Turkey

on the World Today

FOR six centuries the Turks have had many experiences as an ally of various European countries. Since Peter the Great, two hundred years ago, every alliance has been made as a defense against Russian aggression. In 1939 the British-French-Turkish alliance was signed immediately after the HitlerStalin treaty was announced.

When Russia became an ally of Britain, Turkey became uneasy, recalling that in the First World War Britain had agreed that Russia should possess the Turkish Straits. Russia was now in a position to renew the demand.

When Mr. Churchill began criticizing Turkey sharply for not engaging in hostilities, under conditions which not only had not been provided for in the treaty of alliance but would have been disastrous for Turkey and probably for the Allied cause, the Turks became alarmed. Their alarm increased when the Russian influence in Washington and London became apparent, when the American President and British Prime Minister ceded Eastern Europe and Manchuria to Stalin on a pretext which the Turks believed, and still believe, was unjustified, and when Mr. Churchill threatened to support Stalin’s demands on Turkey.

Stalin had informed the Turks that his nonaggression pact with them, due for renewal in 1945, would not be renewed unless they ceded the Eastern Provinces and a partnership in the Straits. But Ankara reacted differently from Washington and London. The answer was no.

Actually the British-French-Turkish alliance of 1939 is still in effect, and theoretically should serve as Turkey’s link with the West, but the Turkish desire to join the Atlantic Pact reflects a lack of confidence in the old alliance. One of the provisions of that treaty was that Britain and France would furnish Turkey certain military equipment without which she would be unable to fight a modern army, and would not be expected to unless attacked. Then the war started, France was quickly knocked out, the British were hard pressed at home and in North Africa, and there was no equipment for Turkey.

Later the United States sent equipment to Turkey under a Lend-Lease agreement, but it passed through British hands, and a large part was kept by them for their own use. As a military emergency this could be understood, but when the British, at Stalin’s instigation, tried to use this control over equipment coming from the United States as a lever to force Turkey into the shooting war, the Turks took a different view of the matter.

The Turks believe the British would try to use the same or any other tool that might become available to them to force Turkish support of British projects in the Middle East. For this reason British insistence on setting up an Eastern Mediterranean Defense Organization, independent of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, has little appeal for the Turks. In it they see a Britain interested in extending her influence in the Middle East rather than in supporting the spirit of the Atlantic Pact.

The Turks may be expected to lean over backwards to avoid being used by the British, and they will insist on eliminating Britain as the middleman in handling American supplies for Turkey.

The Turks recognize that their mechanized army has its roots in the United States and that it must be nourished from there if it is to be effective. This is the kernel of their desire to be a member of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.

They also realize that the problem of getting essential munitions to them would be difficult, but they recall that the Chinese received supplies “over the hump” under more difficult circumstances, and that a supply route was opened from the Persian Gulf to the Caspian Sea to supply Russia. They believe their strength and their will to oppose the common enemy justify making the effort to supply them.

The Arab-Israeli war

As a result of past associations and common religion it was generally expected in foreign circles that the Turks would show strong sympathy for the Arabs when the State of Israel was set up in their midst and hundreds of thousands of Arabs were driven from their homes into the desert. But this sympathy did not develop to any marked degree.

Turkish reaction to this event can be summed up as follows: disillusionment that the long-publicized American ideals, which Asiatics had come to believe in largely as a result of the American record in the Philippines, had turned out to be a myth; bewilderment that any responsible government, in the present world situation, should deliberately destroy the high prestige of itself and its people among Asiatics generally, and Moslems in particular, to satisfy the political ambitions of a few Zionists; fear that the State of Israel is a political cancer that will further weaken an already sick world.

The inability of the Arabs to unite to oppose the Jews in Palestine confirmed the Turkish opinion that the Arabs are inherently incapable of united action in any common cause and that a united Arabia to oppose Soviet aggression must not be expected, no matter who assumes the leadership. This does not mean that they cannot unite their hate against a people which, they believe, has deliberately wronged them. That they can do this is seen in their attitude towards Americans today.

