The situation in the Middle East: Win-win or lose-lose?

It is true that the new Middle East process Turkey suggested especially for Syria and Iraq is a human-centric strategy that will introduce a win-win situation for the West, Israel and countries in the Middle East. Turkey is a secular and a Muslim country that dissents with the U.S. and Israel on some crucial issues, although it is not categorically hostile to them. With this peculiarity, Turkey has a key role as it manages to have relations with both the Middle East and the West and has the facilities to reconcile the declining relations. In this sense, the efforts to limit Turkey instead of benefiting from its potential mean wasting a great opportunity.

The cost of keeping Turkey in a position that could make its economy and foreign politics controlled remotely and subjugating the country is a higher priority than cooperating with the country by establishing equal relations with it and it is urgent to see that the former will not favor anyone. Turkey is gradually adopting a form of established democracy that objects to Islamophobia, anti-Semitism, anti-Western and anti-U.S. attitudes and the colonialist perspective in the Middle East. While improving its economy, it also embraces social segments aggrieved and marginalized by authoritarian Kemalism. The billions of lira of properties belonging to Christian and Jewish foundations, which were once plundered by the secular Kemalists, were returned. The schools that were shut down are now being reopened and churches are being restored. Kurds can freely speak and learn their own language now.

Although Turkey is subjected to double standards in terms of the Cyprus issue and EU membership, it still preserves its perspective of progress in both subjects. A statement of condolence was issued by the Prime Ministry on the 1915 Armenian deportation. This message might not satisfy Armenians, but as the denial policies and the troubles Armenians had are considered, the state's perspective on the issue can be said to have changed to a great extent. In all these subjects, Turkey has progressed so far that a comparison between the current Turkey and the Turkey of 10 years ago is like comparing black and white.

The passivity shown by former Turkish governments, which considered the laws imposed by the International Monetary Fund as a command during the 2001 crisis, cannot be expected now from such a successful country in an intellectual and economic development process. This is neither fair nor realistic. When the Syrian civil war broke out, Turkey's government, Prime Ministry and Foreign Ministry made a great effort to deter Damascus from this catastrophic path. During that period, U.S. President Barack Obama said Bashar Assad would have to leave his seat and Turkey was suppressed due to its conciliation efforts. The original plan of the U.S. included supporting the moderate opposition in Syria. Turkey, on the other hand, was suggesting ways to prevent this war through democratic reforms by persuading Assad. One of the three suggestions Turkey made was recognizing Kurds as citizens and granting their rights to them.

And now, the group called the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham (ISIS) has asserted domination over both countries. The moderate opposition was undermined and most of them joined ISIS with their arms. Upon that, Turkey is being charged as if the aid sent to opponents was actually sent to ISIS. The U.S. government is trying to lay this tactical mistake on Turkey in front of both the U.S. and the rest of the world. The U.S. cannot go beyond airstrikes reminiscent of a palliative PR campaign and also expects Turkey to intervene in Syria to be trapped in this mess by ignoring Turkey's comprehensive offers of a solution. aTurkey does not seem to accept this imposition. But evidently, everyone would be harmed from it. The most sensible thing is to agree on a common strategy. The other options would only pave the way to chaos.