Rating: 
Summary: When Western Bias Goes Unchecked
Review: Being married to a Turk I can tell you there are at least two people who have read this book that found it a typical assault on Turkish society via a western point of view. Kinzer may have lived in Turkey and worked in Turkey but he just doesn't get it. Turkey is presently being held hostage by the United States as well as the European Union. Watch. Turkey will end up cleaning up our mess in the mideast without so much as a "thank you." It is a wonderful country with some of the most decent people I have ever met. When I was there I felt much safer than I do in major cities in the United States. And the work ethic? We could relearn a few lessons about hard work from the Turks. Sorry Mr. Kinzer but you missed the boat on this one. You're not even on the dock. Instead of being so concerned about Turkey being the greatest hope for and Islamic democracy why not let Turkey do as she has always done, move strongly and stubbornly forward toward her own identity. If you want to understand modern Turkey there are better books out there. Start with a decent biography of Ataturk. Ataturk was probably one of the top four or five political minds of the twentieth century yet the west knows very little about him. Yurtta Sulh, Cihanda Sulh.
Rating: 
Summary: Too much like Thomas Friedman
Review: Readers who find Thomas Friedman's books insufferable will find much to annoy them in Stephen Kinzer's book on Turkey. Kinzer is another New York Times correspondent who is able to make glib assertions about peoples and conflicts moments after arriving in a country. Here he is on the Kurds: "Kurds are poor, share a collective memory of rebellion and have used guns to solve their problems for as long as there have been guns (P. 111)." Here he is on the Middle East: "Since time immemorial, leaders in the Middle East have nurtured a culture of power and confrontation. Winners take all, losers are annihilated and compromise is considered a sign of weakness (p.133)." A further annoyance is the writing. It is clichéd and uninspired: Abdullah Ocalan is described as a "Marxist firebrand;" the Kurdish conflict is "Turkey's festering wound;" the Black Sea is "cool, verdant and alpine." Also like Friedman, Kinzer is careful to emphasize the fact that he (the New York Times Correspondent) has access to all the movers and shakers. We learn that in the summer of 1999, he had lunch with Foreign Minister Ismail Cem "at a fashionable restaurant in Ankara." A few days later in Athens, Kinzer meets Cem's "Greek counterpart, George Papandreou." Neither man has anything profound to say, but since Kinzer is a Times correspondent, they will talk to him; and since they have talked to him, why not write it down? Kinzer has written books on Nicaraqua and Guatemala and, according to the dust jacket, is now the Times national cultural correspondent in Chicago. Further, he has "covered more than fifty countries on four continents." So perhaps he has spread himself a little thin. At least in this book it seems that way. For a more substantial and less egocentric view of contemporary Turkey, try "Turkey Unveiled: A History of Modern Turkey." Or better still, keep looking and maybe you will find a good book about Turkey written by a Turk.
Rating: 
Summary: Excellent Crash Course
Review: This book is a well written crash course in the current status of politics in modern Turkey. It does not go into profound detail by any means, but it does provide an excellent set of premises for understanding the major issues facing modern Turkey, such as its contemplated entry into the EU, its difficulties in completing its transition to a fully modern democracy, the Kurdish revolt and the spectre of the Armenian atrocities, the strange rise and fall of the Islamist Erkaban, and the current status of Greco-Turkish relations. The book is engagingly written by a man who was the bureau chief for the New York Times. It is not to be mistaken for a scholarly tome in either its style or its depth of explanation, but it does provide a skeletal framework for further analytical investigations. The reader should leave with a series of snapshots of a country that is little known by most of us in the west. These snapshots provide a basis of comparison for me when I read news of events in that region of the world. If you are starting from scratch and find reports from the area to be incomprehensibly denuded of context, this is a good book to provide that initial basis of comprehension.
Rating:
Summary: another book on Turkey
Review: The book is an interesting attempt to formulate some impressions and views about present day Turkey. Besides a few wellknown cultural and popular findings, the author's views on Turkey's foreign policy, the role of the military, Ataturk's reforms and Kemalism, on Kurdish problem, Armenian realities and on Turkish-Greek relations are rather shallow.
