I was struck by the words the Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu addressed to the inhabitants of a village in North Lebanon, part of whom were Turkmens who still spoke Turkish. He said: “When you are safe and happy, our minds are at ease. If you do not have water, then water in Anatolia is forbidden. If you do not have schools, then this would mean there are no schools in Anatolia. The grants you speak of are not gifts, but rather a duty we present to you. It is a debt which we were late in paying, and which we won't be late in paying again.” Davutoglu's words included an additional emotional dose, perhaps due to the presence of Turkmen inhabitants. However, he spoke in the same perspective when he visited other parts of Lebanon. Perhaps the most important part on which his declarations were focused after meeting with Lebanese officials was the link between Lebanon's stability and that of the region. It is the connection of the fates in the region. Davutoglu's declarations in Lebanon reminded me of what a visiting journalist hears in Ankara. We want a stable Turkey, but we do not want it to be an island of stability in a troubled sea. We want a prosperous Turkey, but we do not want it to be an island of prosperity in a region threatened by poverty, despair, and extremism. Turkey has an effective interest in the region's stability and prosperity, and it is why it works for peace. This interest implies a discourse of interests and international legitimacy, negotiation, entering the countries from their legitimate door, seeking to bring stances together, and arming oneself with patience in order to achieve this. It would not be an exaggeration to say that this policy carries the imprint of a man called Ahmet Davutoglu. Davutoglu saw the Soviet Union disappear from the map. He understood that Turkey, which is a NATO member, has lost its strategic importance after its neighboring enemy disappeared. He thought of his country's future, its European dream, and its ability to play a role in the Middle East and the Islamic world. These thoughts wouldn't have turned into a policy had there not been difficult decisions taken by two men, Abdullah Gül and Recep Tayyip Erdoğan: making their party and their country's stance reach maturation before moving on to the region and even farther. Some years ago, during an event in an Arab capital, an official pointed to one of the persons seated in the room and told me: “Keep your eyes on that man.” When I asked about his name, he replied: “Ahmet Davutoglu”. I tried to get more facts from the official, but he wouldn't give me any. In the subsequent phase, Davutoglu would make dozens of secret trips in various directions, carrying ideas and messages that encourage the adoption of the negotiation option in search of peace, prosperity, and stability. The Syrian-Israeli dossier was at the top of his priorities, not to mention the other issues. Davutoglu visited the Turkish unit at the UNIFIL in South Lebanon. He met with Lebanese officials and discussed with them bilateral relations, resolution 1701, and the peace horizons in the Middle East. He is the new Turkish dictionary. “We want a Middle East based on political dialogue, joint security, economic independence, and diverse cultures. These are our historic traditions, and if we work together we can revive these traditions and turn our region into a region of peace, stability, and prosperity…” It seemed obvious that Turkey, which enjoys today the ability to address all the parties in the region, is attempting to exploit this ability to make stances reach maturation. When Davutoglu was touring Lebanon, the Tehran streets were witnessing a new chapter of clashes with protestors, in what can be seen as a confirmation that the crisis in Iran is not a passing one, even if it appears to be non-fatal. The Iranian dictionary is different on the domestic and foreign fronts. It is enough to compare between Davutoglu's declarations and those of his Iranian counterpart Manouchehr Mottaki. Turkey conducts itself like a normal country. Iran conducts itself like a scared or a scary revolution. I wished that Davutoglu would extend his stay in Lebanon; that the terminology of stability and prosperity would infiltrate itself into the dictionaries of the Lebanese political forces; that he would help us make stances reach maturation, choose names, and distribute [ministerial] portfolios. We have tried all the cuisines of the world, so what harm would it do to try the Turkish cuisine?
