previously said Turkey could attract around $10bn in investment from the Gulf countries, excluding the new Saudi Arabia Public Investment Fund, to the real estate, tourism and financial sectors as well as to privatizations." (For more, please click here.)

TUSIAD Remarks: According to the chairwoman of Turkish Industrialists and Businessmen's Association (TUSIAD), Arzuhan Dogan Yalcindag:

“Our growth has slowed down to a large extent and inflation has a relatively upward trend,” she said during an address to a TUSIAD general assembly meeting in Istanbul. “The unemployment rate has begun to increase with high current deficit figures and damaged financial discipline. And unfortunately that is how we are bracing for the upcoming global wave.”

“The world is closing in to a global crisis and 2008 will be a difficult year for Turkey. We need to concentrate all of our energy to economy.” (For more, please click here)

Perhaps the most remarkable issue to emerge from this small assembly of viewpoints is the degree of urgency and weight shouldered by FDI regarding the stability of Turkey's economy in 2008. Turkey needs FDI in order to address its great imbalances in trade. The fact that a government official is openly lobbying for a greater share of the petrodollar FDI pie is rather telling. It also confirms the degree to which the AKP's economic success has been linked to their close ties with the more religiously conservative, petroleum-rich countries. (For further analysis of this political development, please click here.)

Another point worth considering is the two-thirds figure for the amount of total FDI directed towards the sale of state-assets. It is probably quite normal for an emerging market economy like Turkey to attract the majority of FDI in this matter. However, at some point the number of state companies available for auction will dwindle. Ideally, the newly-privatized and traditionally private firms will generate enough new growth to create the market enthusiasm necessary to attract sufficient levels of FDI. However, the transition for state-asset oriented FDI to ultimately represent the minority of overall FDI in Turkey, instead of the majority, could prove quite difficult in the near term. This will be especially true if the global economy stumbles in the next couple of years and investors decide to retreat to economies with less risk. No wonder Turkey is so keen to attract a portion of the more than $1trn on the table for Saudi Arabia's new sovereign wealth fund.

Turkey's Foreign Affairs Blitz

While of minor importance to most Turks in comparison to their national football team's efficient victory over a weak Bosnia-Herzegovina side and the team's resulting accession to the Euro 2008 tournament, this past week also featured the Turkish government culminating an impressive flurry of foreign affairs activity. Although the Turkish national team has little chance under its coach, Fatih Terim, whose arrogance shadows his remarkable flair for dramatic dress-shirt and jacket collars, the government's latest efforts will surely give Milli Takım fans something to talk about beyond their team's early exit from the European football championship tournament this summer.

Turkey's latest foreign affairs campaign began almost a month ago. Motivated by Turkey's highly theatrical bluff to invade northern Iraq, Ankara hosted a rather awkward summit with Iraq's Prime Minister Al Maliki. This visit was followed by King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia and his delegation of 11 planes. Erdoğan and Gül would then elegantly contrast the King's visit by hosting Israel's President Peres, in addition to Palestinian National Authority President Mahmoud Abbas. Other than the usual series of forced handshakes in front of photographers, Turkey announced that it would lead the development of the Erez Industrial Zone in order to promote foreign investment to a destitute region prone to terrorist activities.

The pace did not slow during this past week. Prime Minister Erdoğan inaugurated a gas pipeline between Turkey and Greece, a key component of the Nabucco pipeline project that transports Central Asian gas supplies to Central Europe. President Gül then participated in ground-breaking ceremonies for the new Baku-Tblisi-Kars railway, which has greater symbolic importance than practical potential due to the dilapidated nature the rail networks in all three countries. Turkey's efforts to pursue peace in Palestine were ultimately awarded with an invitation to the Annapolis Summit, which was a significant acknowledgment of Turkey's (otherwise weak) presence in Middle Eastern affairs.

In December, Turkish foreign minister Ali Babacan will visit Greece to strengthen ties and promote Turkey's candidacy for the EU.

