Turkey's Snub Of Indonesia

The completely miscalculated choice by Turkey to ditch a key conference in Jakarta that marked the 60th anniversary of the Asian-African Conference that led to the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) and celebrated the 1955 gathering of Asian and African leaders in the Indonesian city of Bandung to discuss the role of the developing world in world affairs was yet another indication of how the political Islamist government has made a mess of its handling of Turkish foreign policy.

Turkey not only failed to dispatch a senior political figure to represent the country at these celebrations, but also declined to send a high-level bureaucrat from the Foreign Ministry. Judging by the lack of diplomatic finesse and the condescending behavior often displayed by those in the Foreign Ministry who deal with Southeast Asia, perhaps it is better to keep them on a short leash anyway. That left the Turkish ambassador in Jakarta with the task of managing representation at events that were attended by leaders from China, Japan, Egypt and Iran.

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, the chief political Islamist, recently said he was planning to make a trip to Indonesia. Apparently that was shelved for the moment. Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu, who pretends he knows all about Southeast Asia because he lectured as an academic in Malaysia in 1990, has no idea of the significance for Turkey of showing up at the conference. Let's assume the absence of the Turkish president and prime minister has something to do with the celebrations to commemorate the Gallipoli events of World War I in Turkey, but there is no excuse at all for the no-show by any of the 25 Turkish ministers in Cabinet to make up for that.

This is an open slap in the face of our Indonesian friends and an inexcusable act of spite to the world's fourth-most populous country and largest in Southeast Asia where Turkey has, by and large, good ties. Indonesia, as a member of the G-20 and the founding member of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), is a key country in Southeast Asia in terms of stability, prosperity and democracy. With its diverse ethnic and religious pluralism, predominantly Muslim Indonesia is a perfect partner for the Turkish nation, which shares similar cultural traits and religious moderation. Unfortunately, the current government in Turkey, heavily dominated by ideological zealots and political Islamist activists, has squandered the goodwill and reputation Turkey has in this part of the world.

The Asian-African Conference in Indonesia gave Turkey a golden opportunity to make up for the past mistake Turks made at the original Bandung conference as the only NATO-member country to attend in 1955. Turkey's role was rather that of a spoiler at that conference, which paved the way for long-lingering mistrust among members of NAM toward Turkey. Despite the fact that Turkey itself had suffered from the imperial and colonial ambitions of majors powers in the past, leading to the dismemberment of the predecessor multi-ethnic and multi-religious Ottoman state, Ankara did not understand the aspirations and concerns of the newly independent African and Asian states that attended Bandung in 1955.

Turkey could very well have used the gatherings in Bandung and Jakarta to further its long-advocated policy goals, especially vis-à-vis Africa and Asia, while underscoring the values and commitments that form the basis of Turkey's outreach to encourage South-South cooperation among developing countries. Dispatching an official at least at the ministerial level would have indicated that Turkey really means business, both in practical policy and symbolic terms, when it comes to opening up to both Africa and Southeast Asia. It could also be a perfect occasion to win the hearts and minds of Indonesians, who are proud of their past diplomatic achievements at the Bandung conference.

What is more, the opportunity to ensure greater access to the diplomatic stage in Asia and Africa was missed. Ankara could have engaged in important issues that were represented by the spirit of Bandung and its important principles, an idea that the Indonesian government hoped to rally and channel into economic cooperation. Turkey's absence from the commemorations raised doubts about its determination and cast a shadow over the credibility of its Asian and African policies.

It is a shame that the whole foreign policy establishment of Turkey has been dismantled by Islamists who have been determined to invest in like-minded proxies in Southeast Asia. That policy already disturbed Turkey's ties with Bangladesh over the Islamic political organization Jamaat-e-Islami, with Thailand over religious violence in the province of Pattani, with the Philippines over the Moro Muslim ethnic conflicts, with China over the Uighurs and possibly more. The safe haven provided for members of Hizb ut-Tahrir (the Party of Liberation) in Turkey by senior and influential Islamists figures in the Turkish government is an irritant to the Indonesian government as well.