Statements such as Turkey's "political and psychological underdevelopment" (Page:24), Turkish "National Security Council" is like the "Iranian Mollahs' Council of Guardians" (Page:17),
"Turks are victims of Devlet" (PP:12,26-28 and 145) are erroneous and misleading.
As regards the "politics" recommended by the author; these are not at all adequate to Turkish realities and to Turkish historical background.
Kinzer is of course not the only writer who after having lived in a country for four years feels quite confident and entitled to recommend major policy changes or cultural shifts towards new horizons. This is an unfortunate mistake.
Rating:
Summary: Turkish Story
Review: I have read Mr. Kinzer's book with great interest
I have been following his reporting throughout his residence in Turkey. His reports in the NYT were excllent too.
Mr. Kinzer appears to have a deep understanding of past and present turkish society. For sure the book will generate endless debate in turkey.
One question I would be asking; would Mr. Kinser feel same way after September 11., regarding turkish religious right?
In general, many thanks to Mr. Kinser for his addressing important issues facing the turkish nation from the pen of a friend.
Rating: 
Summary: Just a personal opinion.
Review: Mr. Kinzer needs to do more of his history homework and less of a mezza eating, raki drinking before he makes statements on so called "dark side" of Turkey regarding Armenians.
I would recommed that he reads "Death and Exile" by Justin McCarthy then revise next edition of book.
Rating: 
Summary: A Great Look at Turkey from an Outsider's Point of View
Review: I have spent over 48 months in Turkey over the past 20 years, and was amazed at how closely Kinzer's feelings about Turkey mirror my own. He obviously loves the country and is frustrated that such a terrific place with so much potential has shackled itself to political stagnation. He addresses all of the big issues facing Turkey, and although he is somewhat biased and at times might sound a bit arrogant...he still manages to present both sides of the issues.
This is not a book for those who want a basic text on Turkish history and culture. It is a great book for anyone who wants a more in-depth look at Turkey's current situation. It is one of the best explainations I have seen of the numerous political and cultural forces that are battling for the future of this great nation.
The brief sections between chapters presenting glimpses of life in Turkey made me long to return. Bravo to Stephen Kinzer!
Rating:
Summary: Almost but not quite
Review: In the "Crescent & Star", Stephen Kinzer provides the reader with a flavor of daily life as well as some of the political issues facing Turkey today, such as: the Kurdish problem, human rights, the role of the military, Ataturk's legacy of a western styled secular republic, Turkey's relations with its neighbors, political aspects of Islam and so on. The Meze (slices of life) sections offer in vivid color such subjects as: Raki drinking, Nargile smoking, swimming across the Bosphorus and others. Meze sections are excellent as Kinzer observes Turks with empathy and interest. He manages to jump over cultural hurdles when he drinks Raki and smokes Nargile with them. Stories on oil wrestling, the Korean expedition and Cirit are also insightful and entertaining. Also, Kinzer deserves special credit for devoting an entire meze segment to poet Nazim Hikmet whose works will be universally celebrated this year on the anniversary of his 100th birthday. It is in his political analysis, however, that Kinzer is weak and appears to be arrogant, illustrating a lack of knowledge and understanding of the history of the Turkish Republic. To praise Adnan Menderes as a secular democrat is totally off the mark. Menderes' pro-Islamic actions betrayed Kemal Ataturk's legacy of a modern secular state. Having pandered for votes from the religious right, it was pay-back time and Menderes began demolishing established secular reforms immediately after winning elections in 1950. It took him less than thirty days to convert ezan (five times daily call for prayer for Muslims) from Turkish back to Arabic! (Ezan had been practised in Turkish since 1928) Beginning with this event, the direction of the young Republic was changed and the secular movement stalled. (Today, Islam is still practised in Arabic only by all Islamic communities and nations around the world. In Turkey, the Kuran was translated into Turkish but its use was never implemented). In January 1954, Menderes ordered the highly successful Village Institutes program abolished, denying people in rural communities