The Turkish media has been bubbling with suggestions of Turkey's emergence as a regional hegemon. These sentiments are typified by an article by Fatih University academic, Gökhan Bacık:

Turkey seeks to take concrete actions in the Middle East to move regional politics from its current abstract content to a more practical and implemental level. This is also not surprising because Turkey has the ability and capacity to achieve this. The Erez Industrial Zone, which will be constructed under Turkey’s leadership in the West Bank, is exemplary...There is one simple fact behind Turkey’s ability to offer concrete options and opportunities: that Turkey is a historical actor that has many aspects in common with all the actors of the region. For this reason, its contribution to make the devised projects operational is vital. The operational opportunities of the other actors including the EU are limited.

There is no doubt that Turkey should be commended for its recent surge in foreign affairs activity related to the Middle East. The country must do a better job of defining its modern identity in foreign affairs and this past month has been beneficial to that end.

However, this observer suspects that the ultimate success of Turkey's efforts will be tied to the true motivations for its involvement. If Turkey seeks engagement in a front-page issue like Palestine to self-promote its status as the EU's future bridge between Europe and the Middle East, it is doubtful that they will accomplish anything of note. However, if Turkey believes that it is in its own self-interest to develop such involvement in Middle Eastern affairs, with or without EU membership, then success will be much more likely. It is quite possible that Ankara is genuinely interested in forging stronger relations with Israel as a strategic advantage for the future.

However, Turkey has been making a big push of late to secure public declarations of support for its EU candidacy from multiple EU members. It is consequently the opinion of this observer that Turkey's most recent efforts, and particularly those involving Palestine, are nothing more than an attempt to pursue newspaper headlines in order to influence the opinions of Brussels Eurocrats. Gül's plan to establish an economic zone in order to address the relationship between unemployment and terrorism seems particularly inane given Turkey's own domestic problems with terrorism. Perhaps Turkey would grab even more European headlines if it first solved the unemployment problem in its volatile southeastern region.

Pipeline Politics: Israel

Details were released last week concerning an advanced proposal for a pipeline from Turkey to Israel, which would provide Israel with a new source of natural gas, oil, electricity and water. The project is a notable development in Turkish-Israeli relations during a month that has been highlighted by Shimon Perez's diplomatically significant visit to Ankara today.

(Please review either this article from Zaman for the Turkish perspective or this piece from the Jerusalem Post for an Israeli view of the proposed pipeline.)

If the proposed connection is indeed constructed, this project will represent an intriguing addition to Turkey's growing web of energy pipelines. As an estranged member of the Muslim Middle East, it has been relatively easy for secular Turkey to cultivate a relationship with financially capable and technologically advanced Israel. Perez's invitation to Ankara, which was officially offered by President Gül, reflects the degree to which Turkey's supposed "neo-Islamists" are distinct from other political movements in the Middle East. Perhaps to a lesser extent, the move underscores the historic mistrust that undermines Turkic-Arab solidarity whether in Anatolia, the Caucasus or in Muslim Central Asia.

While the deal appears to be mutually beneficial in terms of Turkey adding a new market to its energy transfer network and Israel diversifying its energy needs, this observer is skeptical of the greater oil export applications for the pipeline suggested in the Jerusalem Post article. In particular, it is unclear what basis there is for the assertion that it is "more practical" to deliver oil to Asian markets via Israel compared to overland routes.

First of all, this observer wonders what real advantages oil transited through Israel has over shipping it from the Turkish terminal at Ceyhan and onto Asia through the proven Suez Canal route. Since the oil will originate in either Iraq or the Caspian Sea, it furthermore seems rather odd to first move the oil west to Ceyhan and then south to Israel and finally onto a destination in Asia. It would make far more sense to ship the oil from Basra or from a port in Pakistan through the growing network of pipelines crossing that country.


