Deconstructing the discourse of models: the 'battle of ideas' over the post-revolutionary Middle East.

• Author: Goksel, Oguzhan
• Position: Report

In recent years, Turkey and Iran, two non-Arab countries emerged as key actors in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region with their rising influence. The Arab Spring has intensified the ongoing discussions over the roles of Turkey and Iran within academic and scholarly literature. Hence, 'neo-Ottomanism' and the 'Shi'a Crescent' have become popular concepts associated with pro-active foreign policies of these regional powers. (1) Debates over the applicability of the 'Turkish model' and the 'Iranian model' have evolved in parallel to the aforementioned literature. Especially after Islamist-oriented parties, such as Ennahda and Freedom and Justice Party, emerged victorious from general elections and formed governments in post-revolutionary Tunisia and Egypt, the so-called rivalry between two different types of governance based in Turkey and Iran have gained wide attention, sparking the interest of media, academia and policy-makers in the MENA region and beyond. This article will start its analysis by questioning the necessity of a model for post-revolutionary societies. This is an overlooked but much needed discussion that can contribute to the rapidly expanding literature. Then, the discourse of models will be analyzed by defining what each type of governance refers to, as there seems to be confusion regarding the meaning of these concepts. Lastly, the relevance and applicability of Turkish and Iranian models will be examined by assessing the needs and demands of the Arab public in addition to ideas of policy-makers in post-revolutionary societies. It will be argued that the Turkish model is much more applicable to the emerging democracies in Tunisia and Egypt than the Iranian model and it has a lot to offer to those societies in terms of guidance in areas such as state-religion relations, economic development, and democracy building.

The Necessity of Models for Development

Modernization refers to a model of an evolutionary transition from 'traditional' to a 'modern' society. Over the years, modernity has been measured in terms of various indicators such as industrialization, education level, and urbanization. Measuring and assessing the concept of modernity remains a controversial issue within the literature of development as different schools of thought such as modernization theory, world-systems school, and dependency theorists have offered various methods and approaches to study this phenomenon. Historically, modernization entered the domain of policy-makers when technologically advanced European empires such as Britain and France began to encounter non-Western nations during their period of colonization. As the non-Western nations lacked the technological tools to counter the territorial and economic claims of Western colonial empires, modernization or development had eventually become a key objective for these societies that lagged behind the rapidly developing West. For obvious reasons, the quickest way to shorten the development gap for non-Western societies was to learn from the example of European and North American nations.

Within the discourse of modernization, there are ongoing debates about whether developing countries follow similar paths to modernity in their transition periods. Clearly, each country's conditions greatly differ, therefore not all societies have followed the same trajectory of development, however all developing nations have, at some point, observed the experiences of more developed countries. During the 19th century, non-Western societies such as Japan, Turkey, Iran, and Egypt pursued series of reforms based on the scientific and political development of Western nations. The early experiments of these non-Western countries with Western models demonstrated that modernization process could be controlled, accelerated, and shaped by policy-makers. The systematic modernization process direct ed by Western-educated reforming bureaucrats in Japan throughout the latter half of the 19th century eventually led to the emergence of a society that stands as one of world's most technologically-advanced countries since the second half of the 20th century, merely a century after Western models were adopted. (2) Moreover, adoption of models proved its success over and again as the Western-inspired economic and democratic reforms propelled Turkey into the position of world's 17th largest economy, a country whose economy was based on agricultural production until a few decades ago. (3) Many other non-Western countries such as South Korea have undergone a similar transformation through the use of models while other developing nations such as China are now following suit.

In the history of revolutionary movements, there have been numerous examples of how previous models impact new uprisings. Waves of revolutions often follow each other in close succession as demonstrated when the American, French, and Haitian revolutions of the late 18th century influenced South American revolutions of the early 19th century; the 1848 revolutions in European countries facilitated one another throughout most of the continent; and the early 20th century revolutionary movements in China, the Ottoman Empire, and Iran that occurred one after the other within three years. (4) Huntington described the role models played on other movements as the 'demonstrative effect'. (5) Building upon Huntington's concept, Kirisci (6) points to the importance of regional models, which are shown to be the most influential ones in shaping the direction of revolutions.

As societies clearly lagging behind their counterparts in other developing parts of the world such as East Asia and South America, post-revolutionary countries in the MENA can benefit from the experiences of more developed nations in terms of socio-economic and political development. In fact, the adoption of models is essential if policy-makers intend to create their own independent modernization models and success stories. All countries such as Japan, South Korea, and Turkey, which are now being portrayed as 'models,' had initially learned from other countries and experienced an accelerated modernization process intensified by Western-inspired reforms. Following the Arab Spring, countries such as Tunisia and Egypt desperately need to reformulate their political structures and increase the pace of economic growth to meet the ever-intensifying demands of their largely young and more educated citizens.

A combination of various factors has resulted in the rise of Turkey and Iran as potential models for the region. Economically, both countries possess key advantages, Turkey is a highly industrialized country in the region and currently stands as the 17th largest economy in the world while Iran is the world's fourth-largest producer of oil and second-largest producer of natural gas. (7) An even more influential factor has been the largely positive images of both countries among MENA societies. Numerous opinion polls in Arab countries such as Egypt, Morocco, Tunisia, UAE, and Saudi Arabia have produced strikingly similar results, placing Turkey and Iran to top and second positions respectively in terms of public affection. For example, a 2010 University of Maryland and Zogby International poll demonstrates that Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan is the most popular leader in the region by a substantial margin, while Iranian President...