Turkish and Arab political Islam ‘differ in secularism’

Turkey’s secular system is the main factor that differentiates Turkey from Arab countries in terms of political Islam, according to a former Turkish foreign minister. ‘Had Egyptians endorsed a secular Constitution, they would have been somewhere else,’ says Yaşar Yakış, a former envoy to Cairo

Looking at Egypt, it becomes obvious how Turkey’s secular system has worked as an advantage, according to a former Turkish foreign minister.

The Justice and Development Party (AKP) founders established the party based on the principle that it would not fight the secular system and decided to embrace the majority in Turkey rather than its core pious constituency, said Yaşar Yakış, a career diplomat who also served as ambassador to Cairo.

Had other Islamic movements been inspired by the sociological engineering of the AKP, events could have unfolded differently in the Arab Spring countries, Yakış, a founding member of the AKP, told the Hürriyet Daily News.

What’s your take on developments in Egypt?

Maybe they were inspired by Turkey on the basis of the message that governance is not just about elections. Perhaps they have gone too far. But there is a difference in how Turkey and the world see events in Egypt. The mood in Turkey is as if the army hit the wall, but the world does not have that type of reading.

Let’s go back a bit; what was your assessment of the Arab Spring?

It had to happen. But if you had asked me at that time whether I saw such a possibility, I would not have been able to say yes. The Muslim Brotherhood [MB] had no experience on governance. Perhaps this is behind the current problem. It was unable to satisfy the expectations of those that had initially filled Tahrir Square. There is a tendency in Turkey to evaluate it with general terms. But we need to see the nuances. Some of those who have voted for the MB have probably quit supporting it. But I am also guessing that even between the military intervention and today there must be people switching sides. In Turkey we tend to see it as the country divided between Morsi supporters and Morsi opponents. But there isn’t a situation in Egypt where there are movements with clear cut positions in the political map. The position of the army will determine the developments. [Egyptian General Chief of Staff] al-Sisi probably thinks that if Morsi is reinstated, he will be punished; therefore he will do his utmost to prevent his return.

In this case you would think that Turkey’s initial efforts to have Morsi back are not realistic.

We need to compare the risks facing Morsi and al-Sisi. If al-Sisi loses he might be executed or condemned to life in prison whereas if Morsi loses, the same outcome is not definitely valid for him. Therefore al-Sisi will do whatever it takes to struggle. We are not talking about a struggle between two groups on equal terms. This dimension is overlooked in Turkey.

What do you say about debates on naming it as a coup?

There is no doubt it is a coup. Every country makes its assessment according to national interests. That is valid also for the United States and European countries. I believe Islamophobia was an important factor while they made their assessments.

So the Islamic characteristic of MB has been a disadvantage?

It worked against them because the West is uneasy about seeing political Islam coming to power. In Egypt they are concerned about the Copts [Christians] as well as the security of Israel. In view of the two concerns it doesn’t suit their interest to have the MB in power.

Read more on the Hurriyet Daily News website