Home » Jerusalem Issue Briefs » Who Will Win the Battle for the Hearts and Minds of the Arab Street: Turkey or Iran?

by Harold RhodePublished December 2010

Vol. 10, No. 16 16 December 2010

Who Will Win the Battle for the Hearts and Minds

of the Arab Street: Turkey or Iran?

Harold Rhode

Iran and today's Turkish government are engaged in a battle for the hearts and minds of the Arab street.Iran represents the Shiites and Turkey represents the Sunnis. The Arab world is largely Sunni, with theexception of many of the Persian Gulf Arab countries and Iraq.

Iran and the Turkish government are also working together against the non-Muslim world - mostspecifically against the U.S. and Israel.

Both the Saudi government and private Saudi individuals are funding Islamist extremism throughout theMuslim world, most importantly in Turkey. They have a willing partner in the current Turkish government.

It appears that the Saudis and the present Turkish government are interested in reestablishing theCaliphate - at first culturally, but later possibly even politically - most likely in Istanbul, the seat of the lastSunni Caliph until the early 1920s.

Iran is Shiite and is appealing to the Arab Sunni street by trying to co-opt the agenda of the Sunni masses- the existence of Israel and the sanctity of Jerusalem - neither of which are traditional Shiite issues.

In doing so, Iran seeks to undermine the existing autocratic and dictatorial Arab Sunni regimes by goingover the heads of their leaders and appealing directly to the Arab street. That is the major reason whyalmost all of the regimes in the region hate the Iranian regime more than they hate Israel.

The Sunni-Shiite Divide

Iranian Shiites and Turkish Sunnis are engaged today in a huge battle to capture the hearts and minds of theArab street, most of which, outside of Iraq, the Persian Gulf, and southern and eastern Lebanon, are largelySunni. Sunni Arabs feel more of a bond with Turkish Sunnis than with Iranian or Arab Shiites, in spite of the ArabSunni world's historical animosity toward what they define as Turkish/Ottoman imperialism.

When Muhammad died, the question arose as to who was going to inherit the mantle of Islam. Some supported

the family of Muhammad, and later became known as the Shiites. Others - much stronger - who supported the

the family of Muhammad, and later became known as the Shiites. Others - much stronger - who supported thearistocracy in Mecca, later became known as the Sunnis. The Sunni-Shiite divide occurred more than 1,400years ago, but it is still alive and well. Iran represents the Shiites and Turkey represents the Sunnis in today'sbattle for the leadership of Islam.

Sunnis and Shiites have very different world views, and their disputes have often descended into violence (withthe Sunnis almost always winning military confrontations). Even so, this basic disagreement has not preventedthem from working together against the non-Muslim world - most specifically today against America (the leader ofthe West) and Israel.

Iran is at a terrible disadvantage in the Arab and Muslim worlds because it is Shiite. Besides a god they callAllah and a prophet named Muhammad, they do not have much else in common. They do not even agree on therole of Muhammad, because the main figure in Shiism is Ali, Muhammad's first cousin and son-in-law who wasmarried to Muhammad's daughter, Fatima. From this line come the Shiite imams. The Shiites believe that theTwelfth Imam will return and their version of Islam will triumph.

Shiites and Sunnis often do not view each other as fellow Muslims. In Iran, it is not uncommon to hear IranianShiites ask foreign Middle Easterners, "Are you Muslim or Sunni?" The Sunnis - especially the Saudis and otherWahhabis - return the "complement" by labeling the Shiites "apostates" or even "Jews." The punishment forapostasy in Islam is death.

About 85 percent of the Muslim world is Sunni and most of the Arab world, except for Iraq, other Persian Gulfcountries, and parts of Lebanon, does not really know what Shiism is. Therefore, the Shiites are at adisadvantage because their brand of Islam seems, at best, strange, if not heretical, to most of the people in theArab world.

Some two-thirds of Turkey's population is Sunni. The Ottoman Empire, on whose embers modern Turkey wasfounded, was a Sunni empire which treated the Shiites and their allies - like the Alevis in Turkey - badly.

About a third of Turkey's population are Alevis. Historically, Alevism is closer to Shiism than Sunnism, as Alevisvenerate Ali and traditionally have made pilgrimages to Najaf, where Ali is buried. Alevis are being terriblydiscriminated against by this Turkish regime. The government refuses to fund Alevi religious houses of worship -called Cemevis - but does fund mosque construction for Sunnis. The government also forces Alevischoolchildren to take classes on Sunnism, trying to convert Alevis to Sunnism.

