Rethinking Turkish Concept in the Balkans and the Turkey's wider region By Jahja Muhasilović

We are witnessing more active Turkish policy in the Balkans in the last few years. Turkey with its new AKP government and with the coming of the foreign relations minister Ahmet Davutoğlu to power is trying to develop a new foreign policy which is trying to position Turkey as a more influential player, and not just in the Balkans, but also in all the neighboring regions.  When it comes to Balkans, Turkey has a problem with changing its image in the region which was for a long time poisoned by nationalistic elite and academia of the region. Not just in political, but also in the academic circles, Ottoman history was perceived in a very subjective manner.  This generated hatred and untruthfulness toward the Turks in the region which has its deep roots going back to middle ages. Ottoman period of history is still seen as a main obstacle in development of the region by many today. For the nationalist historiography which still is influential in the region's nation-states, Ottomans are those who are guilty of isolating the Balkans from the European scientific rebirth in the Renaissance period. Seeing its past and its role in the region in a negative way is making Turkish efforts much harder. Some observers may think that Turkey with its institutions and new tone in foreign policy is succeeding in changing this negative image.  But It could be a matter of discussion how successful was Turkey in the last few years in this ''changing process''. Maybe even better question would be, did Turkey take the right path or the best way in addressing these issues.

What model Turkey can offer to hostile environment in the Balkans and does Turkey need something new to offer to all these areas where they want to spread its influence? It seems that Turkey's Kemalist state ideology which had some changes through the last decades was and is not enough and adequate for spreading its power outside the country's borders. This old secularism-nationalism combined state ideology which in its early development years maybe was a logical step is not fitting the Turkish dynamism and its ambitions of building the soft power any more. With the dissolution of the Ottoman Empire and in the times of formation of the Republic, forming nation-states was a  global trend and it seemed as the only logical solution for the making of a new state out of the ruins of an ending Empire. Today Turkey has to reshape its model which is unacceptable to those outside country's borders. In my opinion as much as a certain state ideology can include and absorb the differences, it makes the ideology and the state, the carrier of that ideology, more ready to spread and reach the others outside its own entity in order of becoming a great state. Let's analyze the American model as an example which seems as the most influential and among the most successful models in whole world in modern times. One of the reasons why American model is acceptable for those who are not American or even to say almost to the  whole world, is exactly because it so flexible that it could include someone who is totally different from an ordinary American. With few unofficial rules they made a model so attractive to many. For example someone who is not Caucasian, Christian and not form an English speaking background, with few certain qualities can become part of an American nation. It could be matter of discussion how well would society accept him, but what is certain is that American model even for those with asymmetrically different backgrounds then Anglophone-Caucasian-Christian background is open to include and assimilate. Even with its pretty much new history and culture, this possibility of including and reaching those who are not the same like ordinary Americans and power of Americanizing them is maybe the main reason why US is still number one in the world from the aspect of cultural influence. But is it the case with Turkish model and what should be done to build more cosmopolitan model which could have success in the multireligious and multiethnic and in the same time hostile environment towards Turks like the Balkans?

Of course it would be madness to try to impose American system on Turkey, because every region and state has its specific background and region with certain logical developments despite how globalization and global culture and values are developed in the modern times. Ottomans in the past well understood the importance of cosmopolitism. This understanding had its influence to all spheres of the Ottoman civilization. Good example for seeing this clearly is the example of organization of agricultural and taxing system throughout the empire. Flexible rule philosophy affected even this segment of the empire. Ottomans never became a Timar empire all over its territory, but it was a flexible empire which was open for differences in areas they conquered, ready to absorb these differences and enrich its own culture. So this is one of the important reasons it could rule for a very long time distant and different areas under the colourful Ottoman umbrella without doing many changes in its own ruling model and making drastic changes in some areas with specific environment and background. They developed many parallel systems under one sophisticated system of ruling which they brought to the three continents. This is what is called Pax Ottomana. So can Turkey develop some kind of new Pax Turcicum in the Balkans and its wider region?