their source of "Western" education. In a style befitting Nero or Caligula, he ordered streets lowered and buildings wrecked around Istanbul mosques (Muslim religious temples) in order to enhance their visual might and power! Menderes committed more tragic errors, including 5-6 September, 1955 show-of-force event when he unleashed his goon squads against the Greek community in Istanbul. Again Kinzer misses the mark when he does not pin this disaster on Menderes. In 1959 Menderes gained "Prophet" or "Messiah" status among his Islam-fed followers as he walked off unhurt from the plane crash in London en route to attend a conference on Cyprus. Upon his return to Turkey he believed he was invincible and his government became more corrupt and reckless During the ten year period from May 14, 1950 to May 27, 1960, the Menderes regime allowed limitless freedom to Islamic forces to build a political infrastructure which to this day threatens to divide Turkey. Under the official layer of secular democracy, lies a reactionary Islamic force that is trying to take control over the Turkish nation. A clear understanding of secularism and Islam is essential for evaluating any issue in Turkey today because the clash for power between these two polarized forces involves everyone and will eventually determine the success (read survival) or failure of the Turkish Republic. To emphasize the significance of secularism for the continuation of the present State, last year President Ahmet Necdet Sezer (who was previously Chief Supreme Court Justice) declared that secularism would be defended at all costs. Exhibiting this lack of political understanding only weakens Kinzer's case as well as his unsolicited advice when he admonishes many senior government officials for being weak and narrow-minded. His bland summaries on terrorism by the Kurdish PKK organization, the Armenian issue and relations with Greece equally lack substance. Moreover, Kinzer's harsh treatment of the military could mislead the reader about the reality of military's role as defender of the secular state and its constitution. Contrary to what Kinzer claims, during the Menderes regime, the military had remained outside of politics and allowed the democratically elected government run the country. Since the top echelon of the military was supportive of the civilian rule, however flawed, the coup d'etat was planned and staged on May 27, 1960 by a cadre of young officers. It is likely that the military will continue with its mandate to safeguard the secular Republic until Turkey becomes irrevocably a complete, secular democracy. With ongoing democratic reforms, a progressively growing strategic alliance between Turkey-USA-Israel and the increase in the compulsory education from eight to twelve years, Turkey will continue in its westward course. Only with a strong, secular military can Turkey fulfil its role in Nato, defend its borders, fight against terrorism and have any hope for making further progress. Still, as a native of Istanbul, I would like to congratulate Kinzer especially on two of his accomplishments: Firstly, writing an interesting book on Turkey that raises issues which require careful analysis and debate; and secondly, swimming across the Bosphorus in good time, a feat which many have tried (including me) but failed to achieve.
Rating:
Summary: Historical and Personal Perspectives on Turkey
Review: I enjoyed the book, having seen the author discuss it on C-SPAN. While full of fascinating insights and history, the author indulges a bit too often in somewhat strident rhetoric about how the leadership of Turkey must adapt to fulfill the vision of Ataturk and stay in step with modern times. His viewpoint is well presented, but repeated too often. The rest of the book is quite a good read and I still recommend it.
Rating:
Summary: Not your grandfather's Ottoman Empire.
Review: Turkey is a travel destination for only the most intrepid traveler, it seems. But anyone who goes there raves about the beauty and the friendliness of the people. This book gives the reader a newsman's perspective (unplugged from the straight news). It's both a funny and serious book about the author's experiences in Turkey ,all the more important on the geopolitical scene because of the Central Asian/Middle East conflicts. The question of fundamentalist Islam and the political situation in Turkey is extensively discussed; the author does tend to get a bit "preachy" about the Turkish military's "oversight" of the secular government. Overall, a very good picture of the current cultural/ political situation in Turkey and a necessary addition ot the bookshelf.
| 
