The U. S. operation in Iraq caused ruptures in a great scale: The United Nations cracked, NATO cracked, the Western European Union cracked, the West cracked and Europe cracked. The direction in which these ruptures will develop is not certain yet. Will the crack become even bigger? Nowadays, everyone is trying to repair these cracks in order to ensure global cooperation. The developments in Iraq will determine the place and role of a new division and grouping in the world. The real determinant here is what the United States wants to do and how much it can be accomplished. To the countries like Germany, France, Russia and Turkey these are the questions: Do they want the U.S plans in Iraq to be successful? Or do they consider these plans incorrect? Do they object to the U. S. plans and interests considering the fact that the United States is after establishing its hegemony in the Middle East? Of course, the plans and interests of other countries in the region will influence the developments. Besides, what the various forces in Iraq want to achieve is also important. The process that will emerge as a result of all these plans, and the clash of interests, will play a role while a new Iraq is being shaped. What is interesting is that Turkey, which has been the best U. S. ally and friend for 50 years, has become the most anti-American country. Everybody in Turkey, including all the columnists, have become anti-American. With the effect of intellectuals on the society, anti-Americanism has risen sharply. This same America took sides with us in Bosnia, contrary to Europe that preferred to watch the genocide in that country. [Foreign Minister] Abdullah Gul asks: “Shall we in bad terms in a unipolar world with America, which was our friend in the multipolar world? Is it logical?” The most important characteristic of the Iraq model that Bush is trying to establish is that it includes a pretentious cultural metamorphosis project. The establishment of a Western societal system is being envisaged in a very short time in Iraq, which has traditional social and economic qualities of Oriental, Islamic societies. All the mechanisms and foundations that are going to be established are Western patented. The establishment of political parties, parliaments, private companies, private enterprises, central bank, stocks exchange market, independent media and the public opinion, are all part of a Western system, financed by the United States under the control of U. S. troops. Those who do not believe in this consider the elections as part of the game. In fact, there is a war going on in the social and cultural arena with the basic differences between the typologies of Eastern and Western people, and it will continue. In Eastern-type dictatorial regimes, power and money are distributed from top to bottom according to the ruler, family, party or ethnic connection. Ruling parties like the Baath Party, rule the state mechanism in this way, and by nourishing men bound to them like gangs, they control the society. – In Eastern societies, the leader, tribe and state are traditionally very important. The individual is not important. The individual is nothing and can be sacrificed easily. Can be killed easily. You cannot even question this. – On the other hand, the individual is at the center in the Western society. Social development and the state are meant for the individual’s welfare and happiness. The individual is important. The real foundation stone of the Western-type democracy model is the individual getting stronger both economically and socially. But there is also another fact that the West mostly ignores: In Eastern societies, the individual finds his strength, public spirit and social security in the tribes, congregations or sects. Someone who joins such organizations, in one way or another, is better protected in difficult times and can also find people to support him. – Those who are clearly flabbergasted by the organized attitude of millions of Shiites demonstrating in the streets, and their participating in the elections, do not know anything about the religious-political organization model, that includes even the prayer leader of the districts. – Shiism in particular, different from Sunnism, has turned religious and political authorities into a state and societal control mechanism, most especially in the Iran model. It would not be incorrect even to say that Shiism has repeated Lenin’s and Stalin’s classical one-party model that reaches the traditional streets. – Establishing a Western model in such a special, organized structure that protects and controls the society will encounter certain difficulties, because this will mean a drastic shift from East to West geo-culturally, in a very short period of time. We hope that this shift does not result in Turkey being stuck between the EU and the United States, and being unable to do anything about it. Turkey should adapt to its role as a global player. February 8, 2005

letter of reader:Abit impolite entrance! man in your article you touch upon shia and shiaism with a little bit of disrespect. I do not see shias much different than sunnis and shiaism much different than sunnism. they are both represive, backward and regressive thinking. sunnis have ruled most of middle east for the past several hundered years and they do not have much to show for. all these countries from turkey to the arab countries and beyond who are ruled by sunnis are nothing than bunch of currpt , ineffective and repressive group. it is sad to watch peoples of these countries and not feel for them. the sunnis have repressed , opressed and killed and committed acts of genocites against millions of shias, kurds, yazidis, assyrians , armns and others. they have wasted all their energies of subjecting these peoples while themselves being sujegated to the west. look at turkey. turkey with a broken economy, broken society owes the west over $200 billion dollars. it cannot even service its debt interest being so high. it has committed untold cruelty against some 20 million kurds who the turks calling their brothers and yet turks banned their language. wow!! an american friend of mine asked me how is it poosible to ban someones language. turkey is still pissing in the wind in regards to eu about the kurds. it cannot be honost and straight and try to carry out the reforms , it promiese eu. it is a bazar mentality all lies and no honor. so how do you expect a country like turkey or egypt or any of those bugos republics to serive and call themselves a country. turkey is still using all its energies on containing the kurds in iraq. if you watch iran which has just as much fear on a free kurdistan , does not say a word and has been helping thme a lot. there is not a forces in the world including the supper power US to deny the kurds their eventuall freedom. let alone a third grade , poor thirld world country like turkey to deny the kurds. may be iran is smart enough and knows this, and the turks are not . turkey is till recovering from cyprus and has not been able to digest accupying cypurs. kurdistan is no cyprus. saddam with all his money and power and the help inside iraq could not dfeat the kurds. turkey is not even in the same league. tukrey still cannot handle pkk and is begging us to do it for them. so, do not blame the shia, the sunni establishments are and have been loosers for decades and they are not smart enought to wise up. by the way i come from a prominent sunni family and but i do not conisder myself a sunni. thanks for your time jordan letter2:Dear Nevval, first i must apologize for having written your name wrongly last week. Please forgive me. As to Iraq, you said exactly what i think about it. Except the clear difference between Shiism and Sunnism – i think of Saudi-Arabia and the Pashtunes, they are Sunnitic too. Are’nt the Alevites, which make the strictest difference to Chomeini in the Islamic World, much more Shiites than Sunnites in some respect? And I remember some poems of the Bektashi tradition, that i will not repeat if you are a Sunni. Perhaps, of course, you know them much longer than i do. I feel, that the Turks, as an ethnic tradition, make a difference. But also the Ottomans – they allied to the Sunna*, like the late Roman emperors to Christianity, and by that gained control of the faithful. I think, it is an alliance of powers. Chomeini and his successors rule(d) themselves, like Stalin, you’re right. That’s a difference, but i do not consider it very large if compared to liberal systems. In Saudi-Arabia, the theologians do not rule themselves, and nevertheless it is worse than Iran. So, the US will have much to do for a long time. Let us hope the best Hans-Peter Geissen *There is a degree dissertation which describes this alliance as a firm political and social control mechanism. Unfortunately, it is written in German. Some, like Elcin Kürsat-Ahlers, think, that the ulema control had become more fierce as the Ottomans became more and more defeated in Europe and started “Westernizing” reforms, which in turn jeopardized the position of the ulema in that alliance.