Turkeys Trail of Terror and American Foreign Policy | American Enterprise Institute

Note: This extract is part of a more important political note “Hamas and Türkiye: Partners in terror“” by the Foundation of Defense of Democracies In collaboration with Jonathan Schanzer, Sinan Ciddi and Melissa Sacks. Read the entire memo here.

In 1979, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini led the Islamic revolution that swept Irans Shah and replaced the Iranian monarchy with an office rule. Overnight, Iran has transformed from an American partnership pillar in the region in an opponent and a terrorist sponsor. The change was undeniable, even for the most ardent supporters.

Before his rise in power, Khomeini denied any ambition to govern Iran. He spoke of arouse democracy and of interest in Iran's decision. I don't want to have government power in my hand; I am not interested in personal power, he told a gullible journalist.¹

There is an irony today that, although political decision -makers recognize the evidence concerning the transformation of Irans, there are too much denial on the equally important turkeys.

The pragmatism that Western officials have attributed to Recep Tayyip Erdogan has always been a cunning that Erdogan kissed to appease concerns while he consolidated power. It worked. And not only with the Obama administration. Daniel Fried, George W. Bushs Secretary of State for European Affairs, described the Erdogans AKP party as a sort of Muslim version of a Christian Democratic Party, while Bush Secretary of State, Colin Powell, congratulated Turkey as Muslim democracy. ² Erdogan played for Western Naivete as he consolidated control. The authoritarian trends of Turkish leaders were fully exposed after the arrest of March 2025 of the Turkish opposition figure Ekrem Imamoglu for false accusations. Erdogans is the subsequent repression against demonstrators only from the exacerbated Western concerns that the turkey window to join the club of liberal democracies has almost closed.

With hindsight, the accession process of the European Union of Ankaras had less to do with the desire to join Europe than to serve as a mechanism to consolidate the autocracy of Erdogans. Indeed, Erdogan was only too happy to remedy the European requirements so that he unravels any internal military role in Turkish society. In theory, this was good for democracy given the role of soldiers in the overthrow of previous regimes. In 1960 and 1980, the Turkish army interceded to end the governments which violated the Constitution or did not maintain the law and the order. In 1971 and 1997, the threat of intervention was sufficient to force governments to resign. But the European Union has unplugged the role of the military to protect the Constitution before establishing control over the power of Erdogans. Retrospectively, it may have been the last nail in the coffin of turkeys democracy.

Erdogans, the first step in consolidating its dictatorship, was to divert the technocratic bodies. His first decision was to replace each member of the Savings Deposit Insurance Fund (TMSF) with veterans in Islamist finance. TMSF is similar to the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation in the United States, but it also has an excellent goal and is more powerful. Erdogan armed him to audit banks and companies affiliated to his competitors and often struggled with ruinous fines. He quickly moved the TMSF as the office of the Prime Ministers and, when he assumed the presidency, he accompanied it.

Erdogan also created a new income administration (GIB) which, in practice, imposed tax evaluations of punishment not only on political competitors but also to anyone who made them a donation. In a famous case, a report concerning a Turkish-German charitable organization illegally transformed money into Islamists in Türkiye made Erdogan smoked. The tax authorities punished the Dogan group, the owner of the newspapers, with a tax privilege of $ 600 million. When Dogan paid the penalty and the newspaper continued to present itself critically on Turkish governance of the Turkish forts, the authorities slapped Dogan with a fine of $ 2.5 billion.³ In the end, Dogan unloaded his media assets from Pro-Erdogan interests.

It was the rule rather than the exception: the government of Erdogan confiscated the independent daily with high traffic SabahFor example, and transferred his control to his son -in -law after forcing all other potential bidders to get out of the auction for auction Sabah and its assets.⁴ By taking full control not only of newspapers, but also on television and on radio, Erdogan was able to shape a media story that has only strengthened his efforts to consolidate domestic power. The adapted coverage of Erdogans to an endless incitement against Israel and the promotion of terrorist groups like Hamas has still fundamentally changed public opinion of turkeys on foreign affairs.

None of this should have surprised. The Islamist ideology of Erdogans was still there for those who cared to see. While the mayor of Istanbul, Erdogan said all-powerful thank you, I am a Sharia servant [Islamic law]. He then described himself as the Imam of Istanbul.⁵ But his jihadist tendencies were not the only ideological red flag. The Turkish strong man compared democracy to a tram. Democracy is like a tram journey: when you reach your stop, you go down.⁶ As Erdogan consolidated control, he lost a pretension of moderation.

As this FDD research note clearly does it, Turkey today qualifies as a state sponsor of terrorism. In administrations and political parties, two faults undermine American policy. The first is a tendency to ignore ideology. Erdogan has a central set of beliefs. It is a mistake to confuse tactical moderation with sincere conversion. Secondly, American officials constantly calm American politics to a vow for what they hoped that Turkey is or believed it was once rather than what it is now.