I have heard senior Turkish government officials call Alevis "dogs" and claim that Alevis engage in immoral acts.These are traditional Sunni accusations that were hurled at Alevis during the time of the Ottomans. During theearlier years of the secular Turkish Republic, where Ataturk and his allies, who had much Alevi support, tried toextinguish the differences between all citizens of Turkey, it was considered in bad taste for Sunnis to make suchaccusations. Since 2002, when Erdogan et al came to power, that is no longer the case.) Such discriminationwas not always the case.

Until the 1500s, Iran was largely Sunni, but for various political reasons it became very Shiite within a hundredyears, largely as a means of protecting Iranian culture from the Arab/Turkish/Sunni non-Iranian world around it.

Now, both Iran and this Turkish government are working together to undermine the West and to advance theIslamic cause around the world. The battle will continue until the entire world becomes Muslim. But deep down,they also loathe each other.

Jerusalem Is Not Holy to Shiites

Jerusalem is an important case in point in understanding the Iranian-Turkish battle for the Arab street.

Jerusalem does not matter for traditional Shiites. They see the city's sanctification as a Sunni innovation andtherefore summarily reject it. In the late 680s CE, the Sunni Umayyad rulers of Damascus built a dome over theRock on the Temple Mount as a way to help smother a local revolt in Mecca at that time. The Umayyads wereafraid that people who made the pilgrimage to Mecca would join the rebels' cause, and therefore blocked pilgrimsfrom going to Mecca. That is when and why they turned the Temple Mount into an alternative pilgrimage site.Jerusalem, in short, became holy in Islam as a result of a local revolt in Mecca, some 55 years afterMuhammad's death.

The Shiites hate the Umayyads and all that the Umayyads did. Some Shiite Grand Ayatollahs even have arguedthat Jerusalem was given to the children of Isaac, while Ishmael, Abraham's older son, received Najaf, which isin Iraq. In other words, from a Shiite perspective, Jerusalem is a Sunni heresy.

Why then did Shiite Iran adopt the Jerusalem and Israel issues as its own, given Shiism's historical antipathy tothe Sunnis? Because these issues are so close to the hearts and minds of the Arab Sunni masses whoseleaders have been unable to dislodge Israel from Jerusalem or to eliminate that country.

Additionally, the Iranians named their most elite unit the "Quds/Ghods" forces - the Arabic and Persian Muslimnames for Jerusalem.

The Jerusalem/Israel issue has proven to be a wonderful tool for Iranian leaders to use to garner support for theIslamic Republic in its fight against the Arab Sunni rulers. The Iranian Shiite interest in Jerusalem is, therefore,nothing more than a political tool the Iranian government uses to bash their Arab Sunni enemies.

The Saudi Connection

The Saudis - Sunni Wahhabis - know they are too weak to rule over the Sunni world, and they are petrified ofIran, as the WikiLeaks cables make abundantly clear. The Saudis are interested in Turkey because traditionally:1. the Turks are very militaristic and have been the soldiers of Islam; and 2. Istanbul was the capital of the SunniCaliphate which in 1924 was abolished by Ataturk, the founder of the secular Republic of Turkey. The Saudisknow they are impotent desert nomads and therefore need to enlist other, more powerful Sunnis like Erdogan andhis crowd in their goal to "Sunni Islamify" the entire world.

Wahhabism is fanatical and for Islam is the equivalent of the Ku Klux Klan brand of Christianity. The difference,however, is that the Ku Klux Klan never had oil money to spread its brand of Christianity. The Wahhabis havelots of money and they are using it to propagate their hatred of Shiites, the West, and Israel. While they aredoing all they can to eradicate radical Islam in their country - which really means anti-Saudi activity - theylavishly support radical Islam everywhere else. Erdogan and company are therefore their natural allies andbeneficiaries.

It appears that the Saudis and the present Turkish government are both interested in reestablishing the Caliphate- certainly culturally and probably eventually politically - most likely in the capital of the last great Sunni empire inmodern times: Istanbul. The Turkish government is very receptive to that idea. If they reach their common goal,an Islamist Turkey would be a bulwark against both the Shiites and against Westernization.

The Turkish government claims that there is no Wahhabi money going into Turkey. Maybe so, but gorgeous,expensive mosques are being built in Turkey's poor, small villages. The locals obviously do not have the moneyfor this. Moreover, mosques are also being built in Alevi villages which have no Sunnis and therefore don't needmosques. The money to build these mosques comes from somewhere, and the Turkish government simply doesnot have the money to engage in such a massive building campaign. Everywhere else in the world, the Wahhabisare building mosques - but, if you choose to believe the government of Turkey, not in Turkey.