It is ultimately of little concern to Turkey whether or not such dreams of exporting oil to the "Far East" via Israel are in fact realized. Of far greater importance is the considerable geopolitical leverage Turkey will acquire through this increased cooperation with Israel. If the proposed pipeline proves successful, Israel will ultimately come to depend on it for a relatively significant portion of its subsistence. Therefore, Turkey will possess a greater means to "lean on" Israel for certain types of military or diplomatic support that the US or Europe will otherwise be reluctant to provide.

Russian Whispers and the PKK

Turkey has been the unequivocal star of this week's news agenda. Turkish cable news has featured a mindless stream of images featuring mortars being fired into the anonymous distance, well-equipped commando units waiting at attention, and other staged military exercises involving men with big guns and intimidating face paint. While Erdoğan and Gül are bathing in the warm light of nationalist sentiment generated by the recent deaths of soldiers and policemen, as well as the Armenian genocide legislation, it is the opinion of this observer that the current media and diplomatic buildup will amount to nothing more than the usual sabre-rattling. It would be surprising if future military actions amounted to something more than limited raids and aerial assaults. Full-scale invasions are expensive propositions and Turkey doesn't exactly have the financial resources of the United States or even Russia.

On Wednesday, a spokesman for the Russian Foreign Ministry issued a comment that was rather surprising in light of his country's recent experience with full-scale invasions.

We urge all parties in the conflict to exercise maximum restraint and demonstrate the ability to assess the long-term effects of their actions, including those that might further aggravate the situation.

This comment seemed rather strange in light of the fact that Turkey's ordeal with the PKK is ultimately an issue of a minority ethnic group's will to politically separate. In many regards, Turkey's situation in northern Iraq and south-eastern Anatolia is analogous to Russia's debacle in Chechnya. Depending on one's point of point of view, the underdogs were either "freedom fighters" or "terrorists". Over the years, Russia has had its fingers burnt in a number of such blistering-hot pies ranging from Afghanistan to the northern Caucasus.

While there was some oil to be lost if Chechnya had successfully broken away, the main threat was the dismemberment of the very ethnically and regionally-complex puzzle that is the Russian Federation. This was especially a concern when Boris Yeltsin was proving rather incapable of running the show in Moscow. Vladimir Putin arguably reignited the disastrous campaign in Chechnya in order to rally the country around a single nationalist cause. Russian history is full of similar examples of the country's political leaders using the "foreign threat" to their political advantage. It would seem that Turkish politicians have often capitalized on the "PKK-threat" for this same purpose.

Clearly, Russia's voice concerning the PKK-issue is not as potent as it would be for an event related to Armenia or Central Asia. It is quite possible that Russia has already established certain economic ties with the Kurdish government in northern Iraq, which they do not want compromised. Vladimir Putin is apparently scheduled to visit Iran in the very near future. Hopefully, we will gain some greater clarity concerning this rather surprising statement at that time.

Considering the Turkish Economy and the Conditions of its Success

The Turkish economy is currently moving at full throttle. Not since the privatization reforms of the venerable Turgut Özal has there been such a sustained stretch of economic progress. While the average Turk will point to the fact that unemployment, which probably unofficially hovers at 14-16%, remains a sizable dampener to overall well-being, a considerable cross-section of Turkish society would nonetheless agree that the country's economy is enjoying unprecedented prosperity.

Taxi drivers in Istanbul and even the heads of conglomerates will tend to point to the same rationale for this long period of positive growth: the political stability experienced under the AK Party. There is little dispute that Turkey's current period of economic success correlates nicely with the starting date of the AKP's leadership of the Turkish political system. In a country that is accustomed to military coups, hyperinflation and dramatic terrorist attacks, the AKP's tenure has been quite serene by Turkish standards. This point was not lost on the AKP during the July parliamentary election and Abdullah Gül's subsequent successful bid for president. Many Turks voted for the AKP simply due to economic issues and not as a result of the party's much ballyhooed portfolio of social views.

