Afrasianet - Is it true  that President Recep Tayyip Erdogan is trying to revive the Ottoman Empire, comments that have become routine among Western political analysts regarding discussions about Turkey's foreign policy, no longer carry the same critical weight?

Erdogan and his supporters do not feel inclined to counter these arguments and are in fact unbothered by claims of "neo-Ottomanism."

On the contrary, these accusations have made Erdogan more popular in the eyes of many Turks who want to make peace with their historical roots, including their Ottoman heritage. Almost every link to the country's past was severed after the collapse of the empire and the founding of the new Turkish state in line with the institution's rigid principles, such as hardline secularism and Turkish nationalism.

The ink of the Treaty of Lausanne was still wet when members of the Osmanoglu family, which ruled the Ottoman Empire for six centuries, were expelled from the country's territory in 1924.

Twelve sovereign states in contemporary Europe, including the United Kingdom, Denmark, Sweden, Belgium, the Netherlands, and Spain, have retained their royal families because of their "constitutional monarchy" system, giving kings and queens the status of symbolic "head of state," while in modern Turkey the Ottoman royal family was declared a traitor to the new Turkish nation.

Ottoman dynasty

None of the dynasties of European empires were treated in this way. I'm not saying that the new Turkish state should have been a monarchy rather than a republic, but the ancestors of Osman, the founder of the Ottoman Empire, could have stayed in the country and lived as citizens rather than being sent into exile as persona non grata.

Sadly, most of them fell into poverty; some were even forced to work in manual labor until they had enough. Although they were allowed to return to Turkey in 1974, only some returned for fear of being abused.

Those who returned did not immediately obtain Turkish citizenship, and intelligence tracked them for a while.

Today, they feel safe and secure in their homeland, leaving behind the bitter stories of the past. No one can deny that they have always respected the laws of the Turkish Republic and that they live humbly.

Historians say that the Kemalist elite of the new republic erased Ottoman history, effectively silenced Ottoman history, and almost rewrote it, especially the last centuries of the empire.

According to them, the new nation, in stark contrast to the multi-ethnic Ottoman Empire, must be home to many religions, so its reputation had to be discredited.

Over the decades, Turkish society has been inundated with stereotypical and uncertain perceptions of their ancestors.

However, since the Turkish Republic is a young country, a lot of people who have listened to the stories of the past from their parents and grandparents have not adopted the imposed perspective.

Historical Background

The history of the Turks dates back to about 2000 BC. When they first lived in Central Asia before they spread, but they began to settle in Anatolia in the early eleventh century.

The Seljuk state of Anatolia was founded in 1080 and was the first Turkish state on these lands but declined with the Mongol invasion of Anatolia.

The Ottoman era, which begins with the legend of Oghuz Khan, was founded by Osman in 1299 and lasted for 623 years until the end of World War I.

After the Turkish War of Independence between 1919 and 1923, the Turks established the successor state: the Republic of Turkey.

Erdogan's Agenda

Unlike most of his predecessors, Erdogan did not ignore the legacy left by the Seljuks and Ottomans and considered the Turkish Republic to be a continuation of empires.

As he began to break taboos, explaining that he did not want to forget the nation's history in the dusty pages of hidden history books, long-standing political disagreements emerged within Turkey.

Erdoğan heads a country at the center of regional tensions and global rivalries, and the president is increasingly under attack by anti-Trump circles over Turkey's regional policies, specifically after the beginning  of the so-called Arab Spring, accusing him of aspiring to restore the Ottoman Empire. Erdoğan said: "The Republic of Turkey, like our previous countries, is a continuation of each other, it is also a continuation of the Ottomans. Of course, the boundaries have changed. The forms of government have changed... But the essence is the same, the spirit is one, and even many institutions are the same."

Meanwhile, with Erdogan accused of aspiring to become a "modern-day sultan," a portrayal used to stoke fear of the president, people are now wondering which of the empire's 39 sultans Erdogan resembles him most. They are now examining Erdogan's characteristics and trying to make balances and comparisons between the president and the sultans.

Comparisons with Sultan Selim I (Yavuz Sultan Selim) began.Selim was a conqueror who greatly expanded the geographical presence of the Ottoman Empire from the Middle East to the Balkans.

During his reign the Ottoman Empire grew by 70%. After his conquests of Egypt, Syria, and some parts of Persia, he was seen as one of the most important sultans of the empire, having conquered the holy cities of Mecca and Medina to Muslims.

Subsequently, he received the title of "Caliph", i.e., the leader of the Islamic world, paving the way for his successors to hold this pivotal title until the caliphate was abolished in 1924 by decree, as part of the strategy of the founder Mustafa Kemal Atatürk to replace the Ottoman Empire with the Turkish Republic.

Although Selim I ruled for only eight years between 1512 and 1520, Islam became central to Ottoman life, which is why the sultan was hated by Westerners and hated by some leaders in the Middle East because of his conquests.

