Turkish revolution. An interview with Boris Nad
Natella Speranskaya: The national revolution has started in Turkey. What are the forces behind it? Who is fighting who?
Boris Nad: The revolution in Turkey is not only an internal matter of Turkey, it is part of the dramatic changes in the Middle East and is also part of global changes in the balance of power. Turkey is full of internal contradictions, but its foreign-political position, especially in the last five years, has become very schizophrenic, which is best seen in its relations with Syria and Israel. This is a consequence of Atlantic geopolitical strategy and orientation of the government of Turkey, which harbors neo-Ottoman ambitions, remaining torn between Islamic and Ataturk heritage, traditionalism and modernism, secularism and nationalism, on a deeper level between Atlantism and Euroasianism...
It is obvious today that many different streams, including neo-Kemalists, communists and others oppose the regime, therefore, those who are not supporters of Erdogan and the ruling party vary in type. Now it is not so important who started a chain of events – which began in Taksim Square, which is anyway of huge symbolic importance to Turkey – more importantly is how it will all end. In our opinion, the revolution in Turkey marks the end or beginning of the end of Erdogan's sub-imperial project of the "neo-Ottoman Turkey".
Natella Speranskaya: How is the Turkish revolution related to the geopolitical opposition of Eurasianism (Russia, Iran, Syria) and atlantism (NATO, USA, EU)?
Boris Nad: From the standpoint of Eurasian geopolitics, Erdogan and his government are absolutely unacceptable, they are the embodiment of atlantist, pro-Western, "neo-Ottoman" Turkey, in the service of U.S. interests. This policy is fundamentally different from Turkish policy during the Cold War, because it's now grown into a denial of Turkish identity, into the real geopolitical suicide.
However, the true Turkey is East, Eurasia. In this sense, this revolution is deeply national, Turkish being speaks out through it. There is absolutely an Eurasian core in the Turkish revolution, but another question is to what extent in the future it will succeed to determine the direction of events. Of course, the West is trying to reverse the course of events to their advantage, playing on multiple streams simultaneously, so that, in case of fall of Erdogan regime, they could re-installed puppet government in Ankara. It would be a disaster for Turkey.
Natella Speranskaya: Your prognosis of the development of events in Turkey and how it will effect the situation in Syria?
Boris Nad: The revolution in Turkey, in any outcome, will undoubtedly have a positive impact on developments in Syria. Politics led by Erdogan has now come to its end; even if the regime survives this crisis and decides to continue with the same policy – which is in our opinion unthinkable – weakened Turkey will no longer be able to represent the logistic center and to provide lines of supplying Syrian terrorists.
Let us repeat once again that the Turkish revolution marks the end of Erdogan's project of "neo-Ottoman Turkey," that reality requires a fundamental revision of the Turkish strategy not only in the Middle East and the Muslim world, but also in the former Soviet Union and the Balkans. In other words, the key question is whether Turkey will manage to reinvent itself and redefine its relations with the West - the United States, and Russia - Eurasia. The key is the Turkish attitude towards Eurasia.
Translated by Zorana Lutovac & Ivana Ivanc