These calm conditions have given foreign investors cause to increasingly reward Turkey with much needed sources of investment. Foreign capital inflows have been quite often directed toward the very large number of government assets, which the AKP has aggressively sought to privatize. The growth of exports have also played a prominent role in the country's economic resurgence. According to the head of the Turkish Congress of Exporters (TIM), Turkey's exports exceeded $100bln during the past 12 months for the first time in the country's history. Exports of automobiles took the lead, followed by clothing and textiles and steel-iron in a distance third.

The numbers would indeed seem to indicate that AK Party is doing something correct. However, "the numbers" only tell a small sliver of the entire story as is often the case. In addition to the AKP's adept management and calming presence, one must also consider certain other factors that have equally contributed to the situation.

There has been a great prevalence of "petrodollars" in the Middle East looking for "shariah-compliant" homes for investment. Under the unprecedented political auspices of the religiously conservative AKP, Turkey emerged as a much more viable option for this capital. In this regard, the Turkish economy of the AKP era has been a direct beneficiary of the oil-crazed world and its oil market. Second, the availability of inexpensive products from China has also had a great influence on the Turkish economy. In addition to increasing the buying power of the Turkish consumer, cheap Chinese products have so far been a benefit to the non-textile sectors of the Turkish economy. This has particularly been the case for the outsourcing of component parts, which are used for goods manufactured in Turkey.

All of this should be reconsidered in the increasingly gloomy shadows cast by the foreign trade deficit, which Turkey currently maintains. In addition to considerable spending in the public sector, Turkey's great affinity for imports is strongly driven by its energy consumption needs. While this situation is more palatable during periods of reliable foreign investment, the continued strength of such inflows is certainly ephemeral.

In the opinion of this observer, it is time for the AKP to stop riding on its somewhat false laurels concerning economic management. The AKP must instead use its strong political mandate to take the types of tough measures, which are necessary to cushion the Turkish economy's inevitable descent into more turbulent economic waters. If the AKP chooses not to take such steps, it will eventually find itself in equally hostile circumstances.

Turkey's Silence On Iran Question

During the past week, the global press has enjoyed a multimedia feast over the comments about Iran made by France's Foreign Affairs Minister, Bernard Kouchner. While these remarks were subsequently tempered by the French President, Nicolas Sarkozy, this week's exchange nonetheless underscores the increasing weight that the Iran-question currently receives in diplomatic and political circles outside of Washington.

The press in Turkey has also been following this story quite closely, which is only natural for a country that borders on the pariah-nation in question. What has particularly puzzled this observer is the general absence of Turkey's political elite in the overall international dialog related to Iran and its potential development of nuclear weapons. While there does seem to have been discussion between Ankara and Washington concerning the Bush Administration's view that Turkey should freeze all trade with Iran, there has been little proactive commentary about the Iranian issue on the behalf of Ankara. Such relative silence on the part of Erdoğan and Gül would seem to be misguided for two main reasons.

Even a limited military attack on Iran would most likely have disastrous effects on the relatively fragile Turkish economy. In addition to losing its direct trade with Iran, the Turkish economy depends on increasing future levels of foreign investment in order continue its positive growth trends during the coming years. Needless to say, investors will be very reluctant to sink meaningful amounts of capital into Turkey if Iran is launching missiles through Turkish airspace as a retaliatory measure.

Moreover, the Turkish economy has come to rely on the flow of natural gas from Iran during the past two decades. A military action against the country would clearly necessitate the cessation of this supply and force Turkey to further rely on Russia for its energy needs.

The second important concern related to Ankara's silence is related to how Turkey views itself as a regional player. The now cliche reference to Turkey functioning as Europe's bridge to the Middle East and Asia would suggest that Turkey is consistently active in the affairs of the region. While Iran and Turkey do have very clear religious and cultural differences, the current drama in Iran would seem to be a perfect opportunity for Turkey to show the world its ability to act as a regional facilitator.

Although this observer does not believe in the practical value of "Camp David-style" political summits, which are meant to reconcile the differences between two foes through a series of photo opportunities, it would seem that Turkey could gain incredibly valuable recognition by demonstrating its ability to play such a role.

