csteele

I am not defending the lack of freedom in Singapore. I am simply pointing out that you cannot compare a city-state like Singapore run along the lines of Singapore Inc to a big sprawling country like Turkey.

Nor am I defending the Shah. I simply pointed out that when he went so did the entrepreneurs. Is the present dictator (Khameini) really an improvement on the Shah?

The thrust of my post is this:

Turkey it a huge success story. Will the present Islamist government derail that success?

I don't know the answer. I cannot tell the future. All I can say is that some of the auguries are ominous.

Perhaps, as you say, Islamists and secularists will find a way of co-existing in Turkey. And, then again, perhaps not. In the end I guess it depends on whether the AKP (Islamist) party currently in power allows genuinely free and fair elections. However given the amount of self-censorship in the Turkish media it is difficult to see how this can happen.

From a recent Amnesty International report on Turkey:

"Hrant Dink's case is not an exception. Many in Turkey continue to be prosecuted for the peaceful expression of their non-violent opinions. This is due both to the existence of flawed legislation and the arbitrary implementation of the law by judges and prosecutors."

Hrant Dink was repeatedly prosecuted under Article 301 of the Turkish Penal Code that criminalizes “denigrating Turkishness”. Amnesty International has continually called for Article 301 to be abolished on the grounds that it poses a grave threat to freedom of expression, as it is worded in such broad and vague terms. Amnesty International is concerned that the number of cases opened under this article appears to have increased in 2007. The organization notes that in the past year, violations of human rights increased and measures to combat them remained insufficient.

See: http://www.amnesty.org/en/for-media/press-releases/turkey-reveal-full-circumstances-surrounding-hrant-dink039s-murder-20080

csteele, it would be arguable how well Israel's holding together of various annexed provinces actually is, and it doesn't make it right- holding together just may easily mean the other groups got subjugated enough not to kick up too much of a fuss worthy of a news report.

And seeing as there is a good contrast between the secular and not-so secular peoples across Turkey, I don't think it's fair for either to be forced to comply with the wishes of the other (though I do not hide that I'm personally more concerned about the plight of the secular side).

As for US protecting whomever reinforces their interests more- precisely! Sadly their sole interest seems to be toadying up to a certain few key oil-rich gulf states.

Um, how does anyone manage to compare Israel to Turkey? Turkey subjugates 15 million Kurds daily, undertakes joint military action against its neighbour, an autonomous province (which is technically & legally under the protection of the UN) with its ally Iran. Such action being directed deliberately at destroying the civilian population.

This after the Armenian Genocide (in which at least 1M people died)?

Yet the world media really doesn't care?

Yes, the only real difference is that the US and Israel aren't involved, otherwise the killing of so many civilians would be front page news daily.

Yes, neither Israel or America have to make any overt action to destroy Turkey, the investors are pulling out in droves (cannot imagine why, fundamentalist islam has such a good record of working with capitalists, at least where oil is not involved) and it is rapidly falling into the third world.

That is where the mullahs prefer countries to be, it makes it easier for them to keep their communities in the 12th Century.

As to Turkey's having the fourth largest army in the world, it is equipped with high-tech American/Israeli equipment. I cannot imagine parts are going to be all that easy to find.

Fair points Custard- though I may point out a typo that should say Americans get along with fundamentalist Islamists when oil IS involved, if a glance at their/our "allies" on the Arabian peninsula are anything to go by.

And there most definitely would be an active push to cut off business links between Turkey and the West by fundamentalists, based on the reasons you described (along with obtaining better monopolies among other Middle-Eastern countries and companies no longer needing to compete with Europe. Not to mention Gadaffi's and various Islamic scholar's "trojan horse" story that gets ciruclated around. I sincerely believe at least half are doing it to distance Western allies/trading/VISA partners and try to drag Turkey into their world instead (some I reckon sincerely believe and endorse the trojan horse idea).

There are comparisons one can make between Israel and Turkey. Both countries are more democratic than any other countries in the Middle East. Both countries have a population with a sizable well-educated socially-aware group and a sizeable rigid fundamentalist group.

They are more like each other in those respects than either are like any other countries in the Middle East.

VERY true that, David F.