Thoughtful Turks fear that Arab antipathy towards the West may cause the mob, supported by Soviet agents, to overthrow any government that may try to come to a peaceful settlement on current issues. They also fear that chaos, with social revolution, may result and that the Israelis will contribute to the disorder to insure themselves against any possible united Arab action and to facilitate extending their borders further into Arab territory.

This Turkish view of the situation is not only without any noticeable pro-Arab sentiment, but also without any anti-Semitism. In the Middle Ages, when the Spanish Inquisition was in full cry, the Turks not only welcomed the persecuted but sent ships to Spain to bring out some 150,000 Jews who were given homes in Turkey. These Jews are the only minority group in Turkey that has never conspired against the Turks, so that one finds no anti-Semitism there.

The suggestion that Turkey should interest herself in Arab affairs, with a view to becoming a stabilizing influence in the Middle East, has been recurring from time to time since the war. In this the Turks see the hand of foreign interests endeavoring to enlist them as a police force to safeguard interests that are neither Arab nor Turkish nor United Nations.

With the British trying to hold on to their old privileges in that area, with the American government building up Israel through power politics in the United Nations and by means of substantial financial support, with Arab hostility spreading throughout Asia, and with Soviet agents everywhere present to pour oil on the fire, Turkey is unlikely to commit suicide by jumping into the developing chaos.

Turkey as a partner

The readiness with which the Turks joined the American-British-French proposal to Egypt for a Middle East Defense Command to replace the British-Hgyptian treaty should not be interpreted as an assumption of leadership in that area. They gave their support to that proposal as a measure for checking Soviet aggression there, in the same spirit in which they sent troops to support United Nations forces in Korea.

Until 1923 the Turks were as completely dominated by the West as were the Egyptians, Iranians, Chinese, and all other Asiatics, except Japan. At the Lausanne Conference they threw off the Western yoke, and during the intervening twenty-eight years of freedom they have made phenomenal strides in political, cultural, and economic fields.

During these few years they have overcome the feeling of inferiority that comes naturally from centuries of domination by others. Recognizing that the freer peoples of the West had made greater progress towards civilization, they turned unhesitatingly in that direction.

Now, with a vitality that comes from their newly won freedom, with an appreciation of what the West has to offer, and with sincere sympathy for the Asiatic peoples, the Turks occupy a unique position in a troubled world. Their advice should be as valuable to the dominating West as to rebellious Asia.

Democracy in Turkey

In Turkey democracy is new, the people are undisciplined in its use, and their reactions are unpredictable. The newly organized Democratic Party that came to office in May, 1950, had no serious expectation of winning the election, and therefore felt free to follow the old American custom of promising the electorate more than it could possibly deliver.

Although the country has been straining every sinew for years, standing by to defend themselves against an enemy whose population and resources are many times greater than theirs, the parly platform provided for lowering the cost of living. The chief measure to be used in accomplishing this was to change the economic system from statism to private enterprise.

Under the Sultans and the Capitulations practically all business and industry had been in the hands of foreigners. When this system was abolished by the Republican Government the country was without adequate private capital or trained personnel to take over the economic development. This forced the government into business, thereby producing a formidable bureaucracy which, in time, came to be recognized as a serious obstacle to further progress.

Like government enterprises everywhere, most of those in Turkey operate in the red. Although the weakness of the system has become obvious to nearly everybody outside the bureaucracy itself, the magnitude of the task of changing it has proved colossal. The government would sell their textile, paper, cement, sugar, and other industries to private groups, but what little private capital there is does not dare to take the risk as long as the present laws and the well-entrenched bureaucracy are in existence.

The government has discovered that it cannot revolutionize the economic system by the mere passage of a sweeping law, but that there must be a gradual change, with the government making separate agreements with any private groups, either Turkish or combined Turkish and foreign, that may wish to purchase existing industries or to start new ones.

Rarely does one find a Turk who says the Democratic Party has improved living conditions. The man in the street is no better off than he was before the election. In view of the effort being made in the field of national defense he could hardly expect to be, but it was promised, and he voted for it, and the question now arises, how much patience will he have?