Turkey leads the Muslim world

Ankara has healed relations with and between its neighbours. But it cannot bring itself to be diplomatic with Israel

This week’s visit to Iran by the Turkish prime minister, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, is to be warmly welcomed. Turkey is playing a highly positive new role in the Middle East. It seeks to be a conciliator, a mediator, a peacemaker. Reaching out to Iran is an ideal way for it to play this role.

Turkish leaders have spent several years pursuing a goal they call “zero problems with neighbours“. They have been highly successful. Turkey is on good terms with Greece, Bulgaria and Iraq. As for Syria, with which it almost went to war a decade ago, visa requirements have been abolished, and foreign minister Ahmet Davutoğlu asserted in Aleppo earlier this month that the two countries share “a joint destiny, a joint history and a joint future”. This came just days after Turkey’s highly promising breakthrough with Armenia, under which their border is to be reopened and diplomatic relations restored after a 16-year break.

Now Turkey is moving to a second, even more ambitious stage of its regional policy: “no problems between neighbours.” Its leaders realise that Turkey’s future prospects depend on regional stability, and are actively seeking to resolve disputes in the neighbourhood. Because of its size, its economic power, its history and its well-developed though still incomplete democracy, Turkey is uniquely placed to be both a model and a broker.

For most of Turkey’s modern history, the Muslim world has seen it as an apostate. Atatürk’s reforms pulled it so far from Islam that it seemed to have no religious legitimacy. Besides, it was perceived as Washington’s lackey, stigmatised by its embrace of American policies that many Muslims found abhorrent.

Neither of those objections applies to Turkey today. It is governed by pious Muslims and has its own foreign policy. Its leaders are warmly welcomed in many places where, in the past, they would not even have cared to visit.

Under other circumstances, Egypt, Pakistan or Iran might have emerged to lead the Muslim world. Their societies, however, are weak, fragmented and decomposing. Indonesia is a more promising candidate, but it has no historic tradition of leadership and is far from the centre of Muslim crises. That leaves Turkey – which, by happy coincidence, is eager to play this role.

One dark spot, however, has emerged to blot this happy picture. Turkey has begun to distance itself from Israel. This month it cancelled its participation in a joint military manoeuvre with the Israeli defence forces. Its leaders speak out angrily against Israeli policies – most notably prime minister Erdoğan, who at this year’s Davos conference denounced Israel’s invasion of Gaza as a “crime against humanity”. One of the region’s most important relationships is fraying.

Turkish leaders are allowing emotion to affect their attitude toward Israel. They are understandably angry over Israeli misdeeds. If Turkey is to be a bridge among nations, though, it cannot afford gratuitously to alienate any. The United States has brought itself much grief by isolating Iran; it would be just as foolish for Turkey to reject Israel.

Like Iran, Israel is a pariah in many circles, and is frozen out of Middle East security arrangements. This is bad for all parties. Pushing Israel into a corner, or making Israel feel that it is alone and friendless, does not serve the cause of peace.

Turkey has a history of excellent relations with Jews, and was one of the first countries to recognise Israel. Turning its back on that legacy, as it has apparently begun to do, contradicts its new diplomatic role as a broker of compromise. The contribution Turkey can make by playing that role is far greater than the feel-good effect of lashing out emotionally at Israel’s excesses.

For Turkey to strengthen ties with Iran is good – as long as it does not turn its back on the United States. For it to cultivate relations with Hamas and Hezbollah is also good – but not if it breaks with Israel. Turkey shows unique promise as a regional peacemaker. To play that role, however, it must follow a cardinal rule that the US has for years ignored: shape foreign policy according to national interest, not emotion.