Long Time Comin'

Mid-November, I was traipsing the streets of Rome and Florence with my roommate. Meanwhile, my girlfriend was meeting up with friends in Cairo. She reported it was crazy then--a very interesting but deeply unsettling week--but that, obviously, is nothing compared to today's Cairo.

This past weekend, my roommate from Turkey came over to Ireland to visit me and we took the opportunity to visit Dublin. I did not bring my computer along, so when I got home tonight and opened my browser for the first time since early Friday morning, I spent a solid hour engrossed in reports about what is going on in Cairo and Egypt right now. First of all, I simply could not believe how much had happened in so short a time; secondly, my overwhelming feeling was one of "There but for the grace of time were I."

OK, so I never actually made it to Egypt last semester. And who knows what will become of my vague ambitions to visit Northern Africa sometime before this wild ride is over. But having lived in Turkey and studied the political situation there so intensely for four months and even more so for having been to Syria for close to a week, I think I get at least a little bit of what's going on there. And yes, it's been a long time comin'.

Like too many of its neighboring (largely Arab) governments, the Egyptian regime has long been amongst the most repressive and democratically backward in the world. As anyone who has been even cursorily glancing at any serious front page(s) lately should know, President (for life) Hosni Mubarak's regime has been keeping a tight lid on the country for 30 years and pursuing the so-called kleptocratic practices that we in the U.S. so often decry in Russians and assume are inherent in Arabs. Whether or not shitty government is coded into the Arab genome is beyond the scope of my real knowledge, but I'll happily go way out on a limb and guess that it is not. My impression is that the whole area floundered into the modern era with the collapse of the Ottoman Empire (remember them?) only to be beset by the slippery issues surrounding oil production. That said, it must be noted that North Africa (including Egypt) is Arab but not really oil-producing; the downside of this situation being a regime just as repressive as any of the real OPEC fat cats', but with the upside--if it is that--of a legitimate possibility of regime change, if for no other reason than the purely cynical one that the U.S. and allies can risk the collapse of a totalitarian "ally" against terrorism in a way that they cannot do with a major oil supplier.

On leaving Syria, I was convinced that the regime there was unsustainable. By far the least democratic place I have ever experienced, I was deeply troubled by the twisted and "quietly ferocious" form of state-socialist government I encountered there. Syria is another Arab country with all the problems of its neighbors and--like Egypt--none of the obscene oil riches that keep regimes in power and still dissenting opinions in the Arabian Peninsula. Turkey, too, felt like a place on the verge of momentous change by the time I left there about a month and a half ago. As had been the case in the Arab world (of which Turkey, importantly, is not a part) before a Tunisian vegetable-seller reached the end of his rope, Turkey had the feeling of place that was going to (and needed to) undergo a serious social reckoning between its longstanding competing social, political and economic interest groups. Add the potentially-explosive ingredient of Islamism (more vibrant in Egypt than Turkey), and the situation seemed quite precarious indeed.

It should go without saying that this is a genuine Moment in the history of the Arab and Muslim worlds (again, not coterminous). The Big Question of the past decade has been, Can Islam and Democracy coexist? (Or: WTF is it with these Arabs/Muslims/Middle-Easterners/Central Asians, anyway?) In the immediate aftermath of the Tunisian rebellions, I read a number of commentaries that encouraged Tunisia to go the way of Turkey in marrying democracy and Islam. I would caution writers and rebels to be wary in hoping for the advent of little Turkeys throughout the Arab/Muslim world. To laud Turkish democracy, religious affairs, and especially Turkey's ways of squaring the two, as exemplary for all other Muslim nations is to fall under the spell of a shallow appreciation of Turkish history and politics. As Colin Powell used to say, those advocating the spread of the Turkish system should "be careful what they wish for, because they might get exactly that."

If Turkey is a 99% Muslim country currently celebrating 90 years of democracy and a rapidly-increasing global stature, why should Arabs now in revolt or thinking of revolting be skeptical of the Turkish model? The first reason has to do with the unique circumstances of the creation of the Turkish Republic: Turkey emerged in the wake of WWI with a civil war that had been begging to happen for a long time and finally found its moment as the Great Powers caught their collective breath after the Great War; further, Turkey happened in large part due to the singular influence and leadership of Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, its inimitable and still-revered founder. As many of the same articles that prescribe Turkey for Tunisia note, there currently appear to be no leaders-in-waiting with the vision, ambition and strength of personality of Ataturk. There is a reason the man known as Mustafa Kemal Pasha took the name "Father Turk;" I do not know of any "Father Tunisia" or "Father Egypt" waiting in the wings in either country right now.