In addition, beautifully produced and very inexpensive books which spread hated and advocate violence againstthe West, America, and Israel are easily available in Turkey. Again, the Turks simply don't have the money toproduce such beautifully crafted books. If one chooses to believe the Turkish government, then it is curious thatWahhabi money is going into every Muslim country except Turkey, which, the Turks claim, is one of the mostimportant countries in the Muslim world.

Iran Sees Its Opportunities

The Iranians are great strategists and know how to wait. The Iranians cannot stand up against the whole Arabworld because they do not have the resources or the military to do so. So they have devised a campaign to goover the heads of the Arab Sunni-ruled regimes, directly to the Sunni masses. That is the major reason whyalmost all of the regimes in the region hate the Iranian regime more than they hate Israel.

Their first audience is other Shiites. In the Persian Gulf, where there is oil there are Shiites. Saudi oil is found inan area approximately 80 kilometers by 400 kilometers along the northeastern coast of the Gulf. That area isArabic-speaking and overwhelmingly Shiite, and was independent until 1902 when the Saudis captured it, much

Arabic-speaking and overwhelmingly Shiite, and was independent until 1902 when the Saudis captured it, muchto the chagrin of its local inhabitants. In Sunni-ruled Kuwait, which is probably 40-50 percent Shiite, thegovernment does everything possible to placate the Shiites because they are a natural target for Iran. Bahrain is80 percent Shiite, but its ruling family is Sunni.

In the game of Shiites versus Sunnis, Iranian cunning has to be admired. The Iranians are trying to steal theagenda of the Sunni Arab leaders. At the same time, the current Turkish government and its Wahhabi cohortsare trying to block the Iranian Shiites from succeeding. And all of them together are working against America andIsrael.

Khomeini Stands Up to America

When Ayatollah Khomeini got off the plane upon his return to Iran in 1979, he said he had come to rectify awrong which took place 1,400 years ago. What he meant by that was not lost either on the Shiites or the Arabworld's Sunni rulers. They knew he meant that his form of Islam - Shiism, which is of course the only true Islamfrom his point of view - must defeat Sunnism. As part of his plan, Khomeini, unlike the rulers of the Arab Sunniworld, constantly harangued against and humiliated the West, most specifically the United States - the leader ofthe West. In doing so, Khomeini was standing up for Islam which had for centuries suffered territorial losses atthe hands of the Christian West and later their Jewish allies in Israel.

The Muslim world in general, and the Arab world in particular, feel that Islam has been losing ever since 1683when they were routed at Vienna, and that Islam has been in retreat ever since. When Khomeini's "students"took American diplomats hostage, the U.S. acted as if it were afraid. In response, students throughout theMuslim world put up pictures of Khomeini, who said he was restoring the honor of the Muslim world. Thisdescribes the Iranian battle for the Arab street, as Iran has been going over the heads of Arab leaders - appealingdirectly to the Arab street - to claim it is restoring Muslim honor.

Khomeini and his successors thus touched a deep cord among Muslims everywhere, and particularly in the Arabworld. When he, and later Ahmadinejad or Khamenei, gave public speeches, behind them often was a sign inPersian, and sometimes also in Arabic, saying: "America can't do anything." In other words, we (Shiites andIranians) are the ones standing up for Islam and, by extension, the Arab (Sunni) rulers either kowtow to theAmericans or are incapable of doing anything to stop non-Muslim advances. Over and over again Iran's leadersrepeat: "America can do nothing."

The Arab street sees that neither America nor Israel is doing anything about Iran's nuclear capability. Few SunniArabs outside of Iraq, the Persian Gulf, and Lebanon really know much about Shiism, but they see that theShiites are standing up for them, while their own rulers do nothing. The Iranians have been doing this for overthirty years and they have made some headway in the Arab street.

Turkey's View of the World

There is an enormous Islamist revival going on in Turkey today, strongly encouraged and pushed by Turkey'sIslamist rulers. They are slowly but surely trying to reestablish the Caliphate, and are encouraging journalists towrite articles about Ottoman control over areas over which the Ottomans once ruled - i.e., southeast Europe andthe Arab world. Arab Sunnis appear to be willing to overlook the Turkish imperial past because Arab nationalismhas failed them and so many now look to Islam to save them.

When the current Turkish government took power in 2002, it began a slow process of returning the Turkish polityto its Islamic roots. However, the Islam that Turkey's government is pushing isn't the more tolerant OttomanIslam but a version much more closely attuned to that of the Wahhabi, extremist, anti-Western Islam pushed bythe Saudis.