Because of his Middle East policy that contrasted with Turkey's NATO allies after the start of the Syrian crisis, Erdogan was portrayed as Selim the First and accused of wanting to be a conqueror.

The Iranian and Syrian regimes have focused particularly on the similarities given the conquests of Selim I in Syria and Iraq.

The sectarian violence in Syria and Iraq, was an opportunity to portray Erdogan as the figure of Selim I and push the argument that the Turkish leader wanted to invade Syria.

Comparison of Erdogan to Abdul Hamid II

The other sultan most often compared to Erdogan is, of course, Abdulhamid II. Abdulhamid II, who ruled the Ottoman Empire between 1876 and 1909, has long been a point of contention between conservative Turkish Muslims and radical republicans.

While conservatives see him as the ultimate defender of the Ottoman Empire and the Muslim world that was unjustly overthrown by the "Young Turkey" or Young Turks, members of a movement that worked to replace the absolute monarchy of the Ottoman Empire with a constitutional government, the latter group views him as an autocracy.

Conservatives in Turkey believe that Abdul Hamid II has been the victim of a conspiracy orchestrated by the newly founded Zionist movement with the help of Britain since he refused to sell Palestinian land.

They literally offered to pay off all the foreign debts of the Ottoman Empire in exchange for ceding Palestinian lands, where the Zionists had begun Jewish settlement and were planning to establish a Jewish state.

Because of his firm stance rejecting illegal Israeli settlement and annexation of Palestinian lands, despite being subjected to immense pressure and smear campaigns, Erdogan's admirers liken him to Abdulhamid II who is considered the hero of the Muslim world. But Abdulhamid was eventually overthrown and imprisoned until his death.

However, unlike Abdulhamid II, Erdogan survived a number of plots to overthrow him, including a bloody coup attempt.

That's why I think Erdogan is more like another successor, Mahmud II, who is best known for his fight with the Janissaries, the elite infantry unit that was threatening the state at the time.

Erdoğan and the Longings of the Ottoman Empire

Some media outlets refer to what they have described as the new dilemma facing the Middle East, considering it to be Turkey, and the possibility of the emergence of an Islamic empire in the region through the eventual revival of the Ottoman Empire.

She said that there may be agreement among the Americans that their military presence in the Middle East is no longer feasible and does not benefit the country, but the question arises in what might happen in the Middle East after the US withdrawal from the region.

In light of the growing Arab popular uprisings or the so-called "Arab Spring," many Arab countries will turn to Western democracy, but the nightmare is either the outbreak of civil wars or the emergence of an Islamic revolution in the region. The third and most important scenario is the wishes for the return of the Ottoman Empire in the Middle East and the Muslim world.

Despite Turkey's recent aggressive bid to join the European Union, and despite the Turks supporting the Americans in the Cold War, since 2003, when Recep Tayyip Erdogan took office  in an election won by the Justice and Development Party (AKP), things have changed about Turkey's continued aspiration to the West.

Erdoğan's personality draws the attention of many as a moderate Islamist, as well as having saved Turkey from devastating economic crises and contributed to the development of his country's economy and the reduction of the military's power. 

It was no coincidence that Erdogan's Istanbul received the first foreign visits of US President Barack Obama, and it was no surprise that the AKP won the election for the third time in a row.

And let's take a closer look at Erdogan, who seems to already dream of developing, prospering, and reviving Turkey in the way that the Ottoman Sultan Suleiman the Great used to admire.

"Mosques are our barracks, domes are our helmets, minarets are the bayonets of our guns, and the swordsmen are our soldiers," Neuseyuk said, adding that Erdogan has a clear ambition to revive the Ottoman Empire not only as an Islamic power, but as a regional superpower.

Perhaps this is why Erdogan is making efforts to amend the constitution in order to give himself more and more power at the expense of the judiciary, the media, and the military, i.e., at the expense of the country's secular appearances.

Erdogan also described Israel as a "terrorist state" following Israel's war on Gaza, and then sent the Freedom Flotilla to lift the Israeli blockade of Gaza.

What is worse is that Turkey  has  shrewdly tried to seize opportunities in the Arab popular revolutions,  trying to  rebuke Syria, test Iran, and present itself as a better model of governance in the region.

Erdogan's speech 

was referring to Erdogan's speech following the Justice and Development Party's victory in the elections for the third time in a row, which was represented in his saying that "Sarajevo today won like Istanbul," and "Beirut won like Izmir, Damascus won like Ankara's, and Ramallah, Nablus, Jenin, the West Bank and Jerusalem won like Diyarbakir." 

Erdogan once likened democracy to a car that loots the road, and when the driver stops at the end of his journey he has to get off, so it's no surprise that Erdogan's last stop is an Islamic empire in the Middle East.