Hizb ut-Tahrir has been in business in Turkey since the late 1960s as a small and not very effective Islamist group. It was closely monitored for years. It reasserted itself in September of 2005 when it held a demonstration at İstanbul's Fatih Mosque, with its members calling for a reinstitution of the caliphate and chanting slogans against Turkey's founder, Mustafa Kemal Atatürk. In 2009, Turkish police detained nearly 200 suspected members of Hizb ut-Tahrir in simultaneous raids in 23 provinces across Turkey on charges of being members of an outlawed organization and planning bloody attacks against civilians. Police said the group was planning to stage a large attack in İstanbul on the anniversary of the abolishment of the caliphate. The Ottoman Caliphate was abolished by Atatürk on March 3, 1924, following the founding of a secular state.

In June 2011, prosecutors ordered police again to launch an operation against Hizb ut-Tahrir cells in five cities, detaining 17 people, including Serdar Yılmaz, the alleged member responsible for Turkey operations. Turkish investigators discovered that the group was regularly funded by Imameddin A.A. Barakat, a Jordanian citizen of Palestinian origin who resides in Israel. Bookkeeping records of Hizb ut-Tahrir members that were seized during the operation revealed that a businessman acting as a courier named Mazin Harbawi entered Turkey with bags of money every two months and gave the money to V. A., the member in charge of Hizb ut-Tahrir's İstanbul operations. Investigators believe Harbawi smuggled in about $40,000 during each visit.

While law enforcement agencies have been battling with Hizb ut-Tahrir cells and concerned that the network may be a conveyer belt for the militant recruitment for more radical and violent groups in Turkey, political Islamists in the government rushed to rescue them. In July 2012, a government-endorsed bill was hastily adopted in Parliament that paved the way for the release of over 100 members of Hizb ut-Tahrir from prison, including senior leaders. Conveniently, the decision was issued after working hours on Friday, preventing prosecutors from challenging the release. By the time the objection was finally filed with the court on Monday, most of the released had gone into hiding.

When the government finally took over control of the Supreme Board of Judges and Prosecutors (HSYK), the judicial council that assigns, promotes and investigates judges and prosecutors in Turkey, in 2014, political Islamists became much more emboldened in their interference in the criminal justice system. On the one hand, they abused judicial probes to punish their critics and opponents with sham investigations and trumped-up charges, and on the other, they deliberately sabotaged legitimate investigations and derailed ongoing trials of extremist, violent and armed Islamist groups including Hizb ut-Tahrir, al-Qaeda and the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL).

For example, Turkish prosecutor Hanifi Yavuz, who was recently assigned the 2011-dated Hizb ut-Tahrir case, asked the Gaziantep 1st High Criminal Court on March 26 to acquit all 17 suspects by saying the group is not a terrorist organization but is rather a political Islamist group. Following the prosecutor's plea, the court acquitted all the suspects, despite the overwhelming evidence in the indictment against them. This was a clear violation of a superior court's decision that should be binding in the Gaziantep court because the 9th Chamber of the Supreme Court of Appeals issued a verdict on April 24, 2008, classifying Hizb ut-Tahrir as a “terrorist organization that threatens the existence of the republic and the state.” The Ankara 11th High Criminal Court also rendered a judgment on April 19, 2004 describing Hizb ut-Tahrir as a terrorist organisation.

Today, the Turkish arm of Hizb ut-Tahrir operates freely, despite the fact that it is still an outlawed organization. It held a caliphate conference in İstanbul on March 3 with senior leaders of the organization in attendance as speakers. Hizb ut-Tahrir chief Sheikh Abu Yasin Ata ibn Khalil Abu Rashta sent a special message to the conference while Ahmad Kasas, Hizb ut-Tahrir's Lebanon spokesman and Sharif Zayed, director of the media office of Hizb ut-Tahrir in Egypt, delivered speeches. Iyad Qunaybi, a radical ideologue, also linked up to the event via teleconference from Jordan. Hizb ut-Tahrir member Islam Abu Khalil from Uzbekistan was also present at the conference.

As a result, by harboring Hizb ut-Tahrir cells and passing on a key event in Jakarta, Turkish Islamists have managed to succeed in adding insult to injury in bilateral ties with Indonesia. This is totally against the national interests of Turkey, though it suits the parochial views of Islamists leading up to the elections. (ABDULLAH BOZKURT/Today's Zaman)