Secondly, Turkey does not enjoy a truly democratic democracy. Its version is light-years ahead of that operated by Egypt's National Democratic Party or the recently-deposed Constitutional Democratic Rally Party of Tunisia, yet it is far from perfect. The army--viewed since Ataturk's day as the vanguard and guardian of democracy--has not, in the 90 years of Turkish independence, seen fit to actually leave democracy to the people. In that time, it has staged no less than two full coups and three "soft coups" in which the civilian leadership was not actually deposed; though still highly-trusted and seen as a force for democracy, by virtue of remaining either at the controls or at least in the control room of Turkish democracy to this day, the Turkish Army remains a concealed but nevertheless significant obstacle to true democracy in Turkey. Thankfully, the armies of both Tunisia and Egypt have so far stayed out of politics and more or less on the side of the protesters; arguing for those countries following Turkey's lead would create a logic if not a mandate for military government in the name of democracy in each. Much better that people like Mohamed ElBaradei lead transitional governments than that the generals seize the moment.

Thirdly, Turkey has, to the cursory view, succeeded in getting Islam and democracy to coexist. The problem is that Turkey's success, such as it is, has come by means of incredibly strict secularism laws that have in some ways buried the issue of Islam in politics and public life and created a secular-nationalist religion of the state in its stead. As the world waits with baited breath to see what role the political Islamists in Tunisia and Egypt have in those countries' present and future democratic (?) iterations, why root for the Turkish outcome, which seems on the verge of a great reckoning anyway? Since coming to power, the vaguely-Islamist Justice and Development Party currently leading Turkey has generated a serious national soul-searching that has brought the country face-to-face with its legacy of secularism (initiated by Ataturk and thus infallible in the eyes of many) and the undercurrent of political Islam and popular expressions of religion that, it seems, are still in tension after all. Turkey has not solved the apparent problem of democratization/modernization in a Muslim country so much as it simply wrote political Islam out of the public sphere. Now that Islam is creeping in--and especially given global views of Islam today--the issue buried by Ataturk is rearing its head with a vengeance today. Turkey itself is going to have to determine if and how to fit the square peg of Islam into the round hole of pluralistic democracy--it therefore makes no sense to encourage Arab nations to essentially duck the issue as Turkey did. At least for now, the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt seems quiescent and willing to negotiate and work with ElBaradei to create a transitional government, why not encourage this kind of self-starting democratic behavior on the part of a notoriously conservative and militant Islamist organization?

So if Tunisia, Egypt, and whatever other Arab countries go next are not to follow Turkey, what should they do instead? What if they did become little Turkeys--isn't the devil we know better than the one we don't?

Not only is rooting for (or even actively encouraging) such an outcome not better, it is simply not right. First of all, meddling in the first truly popular democratic movements the Arab world has seen in a long time would be undemocratic on the part of the U.S. and/or the West, should we attempt it. Secondly, the people involved have been quite firm in stating that they do not really want anything more out of the United States right now than verbal support for democratic processes and outcomes; in other words, kingmaking, advice, money, and most especially weapons are not wanted right now.

That brings us to the second reason we need to hope for and encourage more out of the current Arab revolts than simply copycatting of Turkey. Frankly, America has not done well by these countries or had particularly healthy relationships with them in the past, so they are not in the greatest rush to see us step in now. Furthermore, we all saw how well not listening and instead barging ahead got us in Iraq and Afghanistan; we have neither created democracy nor won a lot of brownie points with the Arab and Muslim worlds for all of our efforts in either place. Most of all, the best thing we can do to recover some of the credibility and democratic/moral legitimacy we sacrificed in Iraq right now would be to openly encourage democracy in Tunisia and Egypt. I mentioned the unhealthy relationship we have had with these places of late; in real terms, this has meant the U.S.'s support of these very undemocratic regimes for fear of Islamists and their doing our dirty work for us. Specifically, we have long been the armorers of Arab despots against their citizens, a favor they have returned by employing on U.S. prisoners the torture techniques they have developed by use on their citizens. Every time you read about or see someone getting shot in Egypt right now, consider that the shooter's weapon, ammunition, and training (if he is a soldier) are all made in the U.S.A. The same holds for many of the tanks on the streets, the fighter jets that buzzed Cairo the other day, and the tear gas canisters used by riot police.