The Position on New Urea

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan said on Monday that his country will continue to defend the principle of respecting Syria's territorial integrity  and political unity against any initiative that provides a foothold for separatist ambitions. But some say that the ghost of the Ottoman Empire has reached Syria 

"Assad fell and Erdogan won," Erdogan's daughter tweeted in the middle of the night.

We'll see how events unfold, but one thing is clear: Ataturk's Turkey is a thing of the past.

The question remains. At least, the Turks are seriously talking about annexing Aleppo. The Turks are doing their best to ensure that the coup takes place in Aleppo without extremism and shocks.

Erdogan came to power on a wave of neo-Ottomanism and opposition to the secular nationalism of the Kemalists, who ruled the country throughout the twentieth century. If he can hold on to victory in Syria, it will be the end of the Ataturk era and the beginning of a new era in Turkish national identity.

We usually talk about the geopolitical situation in relation to the collective West (USA, Britain, Germany), the East-Arab world, India and China. But the shadow of the Ottoman Empire rises to its maximum before our eyes.

Between the West and the East there is an independent player. And whether one should always rejoice in one's independence is a big question.

Once, the Russian philosopher and mystic Daniel Andreev came up with a very apt name for that phenomenon that could be called the "state demon." If we use the term Andreev, the Turkish state devil was sick and weak for a long time, and then recovered; if his appetite doubled, times, we would face a very serious challenge.

In the dock: Are we facing the rise of neo-Ottomanism in Syria?

Turkey was the main actor behind the Syrian opposition factions that set out from the Idlib countryside towards the capital Damascus, in a rapid expansion that toppled the regime and ended a 54-year era in which the Assad family took control of the reins from Hafez to his son Bashar.

Within these orbits, Ankara was among the first capitals to welcome the fall of the Syrian regime on December 7, sending senior officials to meet with the Syrian rebels who toppled the Assad family. Among them were Turkish intelligence chief Ibrahim Kalin and his Qatari counterpart, Khalfan al-Kaabi, on December 12, who were the first foreign officials to visit Damascus after Assad's ouster.

There is an international consensus that Turkey has become the number one player in Turkey, and we have noticed the extensive media coverage on major international newspapers that talked about the fall of the Assad regime as a victory for Turkey, the rise of Turkey and the decline of Iran, and how Turkey won the Syrian cake and other headlines.

President-elect Donald Trump has also stated that Turkey holds the key in Syria. Thus, "from now on," Turkey is likely to replace Iran "most likely" as "the player managing future developments in Syria."

Accusations of Turkey heading towards neo-Ottomanism, and what is hidden is greater!

The power struggle between Turkey and Iran takes us back to a historic moment in  the Middle East and the Levant, specifically in the 17th century when the Ottoman and Safavid empires were at the height of their power and competing for the Levant, which was ultimately an Ottoman province.

Thus, under the Assad regime, Iran seems to have achieved what the Safavid Empire was unable to do, as it boasted of exerting influence in four Arab capitals (Syria, Iraq, Lenin, and Yemen). However, with the fall of the Assad regime, it lost an important part of its equation of first defense in favor of Turkey.

In light of this conflict, some Iranian and Arab newspapers tended to accuse Turkey of the return of neo-Ottomanism. What is good about this is that the Turkish president seemed to lament the way territorial borders were defined after World War I and the fall of the Ottoman Empire, claiming that Syrian cities such as Aleppo, Damascus, Idlib and Raqqa could have been "part of the Turkish homeland" today.

He spoke of the year 2023 as the year of history for Turkey, referring to the 100 years of the Treaty of Lausanne, which ended the Ottoman Caliphate and placed the provinces of the Arab Levant under the British-French Mandate system and the division of the Levant into Qatari states

Features  of the restoration of Ottomanism:

Unlike Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, who tried to link Turkey to the West and Ankara's focus on painting a secular modern image that mimics the West, Erdogan's rise was a sign of a shift towards the Islamic East, the restoration of the glories of the Ottoman Empire, and playing on the chord of the nation .

These include the famous series Resurrection of Ertugrul, which began airing in December 2014 and was produced in four parts, the series "Capital of Abdul Hamid" (the first episode of which began airing in February 2017), then the series "Mehmet Al-Fatih" (which began airing in March 2018) and the rest of the dramas that embody and simulate the establishment of the Ottoman Empire and the periods of rule.

In fact, the Turkish historical drama about the Ottoman Empire is not much different from what Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan believes in and is keen to remind Turks of him in most of his speeches, and he is even interested in restoring some of these manifestations in official protocols and popular speeches directly.

Turkey seeks to become a regional power in the Middle East and North Africa, and it is taking advantage of every opportunity to assert its presence and strengthen and extend its influence in Arab countries, such as Libya and the Horn of Africa.

It is also the actor that holds the key to the new situation in Syria, not to mention that it has a strong card (the Muslim Brotherhood) that constitutes a pressure card on Egypt, in addition to its advanced relations with a number of Gulf countries, foremost of which are Qatar, Kuwait, and Oman.