Reactions to the Flotilla Crisis

How did the Turkish masses react to the Turkish government-inspired "flotilla crisis"? To be sure, many Turkssupported the flotilla terrorists, but that is because they had little or no knowledge about who the people were onboard the ship. Even so, many common people in Turkey reacted otherwise. They said: Gaza is "Arab" and theword "Arab" in Turkish often has a pejorative meaning. Turks associate Arabs with money and laziness.(Industriousness is a highly prized commodity in Turkish culture.) Turks see Arabs coming to Istanbul not to see

(Industriousness is a highly prized commodity in Turkish culture.) Turks see Arabs coming to Istanbul not to seethe sights but to go to prostitutes. These Turks wonder why Arab Egypt - which also blockades the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip - and the oil-rich Arab countries with limitless financial resources have not taken care of thehumanitarian needs of the people of Gaza. Why should Turkey, they reason, which has many people who do nothave enough money to put bread on the table, be more concerned about the Arabs than the Arabs themselves?

Arab Sunni reaction to the "flotilla crisis" was different. Arab Sunnis, especially among the Palestinians, startednaming children after Erdogan. When Erdogan later visited Lebanon, Sunnis referred to him as "Sultan Erdogan,"i.e., their ruler - calling him by the title that had been reserved for the ruler of the Ottoman Empire to which theirancestors had belonged - the (Sunni) Caliph of the Muslim world.

Which Side Is Winning?

So how have Turkey and Iran fared in their battle to win the hearts and minds of the Arab street?

The press in every Arab country besides Iraq is government-controlled, so we cannot get a true reading of whatthe masses think from the press. Nevertheless, a foreign polling company recently asked Arabs what theythought about foreign leaders. No one could get in trouble if they mentioned Turkey positively, but had theymentioned Iran favorably, they might have suffered consequences at the hands of their authoritarian andtotalitarian rulers. We must keep this in mind when trying to analyze who is winning this battle.

The pollsters asked, "Which is the foreign country friendliest to the Arabs?" France came in first, Turkey wassecond, and Iran did not even make the top ten. In essence, public opinion in the Arab world is by and largefickle. What is important is who can destroy Israel, and the Iranians have been working at it since 1979 andseem to be doing a much better job than their own Arab rulers. Yet even though Iran has gone to great lengths towin the hearts and minds of the Arabs, they come up short because the Turkish government is Sunni, as aremost Arabs.

In the end, Iran will always remain at a tremendous disadvantage. The Turkish government has only beenengaged in efforts to win the hearts and minds of the Arab street since 2002, when Erdogan's party came topower, while the Iranians have been at this for 31 years. Only if Sunni Muslims converted en masse to Shiismwould Iran really be able to gain the upper hand. This does not seem to be in the cards for the foreseeable future.

What would happen if Turkey and Iran switched places? Let's say, for argument's sake, that Turkey abandonedany pretense of secularism and re-established the (Sunni) Caliphate in Istanbul, while Iran returned to secularnon-clerical rule. While we can only speculate, it is likely that, with the exception of Shiite-dominated Iraq and theArab Shiites of the Persian Gulf and parts of Lebanon, the Sunni Arabs would look to Turkey and abandon anypro-Iranian feeling because they would no longer see Iran as the center of the battle to defeat the non-Muslimworld. In that case, Turkey would clearly be the winner in the battle for the hearts and minds of the Arab world.

* * *

Dr. Harold Rhode studied in Iran at Ferdowsi University in Mashhad in 1978 during the early and middle stages ofthe Islamic Revolution. In 1979, he received his Ph.D. from Columbia University in Islamic history. He joined theOffice of the U.S. Secretary of Defense in 1982 as an advisor on Turkey, Iraq, and Iran. Since then he hasserved in the Office of the Secretary of Defense and as advisor on Islamic affairs on the Pentagon's policyplanning staff. From 1994 until his recent retirement, Dr. Rhode served in the Pentagon's Office of NetAssessment. He is currently a Senior Advisor at the Hudson Institute, New York. This Jerusalem Issue Brief isbased on his presentation to the Institute for Contemporary Affairs of the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs onOctober 21, 2010.

| Privacy Policy | Site Map | Home |JCPA, Beit Milken, 13 Tel Hai St., Jerusalem 92107, Israel, Tel: 972-2-5619281 Fax: 972-2-5619112, jcpa@netvision.net.il

Copyright © 2011 JCPA. All Rights Reserved. Created by Catom web design