We might also look at this from an geopolitical context, like you provide examples in your text. There has always been radical Islamic terrorism but it was just that, sporadic and more or less contained. The problem was manageable. I guess the Arab Spring opened the Pandora's box. Take Libya for example. Bringing down Gaddafi was a terrible idea as was voiced by many at the time. All the said terrorist groups including Bako Haram and al-Shabab turned war lords upon the spoils of Libyan Army. And the examples can be multiplied.
But, as you pointed out, there might be very local, historical root causes of the whole problem in the Middle East, and in particular, with respect to politicized Islam.
Well first we should define the difference between political Islam and radical Islam. Political Islam, as the name may suggest, represents Islamic ideologies in the political arena. Debates, political parties, youth organizations are all activities of political Islamic groups. The concept of
Fiqh makes huge difference regarding the actions of those groups. Some are much more radical then others, some of them seems very radical in terms of lifestyle however might be very peaceful and even anti violence, some of them seems very contemporary in terms of lifestyle but might be very pro-violence.
Radical Islam is just a tool for political Islam. They can be regarded as "muscle". Every radical Islamic group out there has some forms of links with certain political Islamic groups. Otherwise they won't be seen as legitimate among Muslims, because political Islam is the brain. Let's analyze Al-Qaeda as an example. Al Qaeda is actually the armed group of
Wahhabism and
Salafism and both movements are traced back to Saudi Arabia.
To finish Al-Qaeda you wouldn't need to invade Afghanistan or Iraq but you should finish Wahhabism and Salafism at it's hearth which is Saudi Arabia. But since Saudi Arabia is a petrol-dollar country I'm sure West will go on fighting minions in Syria, Iraq or Afghanistan and won't touch the brain in Saudi Arabia. Of course fighting with minions will be a never ending war. Our British friend
@mike2000 is back will be paying a lot of taxes for decades for a war that will never end, because it was never intended to win. But I'm very optimistic about Russia. If the West leave the Middle East for 10 years to Russia and China bloc I guess a true and a very necessary Arab Spring could take place in Gulf countries and radical Islam would take a huge damage.
The reverse is not true. Not all political Islamic groups have links with radical Islamists. However the aims are very similar among political Islamist groups. They all want sharia law to be restored, they want a single muslim "nation" which is called
Ummah, they ultimately wants a single Islamic state that governs all Muslim population and they want Caliphate to be restored and that Caliph should take Quran and
Hadith as the only guidence when ruling that Islamic state.
Of course as you can see those movements has a certain history behind them. However they all modernized repeatedly and stays active. Wahhabism wouldn't be much radical in 18th century when it was first "invented". However this is definitely not acceptable today.
I am curious about your own assessment? Do you think, with now AKP having almost half of the popular support, it is possible to restore secularism in its true sense?
There are two Islamist movements in Turkey. One of them is
Nurculuk (Movement of Light) and the other is
Milli Görüş (National Vision). Nurculuk is currently represented by
Gülen Movement, and Milli Görüş is represented by AKP. Milli Görüş movement has always been a political entity. Nurculuk never wanted to become a political entity and instead they wanted power in bureaucracy, media, education and business life. They are just like an Islamic masonic order, with all those secret meetings etc. Both movements avoided direct alliance or competition throughout 70', 80's and 90's. However starting with AKP both Islamic movements became allies. In the early periods of AKP when it was first formed, it had no power in bureaucracy or media and it didn't have much of a business contact. Gülen Movement provided all of them in the first years and played a huge rule in the success of AKP.
Taming the military and the high court as you've mentioned was also made by Gülen Movement.
Arresting military officers with fake coup plans, and
arresting civil opposition with an alledged support to that coup, was all planned and executed by the Gülen movement. Today the two movements are like a cat and dog. That's why the unity in both Islamic movements are shattered which is an advantage.
Besides the actual insurance of the secularism in Turkey is CHP which takes a quarter of votes with a very rigid secular political stance which is not bad.
Gezi protests for democracy and
Republic Protests for secularism mobilized millions of people and made me a proud Turk again
. I suspect that if any Islamist movement in Turkey tries to impose sharia law or tries to fulfill the aims that I've counted above, the conflict will evolve into a civil was pretty quick. Political Islamist groups could have more man power but secular groups would certainly get international support. Besides not all 50% of the AKP voters are Islamists. It would be anectodal but my neighbour is a civil engineer and a pretty irreligious person but he votes for AKP because he thinks the construction business is very good with AKP and he can make a lot of money. We had an intense argument with him twice and decided not to talk about politics anymore. Such voters are traditional center right voters who has nothing to do with political Islam and definitely won't support AKP if they impose sharia law. And don't underestimate their number. Scholars estimate that around one third of AKP voters are center right leaning and definitely not political Islamist.
Bottom line is secularism in Turkey won't die, but won't ressurect either in the short or middle term. It will stay in a somewhat purgatory state with the current status quo. However if the status quo is broken no one knows what happens. But everyone is sure that secularism won't really die without a civil war in Turkey.
And we are definitely on the same page about secularism vs liberal democracy dilemma in Muslim majority countries.
I've deliberately given long answers to you questions because you seem to be interested in Turkey and the Middle East.
