The 1991 Gulf War was so successful because countries throughout the Middle East lent their institutional support to the international coalition organized by the elder George Bush. A war can't be conducted simply from aircraft carriers; an army needs a host country. President Bush had been unable to find any similar sort of support, but the Turkish prime minister had agreed. The U.S. Defense Department was all raring to get to Iraq, when the Turkish Parliament threw a surprise monkey wrench into things. In a stunning backbench revolt, they narrowly defeated serving as our host country.
Why did they do this, you ask? The ruling Justice and Development Party is a conservative, Islamic party, but some vague anti-American sentiment is not what guided their action. The Members of Parliament did what politicians in every democratic country do: They looked at the polls. In this case, public opinion was overwhelmingly against serving as host, and so they understood their own jobs would be on the line if they agreed to the measure. Turkey is proof a country can have a religious party, and that the religion in question can be Islam, but contrary to the popular misconception they can function in a manner respectful of democracy and human rights. In this case, that means members of Parliament going against a government agenda specifically to serve the will of the people.
This does create a logical problem in how our war against terrorism has been conceived in the public mind. Lou Dobbs of CNN coined the term adical Islamists"" to describe al Qaeda and the like, and on a superficial level he was correct. They are certainly militant and radical in service of an Islamic agenda, but Turkey provides us proof that Islam need not function in such a manner. At the same time, Iraq is a secular state that actively represses its radical Islamist elements, but is nevertheless more oppressive of human freedom than even its Islamic neighbors.
The problem is not Islam. The problem is a deeply ingrained authoritarian political culture endemic to the Middle East, currently manifesting itself through the medium of Islam. Turkey, technically not part of the Middle East and quite disconnected from its culture, can function under an Islamic government in a perfectly acceptable manner, while secular Iraq and Islamic Saudi Arabia have all too much in common. The controversial right-wing commentator Ann Coulter got in a bit of trouble shortly after the attacks in September 2001 by saying, ""We should invade these countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity."" Even if they were converted, it's likely that a successor to bin Laden would pop up commanding all sorts of vicious terrorist acts, but brandishing a cross in lieu of a crescent moon.
Turkey's democratic political culture proves that our enemy is not some abstract notion of religion but instead simply the developing world's adaptation of fascism. Rewriting a political culture overnight is difficult, to say the least. Our own democratic culture evolved after centuries of feudalism, crusades and the slow extension of voting rights across classes of people and subjects for debate.
A successful rewrite of political culture occurred in Japan half a century ago, and it's that hidden cost that our government isn't telling us about. Social and economic reforms were imposed by a benign military government staying there for years and years, supervising the redevelopment of Japan every step of the way. The Bush administration makes a claim that's pretty hard to swallow, that war against Hussein can be won within a week. Even if that's true, there will be a tremendous cost in funds and manpower to rebuild Iraq and totally reform their culture.
If there is not a full, sincere effort to make Iraq and other Middle Eastern countries less like they are now and more like Turkey, the entire pursuit of our war on terror is faulty. Without successful defeat, not only of current military forces but also the present condition of culture, there cannot be any permanent victory, only the continual fomenting of tensions under whatever pretext might be chosen, Islamic or otherwise.