In conclusion, my view is that we, the United States and other leading democracies of the world, need to take this opportunity to put our money (and our mouth) where our mouth has been for so long. It has been obvious for so long that the Arab world was overdue for democratization and that, when it came, it wasn't going to be an easy process or a pretty one. Now that it or something like it is upon us, we would do well to offer the loudest support for true democracy in the region that we can. If, as currently seems to be the case, we are unwilling to say much more than that we have the situation under observation and would like peace, democracy, and McDonald's to reign happily ever after, then our loudest vote of support for democracy would actually be to just shut the hell up. It might even be the most prudent--we're on touchy ground with many Arabs and Muslims these days, and if we learn to listen twice as much as we talk, our standing might go up dramatically. We would also reduce the chances of putting our foot in our mouth: we're currently hedging our comments so much because the outcomes of all this in the near and long term are so uncertain; saying as little as possible now means proportionately fewer chances of supporting a regime that either is or gets ugly.

The threat posed by Islamism, which has led us to support regimes such as those being toppled today in the past, is both a real and a delicate one. It is just as important that democracy come into being in these countries as that it be as free as possible of radical Islamist tendencies. That said, democracy in the Muslim world will not, should not, and can not be free of Islam. Islam is by nature a more political religion than we in the West are comfortable with or accustomed to; it is also the dominant religion in the Arab world and its social and political expression is going to be part and parcel of any true Arab democracy that comes into being. Turkey decided to simply ban expressions of Islam, notably the headscarf, and their recent reintroduction has caused a national identity crisis; the chances of even imposing such bans in places like Egypt in the first place are infinitely smaller than they were under Ataturk at the dawn of modern Turkey. As long as the Islamist elements in Tunisia and Egypt continue to keep low profiles and support democratic outcomes, let them. How many times have we heard a U.S. president (Bush or Obama) tell us we have nothing to fear from Islam in the past 10 years? Time to find out how we really feel.

So let's not talk Turkey. This democratic moment in the Arab world has been a long time in the making--why not make the most of it? The Turkish Republic has more or less worked for Turkey and it's more or less democratic, true, but we should really be encouraging new thinking, new democratic iterations, and new leadership in the Arab and Muslim worlds. Is it really so inconceivable that the Tunisians and/or Egyptians in 2011 come up with a fresher or better method of creating an Islamic democracy than Ataturk did in the 1920's? What if the Tunisians come up with a headscarf policy that Turks want to emulate? What if Egypt transitions to democracy without the military ever taking power? It's not like the U.S. is going to apologize out loud for our inconsistencies and screwups in dealing with these countries until a couple of weeks ago, so why not seize the democratic moment ourselves and, by word and deed, actively promote the truest and newest democracies anyone could hope for in the Arab world?

The coming days, weeks, months and years will be messy, uncertain, fractious, tense, and hopeful--in a word, democratic--in Tunisia, Egypt, and quite possibly other Arab countries tired of the same old same old. Their citizens are trying to "win the future" for themselves, and wouldn't it be a lot better if they did so by the ballot box and not with bullets we gave them?

A democratic Arabia, Middle East, and Muslim world? That ought to be a change we can believe in.

