The expert believes that Ankara is expanding under the guise of history and culture.
The idea of Great Turan is being promoted in various ways on the territory of some CIS member states. It focuses on the allegedly united cultural space of Turkic speaking states. It is no secret that Turkey is behind the seemingly creative initiative. However, the idea of Turan has transformed imperceptibly, which led to manifestations of nationalism, for example, in Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan.
Logically, such destructive consequences can meet only the interests of Turkey. Ankara does not renounce “neo-Ottomanism”, “Great Turkey”. This state is expanding into the Central Asian republics under the guise of the idea of Turan. A member of the Sphere club of political analysts Pavel Danilov comments on the essence of the Turkish initiative for the readers of CentralAsia.news.
Activity covered by Turan
A generation brought up by various Turkish so-called “non-profit public associations” has grown up in the Central Asian countries. Thousands of mosques and schools with Turkish mentors have been built. Those who graduated from Turkish military universities are in the ranks of the armed forces of the Central Asian countries. Moreover, some of young politicians are brought up in the Turkish ideology of “Ottomanism”. Danilov also emphasised that many economically profitable enterprises, even nominally ‘managed’ by local ones, belong to Turkish business circles. The expert stated bluntly that cultural and humanitarian interests are not behind this idea.
“No matter how many people, promoting the idea of Turan in their countries, I have met, none of them sincerely believed in it. There have always been personal, political or financial interests. The Central Asian governments do not support this ideology at the official level, but cooperate within cultural associations and humanitarian programmes, such as the TURKSOY or the Turkic Council. Of course, the leaders of these states are aware of the danger of expansion of Turkey, a NATO member. However, they need trump cards for negotiating positions with other countries that have influence in the region,” the expert explained.
Pavel Danilov believes that some residents of the post-Soviet republics see a large-scale ideology in Turan that is not limited to economics and politics. The interlocutor has no doubts that the CIS member states need a “unifying idea” that includes ethnic, spiritual and cultural aspects. Therefore, Turkey offers its own version, which, however, does not suppose unification at all, but “Ottoman domination”.
Meanwhile, ethnic and linguistic conflicts arise, and outbursts of chauvinism occur in the Central Asian states against the background of Turkey’s influence. Danilov believes that this is because some citizens trust their authoritative compatriots – acting and ex-high-officials, public and religious figures. The expert noted that in such a situation people do not question their words, but begin to act blindly.
Answer to Turan
The CIS member states may well resist the destructive Turkish idea. Danilov believes that, for a start, economic partnerships should be brought to a new level, which would bring the countries closer together. This is not just about increasing the number of contracts and reducing the number of administrative barriers.
“An economic, customs and investment space with the same rights and obligations for all citizens in this zone needs to be created. Russia and Kazakhstan have proposed, and together with Kyrgyzstan, Belarus and Armenia have become members of the economic integration association – the EAEU. However, in my opinion, this is not enough. Here the “secondly” comes from. A common cultural, metaphysical idea is needed. Such as, for example, “Bratskiy Mir”,” the expert said.
The author of the idea is Pavel Danilov. Bratskiy Mir is a combination of the common history of the CIS peoples, kinship, creative thought, philosophy and creativity.
“It will lead our peoples to new unprecedented frontiers of technical and spiritual progress. Our peoples really have something to remember,” Danilov believes.
The political scientist added that no organisations and associations came close to what the peoples of the Commonwealth countries had managed to achieve together.