To the outside viewer Turkey looks like a country of all seasons. This means that Turkish policy is not clear whether it is Kemalist or New Ottoman, Islamist or Secular, European, or Middle Eastern and there are also many other contradictions in its society's identity. It is true that Turkish society has all these dimensions, but what Turkey is really standing for is still not clear I think even to those running the country. Being the country of all seasons has its risks. We witnessed through the past that almost all new governments that came to power were changing the seasons. They were picking one of these dimensions and were trying to colour all other dimensions with the picked colour. This act was reason for many clashes and disunity in the Turkish society in the past. It is exactly that what happened to country in the past still is happening and we don't have any guarantee that it would not happen again in the future. Knowing Turkish political reality through the past, gives us some suspicion that all these reforms and changes accomplished by AKP government in the last decade, could one day be reversed when some other party with different ideological background comes to power. We are very far from having an assurance that one day some other party would not try to reshape country in a drastic other way. So defining what is country's ideological platform and priorities would be one of the fundamental questions from the aspect of Turkey making in a way of becoming a regional power. Other regional players are also asking this question about Turkey. What is Turkey really standing for and do people who run the country know exactly what they are doing?

Analyzing Turkey's logical path in the future it could take, it seems that replacing an outdated model is the next logical step that should be taken. For a long time inside Turkey there were big problems because of not being flexible in that sense. Model built on Turkish Nationalism and Secularism posed the questions not just abroad but even to many in Turkey itself. Big percentage of the country's population didn't identify itself with the ruling ideology in the past. Ruling elite had to back its power using army because of being a minority and this opened its way to many military coups. Not defining the idea which would be acceptable to big majority of the population maybe is the main reason for clashes today and those that we see in the Republic's past. Best example for this would be the Kurdish question. Large numbers of those who are Kurdish by ethnicity do not see themselves as a part of a Turkish nation. If language is taken as a base for national identity, not seeing them as a part of Turkish nation is natural for someone whose native language is closer to Persian than it is to Turkish, which here is the case with the Kurdish language. Especially when it comes to rude treatment and forcing those populations to change their identity in the past, it rises questions how much effort should be exerted to erase the bad experience and legacy of pressure from the past, which is still alive among the Kurds as a part of historical memory, for the sake of country's secure future and continuing its path as a whole country, avoiding the fragmentation along the ethnic lines. Wrong idea that led the country made many enemies within Turkey, and that is one of the main destabilizers and obstacles in the country's way of becoming a regional power. Interior instability is creating too much hardship for Turks to concentrate on foreign issues and makes it more vulnerable to outside influences. The same applies for those whose political orientation is not secularism, but Islamism and vice versa. There were clashes between secular and religious groups throughout the Turkish history and voice of the religious segment of population was for a very long time suppressed by the army sponsored secular regime. Last few elections showed that in Turkey number of those people is not small. We are witnessing the dominance of an Islamist party in Turkish political scene in the last decade and making of a new religious elite.  So is Turkey becoming an Islamist country and is that the right choice for the country's future would be next logical question. Is this last government's model ready to include and reach out to people in the region? How cosmopolitan are the Turkey's Islamists? These questions are waiting for the Turkey's new ruling elite to deal with. Characteristics of inclusiveness are becoming more important especially when it comes to the Balkans. Here Turkey is entering generally a hostile region towards its culture and history. So making a new cosmopolitan model in which ordinary Balkan Orthodox peasant would not see Turkey as some kind of a rising Islamic Empire and would accept its influence is hard work to be done, but certainly it is a need.

All of Turkey's current political and social dimensions seem as unacceptable to many in the Balkans. Turkish Islamism is not more acceptable than Turkey's nationalism. Turkey's nationalism would be a catastrophe for the country's Balkans ambitions. At least it could have a potential for the first time to unite other Balkans' nationalisms against ''growing threat'' of foreign nationalism. Even Turkey's European dream is by many seen as a threat. So what model should be built at least in order not to be threat anymore for the others is the question that should be asked very openly in the Turkish academic and political circles and must include some brain work by the country's decision making institutions. Fundamental question for the country entering the big powers' club is what path it will take in the future.

Note: All the rights are preserved by the author of this text. Everyone who would like to take quotation from the text should ask for the permission from this email address: jahjam87@windowslive.com