Further On Up the Road

Thoughts, reflections, and observations on the end of one semester, the beginning of another, and a move across a continent:

• ·         I have just completed a journey across Europe from the McGhee Center in Alanya, Turkey to the National University of Ireland, Galway. That's two time zones, an entire continent, and more miles than I can count. In so doing, I've exchanged my Mediterranean view for one of the Atlantic, sandy beaches for rocky cliffsides, minarets for steeples, and five calls to prayer each and every day for going to church on Sunday when I feel like it.
• ·         Despite all the apparent differences, life is still a lot more similar than I expected it to be. The scenery creates natural beauty from the same basic ingredients—ocean/sea, the shore, ships moored in marinas, and local flora—and the political and social situations in Ireland and Turkey have many echoes of one another. Both have issues of national integrity (Turkey's Kurdish southeast vs. the six counties of Northern Ireland); both have long and complex relationships with their respective majority religions (Sunni Islam vs. [often Catholic] Christianity); and both have their issues with Europe (Turkey's half-century quest for EU membership vs. Ireland's ignominious economic situation that, along with Portugal, Greece, and Spain, threatens the integrity of the monetary union). Plus ça change…
• ·         Three weeks' travel across Europe at Christmastime—particularly in an unseasonable snowstorm—was absolutely magical. I visited Istanbul, Vienna, Prague, Brussels, Antwerp, Gent, Bruges, Cologne, Dublin, Cork, Blarney, and finally Galway in that time. Family friends in Antwerp hosted me for Christmas and I rang in the New Year in my new home with a pint of Guinness in Dublin's Temple Bar district.
• ·         I've been a lot of places and seen a lot of stuff between Damascus and Galway, but Belgium takes the cake so far for best society, best-preserved Gothic/Dutch Renaissance ambience, and best quality and selection of food and drink. The people couldn't be friendlier, most speak better English (and Flemish and French) than I do, and the fusion of Dutch and French cuisine plus Trappist beer is hard to beat.
• ·         The experience of meeting up with large groups of newly-arrived Americans here in Galway can only be described as surreal. There are a few full-year American students here at NUIG, but of the people I know, I am the only one to have both been abroad without interruption since August and to have arrived in Galway from the east instead of the west. After meeting no more Americans outside of our program than I could count on one hand for four-plus months, suddenly being surrounded not only by lots of Americans but by people who have just been in the States has created actual inter-cultural experiences. Apparently, I have completely missed the evolution of "jeggings" in America and had to have that concept explained; my friends also got a good laugh out of watching me stop dead in my tracks at the sight of Kellogg's cereals in the food store when we all went shopping for the first time. After a five-month hiatus, turning the corner and being confronted with Tony the Tiger, the Cornflakes rooster, and Snap, Crackle & Pop was so unexpected I laughed out loud.
• ·         With a broad sample size in mind, I think I can say with some confidence that neither the Turks nor the Irish are really "European" in the modern sense. Don't get me wrong: I'm glad Ireland is in the EU and I think Turkey should be as well, but after seeing Italy, Belgium, and Germany in particular (and I have not even been to France yet), it seems pretty clear to me that the Turks and the Irish are not just geographically on the edges of Europe, but there are real cultural differences between them and central/western continental Europeans as well. Both countries are clearly the working-class neighborhoods of Europe, and indeed both have long been exporters of labor to the Continent. The modes of dress are also more similar between Turkey and Ireland than between either and the mainland, with the jeans not as tight, the shoes not as pointy, and the general style of clothing tending more towards the workaday than the latest Milan runway items.
• ·         One of the major points of study at the McGhee Center was whether or not we thought the EU should let Turkey in. Turkey was among the earlier prospective members (its application has been open since 1959), yet it is continually rebuffed. It is something of a truism to accuse Europe of being a white, Christian club that will of course not find room for a Muslim country; having now traveled through the EU after all that time in Turkey, I would love to see Turkey become a member of the Union and let the wild rumpus of cultural diffusion start. I think both sides could profit immensely from increased integration with the other, as the Turks could do great things for Europe economically and the Europeans could contribute a lot to Turkish culture and society. The gesture itself of welcoming Turkey into the EU would also go a long way in dispelling accusations of the EU as an inwardly-focused, civilly xenophobic Greater France. Turkey could get the Europeans off their too-high horse and Europe could help show Turkey the way to better democratic and religio-social norms. Sadly, the window may be closing on both sides as the Europeans continue to embrace former Soviet satellites with far worse socio-economic-democratic issues than Turkey and the Turks increasingly want to just move on without the EU, already.
• ·         If I had to bet on the long-term vibrancy of one, I'd pick Turkey. It is a much more "happening" place and it has the feel of a young racehorse chomping at the bit. Europe is more the retired stallion happy to be put out to pasture. Europe might be eminently civilized, but it doesn't have the same feeling of youthful energy and transformation that Turkey does. It must be said that Turkey is dogged by the twin specters of non-democratic government and religious fundamentalism; if either of these ever-present undercurrents triumphs, Turkey is lost. Ironically, I think that relaxing its rigid secularism laws might be the best thing Turkey could do right now to disarm the fundamentalists, by decoupling the ability of citizens to freely express their identity as Muslims from the legitimacy of the government. Strict secularism might have been important in the beginning to allow the Turkish state to differentiate itself both from its Ottoman past and its Islamist neighbors; 90 years later, it is time for Turkey to cultivate and embrace respect for and respectful freedom of expression. Thanks in large part to secularism and westernization, Turkey does not have the hopelessly dead-end feel of neighboring Syria, a society that is clearly spinning its wheels. That said, the government must realize that, nearly a century after the nation was proclaimed by Atatürk, allowing the headscarf back into public life is unlikely to put the country into a hard right turn towards the reactionary Islamism of the Middle East.

