The greatest threat to the Islamic Revolution since its inception?

How Iran Really Sees Turkey – By Mohammad Ayatollahi Tabaar | The Middle East Channel

Then came the Arab Spring, which according to Iran, is a misnomer: not Arab, but rather Islamic; not a spring, but like the Islamic Revolution in Iran, permanent. For Iran’s Leader Ayatollah Khamenei, the Arab Spring is in fact an “Islamic awakening,” the flowering of seeds that were sown three decades earlier by the Iranian Revolution of 1979. According to Khamanei, the uprisings signal the time for Iran to enter the scene as Muslims rise up to kick out one Western puppet after another.

But it was Turkey, not Iran, which seized the moment. Tehran watched in horror as Erdogan was received rapturously during his post-revolution trips to Arab countries. His advocacy of the “secular” model of government, which respected Islam set off alarm bells not just in Iran’s political capital, Tehran, but also in the religious city of Qom. Both the political and religious establishments in Iran protested. Even “moderate” ayatollahs attacked Turkey’s “liberal” and “Western” interpretations of Islam and warned that Iran had fallen behind Turkey in the region. Their voices were initially louder than the voices of Tehran’s government officials.  

What sent Iran over the edge was Turkey’s shift on Syria. Prime Minister Erdogan went from being a good friend of President Bashar al-Assad, to telling him to either reform or he would soon be ousted. Turkey has hosted conferences for the Syrian opposition and is now reportedly sheltering anti-regime fighters. In response, Tehran sent several messages to Ankara, making it clear that Syria is its “redline,” and warned Erdogan not to cross it by backing the anti-Assad opposition. Turkey did not heed Iran’s warning. Instead it announced that it would install NATO’s radar system, which is said to be a shield again Iran’s ballistic missiles, in Turkish territory. Iran’s tone then became more aggressive and even threatening. President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and other political and military officials warned that Iran would be forced to respond accordingly since the NATO radar system is to protect its enemies.

Conservative columnists then opened fire. They criticized Turkey for being a Sunni dictatorship that did not represent the other “50 percent of Turkey’s population,” meaning the Alevis and the Kurds. However, they failed to mention that Iran and Turkey are closely cooperating over the challenges posed by their Kurdish minorities. These commentators, who usually voice trends within Iran’s establishment, implicitly warned that Turkey should be aware that it could easily become unstable. Conservative media close to the office of the Supreme Leader argued that Shiite Alevis, who consists of “27 percent” of the population crave for Ankara to move closer to Tehran and Damascus, while Turkey’s Kurds are angry at the “brutality” of the Turkish army. Pointing to Turkey’s fault lines, they added that its people yearn for the implementation of Islamic law, but that the AKP has only provided them with a “veneer of Islamism.” Moreover, Turkey, unlike Iran and Egypt, lacks a long tradition of jurisprudential scholarship and therefore it does not have nearly the intellectual strength to lead the Islamic world. Last but not least, the Arabs cannot forget the “bitter” memories of the Ottoman period. Thus, Ankara’s euphoric moment cannot last since the new Egypt will once again reassert itself and balance Turkey.

The new Iranian narrative now fingers Turkey as part of a bigger U.S.-Israel-Saudi plot to derail the new wave of Islamic awakening. Since the United States is losing its puppets (Mubarak, Ben Ali, etc.) in the region, it has decided to use the Turkish model as a damage control measure. The AKP is also a new tool the United States would like to use for its regime change policy in Iran after the failure of the Green Movement in 2009, the argument continues. This is a sensitive point to make, however. The Iranian government is aware of the ideological affinity between Iran’s reformist opposition and the AKP. Although they were born in diametrically opposed political systems, both strive to strike a balance between Islam and democracy. Iranian leaders fear that the AKP may inflict a similar damage to their legitimacy as the Iranian reform movement has. They acknowledge that the reformists, although defeated for now, managed to crack the heart of the establishment and bring many die-hard supporters of the regime to their side or neutralize them. Now, the AKP could create a similar legitimacy crisis for the Islamic government on a regional level, weakening Iran’s soft power and undermining its popularity in the Muslim world.

There was a time when Iran would rely on its revolutionary ideology to project power. The Islamic government now finds itself relying on using its power to project ideology, to prove its revolution was right, and to demonstrate its message was just. In a recent speech, Ayatollah Khamenei claimed that the world is entering a “historic turn,” in which the Islamic Republic should be the model for all countries on earth. But that could become a cruel prophecy indeed if the model they were looking for turns out to be Turkish.

9 comments on “The greatest threat to the Islamic Revolution since its inception?

Commenting at CK MacLeod's

We are determined to encourage thoughtful discussion, so please be respectful to others. We also provide a set of Commenting Options - comment/commenter highlighting and ignoring, and commenter archives that you can access by clicking the commenter options button (). Go to our Commenting Guidelines page for more details, including how to report offensive and spam commenting.

  1. Of course, Turkey didn’t really “seize the moment” and dithered more than it should have, but indeed Turkey is growing more influential while Iran is faaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaading away.

    • Maybe it dithered, or maybe the dithering will in retrospect look like a minor episode during an extended and uncertain transition phase.

      All the same, it’s somewhat amusing to think that from Iran’s perspective Turkey has become an instrument of US strategy, while from the the rightwing perspective the rise of Turkey reflects an abject failure of US leadership before the Islamic threat.

      I think the former is probably closer to the truth than the latter, though really there’s little or nothing we could or should have been doing much differently.

  2. No, the Taliban and the Pasdaran ruling clique, represent two sides of the sectarian extremes, the latter nominally had contacts with the Northern Alliance, we can’t have either one win,

  3. CK MacLeod: though really there’s little or nothing we could or should have been doing much differently.

    what could have been done differently was to have not shut Turkey out of the EU….because it was rebuffed so thoroughly,,, me and my Pal Jenny are certain that the Turks are now hell-bent on the reacquisition of Greece and all its riches.

    • By “we” I meant US. Though if we had gone on a public campaign to get Turkey in the EU, it would at least have had the virtue of dismaying the Islamophobes. But it probably would have been counterproductive overall.

      It Turkey gets too uppity, Greece can hire Gloria Allred, assuming it can afford her fees or that she’ll take the case on spec.

      • Clinton and Bush both pushed Turkey into the EU……

        U.S. played a similarly critical role in the outcome of the EU Council’s Helsinki summit in December 1999, vvhich formally recognized Turkey’s candidacy for full membership. Washington had strongly disapproved the EU’s decision in Luxembourg tvvo years earlier, vvhich excluded Turkey from the list of formal candidates for eventual membership. In 1999, the Clinton administration exerted considerable pressure through both formal and informal channels, including telephone calls by President Clinton to European leaders, for a reversal of that decision.

        prior to the EU summit meeting in Copenhagen in December 12, 2002, the U.S. once again launched a majör campaign to advance Turkey’s prospects for entry into the EU. When President Bush met the leader of the Justice and Development Party, Tayyip Erdoğan, at the White House on December 11, he reaffirmed Washington’s support for Turkey and declared that the U.S. “stands side by side vvith Ankara in its bid to join the European Union.”2 Bush also made several phone calls to European leaders vvhile the U.S. Secretary of State Colin Povvell urged his European counterparts to set a date for the start of accession talks for Turkish membership.

        Allred can take her turn at bat with the Greek thing soon enough……

  4. No, the Social Welfare Party was bubbling up in the mid 90s, when Erbakan first took power, in the after math of Tansu Ciller, hard to believe there was a time people wanted to join the EU, sort of like Studio 54 in the late 70s.

Commenter Ignore Button by CK's Plug-Ins

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *