Tweet
TURKEY "LESS DANGEROUS" FOR USA THAN PAKISTAN
La Stampa, Itali
Oct 24 2007
Commentary by Loretta Napoleoni:
"Karachi and Istanbul, Dual Challenge"
The United States is having to reckon with two Muslim countries which
are plagued by terrorism, and which are jeopardizing the precarious
global balance. Turkey is openly defying it, and is threatening to
attack Iraqi Kurdistan, in order to crush what they see as a maggot,
the PKK. Pakistan is doing the opposite: in order to curb the violent
advance of Islamic fundamentalism, it has brought back, with the
blessing of the United States, Benazir Bhutto, whose government was
marked by rampant corruption, uncontrolled growth in the public debt,
an arms race, and the near collapse of its banks. In both countries,
the role of the military is a safety valve for the young recruits
who find in the army a privileged caste.
But whereas in Turkey the army stays in the barracks, in Pakistan it
is in power. Both countries are undergoing an economic rebirth linked
to globalization: foreign investments in energy, telecommunications,
and agriculture (Turkey and Pakistan are major producers of cotton,
which China is hungry for). But whereas in Turkey the redistribution of
incomes makes it easier for the middle classes and lower-middle classes
to have access to a share in the new wealth, in Pakistan the economic
rebirth is lining the pockets of the old, corrupt, large land-owning
elites. Alarming figures describe a very poor country, where more than
half of the 170 million inhabitants live on less than a dollar a day,
and where illiteracy is rife - in Waziristan, the tribal area where Bin
Ladin and Mullah Omar reside, it is sometimes as high as 85 per cent.
The profound difference between the countries is to be looked for
in the differing nature of the elites in power, and not in their
geographical proximity to the West. Turkey has a strong nationalist
identity, led by a political class which is aware of this situation.
Pakistan is a nation which was born from the religious separation
between Muslims and Hindus, a tribal country, led by corrupt elites
who only pursue their own interests. In the aftermath of her arrival,
Bhutto attacked Musharraf, who is technically her ally, using the
blood of her followers to promote herself beneath the banner of
democracy. But it is a democracy which is fictional and feudal, and
corrupt. The Financial Times has recalled that in Switzerland a judge,
Fournier, will over the next few days make public the investigation
into money-laundering by Bhutto and her husband, known as Mr 10
per cent, owing to the kickbacks he used to demand when his wife was
prime minister: 13 million dollars are frozen in their Swiss accounts,
revenue from kickbacks paid out in the 1990s by Swiss firms.
Turkey and Pakistan are also Muslim countries where the Islamic thrust
is strong. In Turkey the moderates have managed to hold this movement
in check, and have kept the terrorism of Islamic fundamentalism at
bay. In Pakistan the radical Islamic movement has become an opposition
force against the military and the corrupt elites who are followers
of Bhutto and her rival, former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, the
head of Pakistan's Muslim League. This polarization perpetuates
their reliance on the coffers of economic aid from Washington, the
only major arbiter in the political contest in Pakistan. By contrast,
Turkey disdains the United States, which has betrayed it in Iraq, and
which has humiliated it with the accusation of the massacre of the
Armenians. Turkey's elites are challenging the superpower because,
backed up by their national identity, they have built economic ties
with the new, large powers on the rise via strategic accords, foremost
among which is the accord on economic cooperation in the Black Sea,
an alliance between Turkey, Russia, China, and the countries of central
Asia, which, to all intents and purposes, is aimed at excluding Europe
and the United States from the Black Sea.
Paradoxically, Turkey's defiance against the United States is a sign
of internal stability and geopolitical certainties, and thus is less
dangerous than the docility of Pakistan.
Translated from Italian
La Stampa, Itali
Oct 24 2007
Commentary by Loretta Napoleoni:
"Karachi and Istanbul, Dual Challenge"
The United States is having to reckon with two Muslim countries which
are plagued by terrorism, and which are jeopardizing the precarious
global balance. Turkey is openly defying it, and is threatening to
attack Iraqi Kurdistan, in order to crush what they see as a maggot,
the PKK. Pakistan is doing the opposite: in order to curb the violent
advance of Islamic fundamentalism, it has brought back, with the
blessing of the United States, Benazir Bhutto, whose government was
marked by rampant corruption, uncontrolled growth in the public debt,
an arms race, and the near collapse of its banks. In both countries,
the role of the military is a safety valve for the young recruits
who find in the army a privileged caste.
But whereas in Turkey the army stays in the barracks, in Pakistan it
is in power. Both countries are undergoing an economic rebirth linked
to globalization: foreign investments in energy, telecommunications,
and agriculture (Turkey and Pakistan are major producers of cotton,
which China is hungry for). But whereas in Turkey the redistribution of
incomes makes it easier for the middle classes and lower-middle classes
to have access to a share in the new wealth, in Pakistan the economic
rebirth is lining the pockets of the old, corrupt, large land-owning
elites. Alarming figures describe a very poor country, where more than
half of the 170 million inhabitants live on less than a dollar a day,
and where illiteracy is rife - in Waziristan, the tribal area where Bin
Ladin and Mullah Omar reside, it is sometimes as high as 85 per cent.
The profound difference between the countries is to be looked for
in the differing nature of the elites in power, and not in their
geographical proximity to the West. Turkey has a strong nationalist
identity, led by a political class which is aware of this situation.
Pakistan is a nation which was born from the religious separation
between Muslims and Hindus, a tribal country, led by corrupt elites
who only pursue their own interests. In the aftermath of her arrival,
Bhutto attacked Musharraf, who is technically her ally, using the
blood of her followers to promote herself beneath the banner of
democracy. But it is a democracy which is fictional and feudal, and
corrupt. The Financial Times has recalled that in Switzerland a judge,
Fournier, will over the next few days make public the investigation
into money-laundering by Bhutto and her husband, known as Mr 10
per cent, owing to the kickbacks he used to demand when his wife was
prime minister: 13 million dollars are frozen in their Swiss accounts,
revenue from kickbacks paid out in the 1990s by Swiss firms.
Turkey and Pakistan are also Muslim countries where the Islamic thrust
is strong. In Turkey the moderates have managed to hold this movement
in check, and have kept the terrorism of Islamic fundamentalism at
bay. In Pakistan the radical Islamic movement has become an opposition
force against the military and the corrupt elites who are followers
of Bhutto and her rival, former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, the
head of Pakistan's Muslim League. This polarization perpetuates
their reliance on the coffers of economic aid from Washington, the
only major arbiter in the political contest in Pakistan. By contrast,
Turkey disdains the United States, which has betrayed it in Iraq, and
which has humiliated it with the accusation of the massacre of the
Armenians. Turkey's elites are challenging the superpower because,
backed up by their national identity, they have built economic ties
with the new, large powers on the rise via strategic accords, foremost
among which is the accord on economic cooperation in the Black Sea,
an alliance between Turkey, Russia, China, and the countries of central
Asia, which, to all intents and purposes, is aimed at excluding Europe
and the United States from the Black Sea.
Paradoxically, Turkey's defiance against the United States is a sign
of internal stability and geopolitical certainties, and thus is less
dangerous than the docility of Pakistan.
Translated from Italian