Forward Thinking

I have seen the future. Actually, I have seen two versions of the future: one energized, bustling, and dynamic; one slipping quietly, comfortably into the past. One feels like it is chomping at the bit, restless to break out and take charge. The other wants a cup of tea and a book of history in an armchair. One wants to be a regional role model; the other wants only to develop its own region in peace. One is Turkey. The other is the European Union. My question: Which way is America going?

But to begin from the beginning: At the end of August, I packed my bags for my junior year abroad—what was to be my first experience of more than a week outside of North America—and boarded a flight from Boston to Istanbul. So began a year that, at the halfway point, has already been the most exciting, challenging, and transformational of my life. After a two-week orientation program in Istanbul and Ankara, I traveled with my fellow students to a Mediterranean seaside town called Alanya, where we lived and studied for four months. From there, we also explored the region, traveling to Syria, Cyprus, Cappadocia, and—in the case of my roommate and myself—to Italy on fall break.

At the conclusion of the semester in mid-December, we all went our separate ways. I set off with my girlfriend on a three-week whirlwind tour of Europe, touching Vienna, Prague, Brussels, Antwerp, Cologne, Dublin, Cork, and finally Galway, where I am now settled in and beginning my second-semester studies. In many ways, life could not be much more different: I have gone from a 15-student program to a 17,000-student university; traded my five-minute walk to the Mediterranean for a 15-minute walk to the edge of the Atlantic; left an economically booming Eastern country and European Union applicant for an EU member state and one of the infamous "PIGS" countries dragging down the Euro; and finally undergone a drastic shift in cultures from a 99-percent Muslim country precariously balanced between Europe and the Middle East to a majority-Christian and English-speaking country on the western edge of Europe. Life might look a lot different now, but the differences are telling. What really separates Turkey, Europe, and—most important to me—America?

Taking some time away from America has granted me an unquestionably different view of my home country than I could ever have obtained without leaving. In my reflection on all that I have learned abroad, what has stuck out the most is that America's can-do spirit and promise of a bright today and a better tomorrow are what really make our country unique. Even if we have a somewhat loud, in-your-face, monolingual culture (from which I by no means excuse myself), Americans are—in the experience of myself and nearly everyone else I have discussed this with—almost always a fundamentally friendly and optimistic people. We might tend to know only one language, we might have a little extra bluster, we might be viewed as a bit childish, and we might not have buildings and culture that are basically older than dirt (there is a reason "European" is synonymous with "cultured/refined" in American advertizing), but I have come to see these traits as some of America's greatest and most endangered strengths.

For the basic paradox of Europe is that it is a collection of new states living primarily on the past glories of bygone empires. ("Italy is a young country," my tour guide at the Coliseum gravely intoned.) America, by contrast, is technically older than most European states in the sense that its current constitution dates back further than theirs, yet America and Americans in general have retained the energy and enthusiasm for life of the young. Our boisterousness might make us appear juvenile to others, but it is the source of our famed ingenuity and of the enduring promise of each generation to leave the country and the world a better place for its children.