Instead, it appears that Turkey is content to remain in the shadows of the West instead of embracing this looming disaster as a potential diplomatic extravaganza. Such opportunities are few and far between. Turkey's unwillingness to seize the initiative in this scenario ultimately communicates a rather petty self-image in regard to its involvement in the region.

Abdullah Gül's Upcoming Constitution Proposals: Looking at the Glass Half-Full

Now that the Turkish upper classes have returned from their sacred beach holidays and cool winds have at last prevailed on the torturous summer temperatures, Turkey watchers are settling in to observe what should prove to be a rather protracted debate. Turkey's man of the hour, Abdullah Gül, will drop his first bomb shell during the next few weeks. The country's secular elite is more than ready to sound the alarm while the ever enigmatic Turkish military bides its time in the shadows prepared to pounce at any moment.

The substance of this impending commotion will be directly related to Gül's plans to reform the Anayasa, which is Turkey's constitutional document. The spirit in which he plans on carrying out these reforms, as well as some of the particulars of his plan, has been neatly outlined an article from this weeks Economist.

Yet the 56-year-old former economist [Gül] hinted at a looser interpretation of Turkey's unique brand of secularism. Until now this has been defined by Ataturk's renunciation of Islamic symbols and rigid state control over all aspects of religious life. Secularism, said Mr Gul, was a precondition for “social peace” but also offered a model “for different lifestyles”. Some seized on his words as proof that he will support loosening restrictions on the headscarf and religious education.

As Mr Gul approved a new pro-EU cabinet this week, another clash loomed over a “civilian” constitution that Mr Erdogan proposes to adopt next year to replace the current text, written by the generals after their last coup in 1980. Draft clauses leaked to the media are nothing short of revolutionary: senior officers will no longer be immune from prosecution in civilian courts, military appeals courts will be scrapped, Kurdish will be taught as a second language in government schools and the definition of Turkishness will be expanded to embrace citizens from different backgrounds and creeds.

Almost all of the issues above strike at the heart of the national psyche and generally define the way any given Turkish citizen perceives their country. The idea of "social peace for different lifestyles" , whether they be ethnic or religious, is an extremely sensitive one. Particularly among pro-secular and prosperous segments of society, there exists a very strong conviction that there is a single secular, Turkish model by which all citizens of Turkey should abide. When the point is made that certain segments of the country's society, such as the Kurds, might have a different orientation toward "their country", a commonly heard refrain is that, "We are all Turkish people and there is no reason why we shouldn't live together in harmony."

From the perspective of this observer, the idea of Gül's initiative to achieve legal tolerance for other lifestyles is extremely attractive in theory. Particularly in the realms of education and freedom for cultural expression (including language), there are many segments of Turkey's population, which are explicitly denied the types of opportunities that one takes for granted in Western Europe. Indeed, one could argue that if these segments of the population, which exercise alternative lifestyles or cultures, were not the victims of a political agenda, they would cease to represent such debilitating political issues.

For example, less than a decade ago it was legally forbidden to speak the Kurdish language in public. Did not the easing of this restriction help relations between Turkey and its largest ethnic minority? Would not the continuation of this trend as proposed by Gül further augment the level of content felt by Turkey's Kurds?

Similarly, scholars have often wondered whether there is a correlation between the traditional campaign waged by the Turkish government against head scarves and the increasing numbers of Turkish women, who choose to wear head scarves as a political statement. Perhaps an easing on this issue would actually diminish the use of the head scarf as a political issue over the longer term.

These would all be positive developments if it is indeed the case that Abdullah Gül's true intention is to make Turkey a more tolerant of its multiple cultures or "lifestyles". However, it remains to be seen whether his real agenda is in fact religious in nature; a near-term goal to make Ataturk's secular nation more tolerant of other persuasions in order to fulfill a long-term goal of becoming the next Iran.

Whatever the intentions of Turkey's new president, it is the sincere hope of this observer that the Turkish military gives Gül the benefit of the doubt in the near-term at the very least. Anything short of such restraint by the military would make a further mockery of the institution of democracy in Turkey.