The “Red Book” or “secret constitution” is a document that determines Turkey's international strategic relations and the challenges it faces, revised every five years. In 2010, the National Security Council (MGK – Milli Güvenlik Kurulu), i.e. the President, the Prime Minister and the leadership of the army, ratified the amended document, and the amendments made to it were considered to represent a strategic transformation in Ankara's policies. Most prominent among those amendments was the focus on the fact that “the region's instability stems from Israeli actions and [Tel Aviv's] policy, which could lead to an arms race in the Middle East”. The “secret constitution” also removed Syria, Iran, Greece (partially), Bulgaria, Armenia and Georgia from the list of countries that pose a threat to Turkey. These countries had, before the amendments, been considered to be of the greatest threat to Ankara, especially Iran with its Islamist rule and its efforts to obtain nuclear weapons. Regarding domestic threats, the term “danger of religious reactionism” was replaced with “radical groups exploiting religion (…) by employing violent methods (…) for destructive (…) activities”. This transformation in the “secret constitution” had been the starting point for new relations with the Middle East. Everyone thought that the Justice and Development Party (AKP – Adalet ve Kalkınma Partisi) had been able to impose its will on the military institution, and begun to apply its “zero problems” policy, as conceived by AKP and government theorist Ahmet Davutoğlu. This meant that Ankara would have begun to lean towards the Syrian-Iranian axis and away from Israel and the West. Indeed, Erdoğan's enthusiastic statements against the Hebrew state are well known, as are his praise of the common history that brings together the peoples of the Middle East, especially in Syria and Iran, and his repeated visits to Tehran and Damascus. What happened then for him to turn against the “constitution” drafted by his own party? The fact is that the exclusion of the danger of “religious reactionism” from the Red Book represented a “historical” reconciliation between Atatürk's institution and the Islamists, whom Erdoğan and his party represent – a reconciliation in which the United States and NATO played a major role. Indeed, no one would believe that the Turkish military had suddenly become democratic and had handed over control of its affairs to the Islamists without coordinating with Washington, which had preceded Ankara in forging good relations with it, since they share with the army its enmity towards Leftist and nationalist movements, as well as “extremist religious radicalism”, as stated in the amendments. The changes in Turkish policy, from “zero problems” to returning to its old role of enmity towards Iran, Syria and Russia, were preceded by changes in NATO's policy, from an alliance in charge of defending Europe to an organization that makes use of its military arm wherever Washington so wishes (Libya being the most recent example). In addition to this, the Arabs shifting in their “Spring” from working on consecrating the European values of justice and freedom, and opposition to colonialist behavior, to consecrating their religious and confessional reality, has also contributed to the enthusiasm shown by Erdoğan and his party in this antagonistic direction. Under its Islamists, Turkey is opening up to its neighborhood through religious ideology, carrying with it the policies of the United States and NATO, in preparation for changing the geopolitics of this neighborhood by helping the “Spring” in which are blooming governments that resemble that of the AKP, without armies that resemble that of Atatürk.