To me, this is the challenge of my generation and those to follow: Will America remain focused on providing a better future for its children and their children as candidate Obama promised and President Obama often says but does not seem to do? Or will we go down the European path of keeping the 40-and-older crowd happy? The latter constituency in Europe and America votes in force to keep its entitlements and its retirements on track. The under-40's, by contrast, often cannot seem to bestir ourselves enough even to vote. Future-thinking necessarily implies responsibility and morality; I would argue that a future-thinking citizen would have thought at least twice before creating a "credit-default swap" or authorizing the Deepwater Horizon to drill.

The Turks get it. Their economy is growing, they are modernizing as fast as they can, and they want nothing to do with the IMF's money. They are convinced that their country is on the move and that there is a bright future just around the corner. Turkey is loud, gritty, and bustling, but (in contrast to Syria) has the feel of a place gathering itself for a big forward jump. The Europeans, on the other hand, have universal health care, highly refined culture, and beautiful old buildings. But their population is rapidly aging, with births significantly below the replacement rate. To a large extent, Turks are picking up the slack in youthful labor within the EU. The Europeans seem quite contented to quietly ride social democracy into the sunset, hoping above all to be left alone to develop their post-modernist socio-political project. The Turks want to take on the world.

If the EU is the future of humanity, it is eminently civilized, but there does not seem to be much "future" in it. Everywhere I have been so far in Europe has the feeling of being a living museum or perhaps a movie set: everyone plays a role, but it is unclear what anyone does. I am fully aware that there are plenty of highly successful European businesses, yet there does not seem to be the same sense of urgency that exists in America and Turkey. Turks drink a lot of çay (tea), but they bring their teapots to their construction sites; by a professor's admission here in Galway, it is no use going to anyone's office between 1 and 2 pm, the sacred tea time (different from lunch) of Irish culture. I am painting with an extremely broad brush here, but I still think the basic point is instructive: do we (America) want to follow in the European mode of going along to get along or the American mode (emulated by the Turks) of creating our own future?

 "Success is tasted sweetest/by those who ne'er succeed," wrote Emily Dickinson. Her poem might as well be the "first amendment" to the American Dream, which always burns brightest for those (often non-Americans) who have yet to achieve it. Growing up in Wellesley, Massachusetts, I saw plenty of those who ever succeed. The same is true at Georgetown University, where too many of my classmates have never pulled any literal or figurative bootstraps whatsoever.

Something ugly is brewing in America when we start putting limits on the American Dream. The Southwest is in the throes of a xenophobic paroxysm of hate and fear directed against "job-stealing" Mexicans, a situation that uncomfortably mirrors the EU's attitudes towards Turkey. Turks, like Mexicans in America, have long been a source of cheap labor in Europe, largely overlooked when times are good but railed against in times like these when they are accused of "stealing" jobs that most Europeans, in their more honest moments, will admit they did not really want anyway. After seeing its membership application rebuffed for a half-century, Turkey is now strongly considering moving on without the EU. And why should they not? They rebuffed IMF loans, weathered the storm of the financial crisis, and are tired of reading between the lines of EU progress reports that they still are not white or Christian enough for the EU family.

Combined with my experiences abroad so far, my reading of American history argues that we are at a crucial turning point. Our culture, history, and social contract are all predicated on the promise of a brighter tomorrow. From the Pilgrims to the pioneers, from the Founding to the 21^st Century, the underlying goal of America has been to provide each generation with a better future. At this point, we—and I would argue that "we" are really my generation and those younger than us—are faced with a choice: do we want to go the way of Europe, celebrating our past and making life comfortable for the present and past generations, or do we want to get back in touch with the idea that it is our responsibility to manage the country that is our birthright in such a way that our children and our children's children may make it still better?

I am nobody's partisan. I have tremendous issues with both major political parties and most especially with the rapidly-deteriorating tone and tenor of American political debate. Fear-mongering, lying, and playing to the lowest common denominators and fringes of the fringes on both sides is nothing short of shameful. Rather than looking to either party for salvation, my most fervent wish is that we, the 20-somethings and younger generations of America, get our act together, make our voices heard, and start taking responsibility for ourselves, our nation, and our future.

President Obama's anecdote is right: "they" did drive our country into the ditch. But "they" are not any one party or ideology so much as a generation of politicians out of ideas yet desperate to keep its hold on the wheel. Maybe it is time to enlist the help of younger and stronger backs to pull the car out of the ditch and clearer eyes to keep it on the road.