A corollary error is to believe that Turkey can return to the status quo ante. More than 35 million Turkish children have registered by the education system since Erdogan came to power; Turkish media have prompted tens of millions of others. Erdogan has equipped the public service with men in his image. He also used couples of coup, real and imagined, to replace the direction of the Turkish staff. Even if Erdogan dies tomorrow, it will take decades to wash Erdoganism out of the system. And this supposes that his successors and the political opposition do not consider his populist formulas as keys of their own future success.

The Islamic Republic of Iran deserved its terrorist designation. There are Hamas pom-pomaliers, finance, which is accompanied by its leaders and contraband of armaments. Turkey is now doing the same. And just as Iran supports other terrorist groups around the Middle East, Turkey too.

The Islamic Republic does not limit its terrorist sponsorship in Hamas; He supports terrorist groups of Hezbollah, Houthis and Kashmir based in Pakistan which target India. There is overwhelming evidence that the force of the guardian of the Islamic revolution also supported the insurrection led by Al-Qaeda in Iraq.⁷

Likewise, there are many evidence that Turkey does not limit its terrorist sponsorship in Hamas. In 2015, the daily center-left Republic Published photos of Turkeys National Intelligence Organization (MIT) Transfer of weapons to an affiliate of al-Qaeda to the Syrian border. The reaction of the turkey was not to investigate his intelligence agents but rather to launch a legal affair against RepublicS editor -in -chief, Can Dundar. He then survived an assassination attempt. Today, the Hayat Tahrir Al-Sham (HTS), supported by Turkey, governs great expanses of Syria, and it remains to be seen if this group is engaged in the assault against its neighbors after consolidating power.

The Islamic State, meanwhile, found a safe refuge in Türkiye at the top of its caliphate. The Syrian Kurdish forces who defended Kobane, a city that attracts the Turkish border, have videos of Islamic State fighters taking advantage of the free passage in Turkey, then pulling the Kurdish defenders against Turkish territory. On February 28, 2025, the Lebanese authorities announced that they intercepted $ 2.5 million worn by a Turk who arrived at Beirut International Airport.⁸ The intention was to distribute these funds to Hezbollah supported by Iran in Lebanon.

There should not be a free pass for NATO members to engage in terrorism. It is also not unprecedented to sanction the allies if their behavior deserves it. Designating Turkey A state sponsor could certainly have drawbacks. There are elements of the Turkish American relationship that still benefit Washington and the West. But there are limits to the duration of the duration of Washington on the blind on the Ankaras for a long time for jihadist terrorist groups.

The sanctions of terrorism against Turkey would infuse credibility in the process of designation of terrorism of the departments of the State by demonstrating that the objective factors prevail over those subjective. Like the designations concerning money laundering have led Cyprus and Armenia to work with Washington to reform and reverse the designation, the aim of any designation of Terror of Turkey should also provide a roadmap to Turkish officials, under Erdogan or any future administration, to understand what they should do if they wish to make Turkey join the Alliance of the United States.

Floor notes:

1. [Special Research on the History of Iranian Civilization, Culture, and Persian Language and Literature],, Iran ShenasiHAS. Jalal Matni, winter 2003.
2. Deputy Secretary for European and Eurasian Affairs Daniel Fried, putting transatlantic power to work for freedom, US State DepartmentDecember 14, 2005. (Https://2001-2009.state.gov/p/eur/rls/rm/58229.htm)
3. Sebnem Arsu and Sabrina Tavernise, Turkish Media Group is sentenced to a fine of $ 2.5 billion, The New York TimesSeptember 9, 2009. (Https://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/10/world/europe/10istanbul.html)
4. The sale of the Turkish media company raises eyebrows, Hrriyet Daily News (Türkiye), April 23, 2008. (Https://www.hurriyet.com.tr/gundem/turkish-media-company-sale-meses-yebrows-8769903)
5. Does Prime Minister Erdogan accept Turkish secularism? Middle East quarterlySpring 2007, pages 89-90. (https://www.meforum.org/middle-east-quarterly/does-prime-ister-erdogan-acpet-turbish-secularism)
6. Nilgun Cerrahoglu, Milliyet (Türkiye), July 14, 1996, page 20. (https://gazetearsivi.milliyet.com.tr/listhtih=1996.07.14)
7. Succession of Robert P. Hartwick, c. The Islamic Republic of Iran, n ° 1: 18-CV-01612 -kk, DDC 2018). (https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5894b0fa725e25cd299eed06/t/5c4241d76d 2A73D0704DDC5B/1547846108112/Hartwick+V+Iran+and ++-Second+Beleend ++ Chplair.pdf)
8. Lebanon entered $ 2.5 million to Hezbollah, say sources, Reuters, February 28, 2025. (Https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/lebanon-seize-25-million-bound-hezbollah-sources-say-2025-28)