Rating: 
Summary: Watch for the author's appearance on Encore BookNotes.
Review: I looked forward to reading this book after the author's appearance on the C-SPAN program BookNotes. Unfortunately he disclosed most of what is of interest in the book in very agreeable style on that wonderful show. The rest of the book is a lecture on political reform. Repeated at the end of most chapters and then summarized in the final one, which I ended up skimming. I grant the political discussion is well-grounded in the experiences he shares with readers. I just expected there'd been more personal observations of life in Turkey and less advice to its leaders. I agree with the all of what the 4 pervious reviewers say. This is an important book for those involved in Turkish life in some way. And after 9/11 perhaps we all are. My rating is that of a general reader.
Rating: 
Summary: Devlet & Raki
Review: Having traveled to Turkey numerous times for both business and vacation (I generally spend two weeks each summer in Istanbul and Bodrum), I thought Kinzer did a spendid job of describing the crossroads Turkey is at. In the aftermath of September 11th, the book is particularly relevant, as it examines what is frequently being referred to as the "model" for a secular Islamic state. The book is also an easy read for anyone interested in Turkey and its important future role in Middle East/Central Asia-Western relations, as it provides an excellent view into the various internal and external conflicts Turkey has had to address, without becoming too bogged down in a detailed history. Although at times fairly critical of the Turkish government and military, generally, the captivating spirit and culture of the Turkish people shine through. The vignettes that precede each chapter about the author's experience with Turkish culture - swimming the Bosphorous, enjoying raki (the Turkish national drink), attending olive oil wrestling and camel fights, and even spending a night in a Turkish jail - add a wonderful personal and human touch to the book. All in all, I highly recommend this book to anyone interested in Turkey and/or current affairs in the Middle East/Central Asia.
Rating:
Summary: Incedible facts, blunt and to the point...
Review: As a Turk living in the US, first I heard Mr. Kinzer's interview on Fresh Air in NPR. Actually, a friend of mine forwarded a radio link on the Internet. There I got very interested of his opinions and what he thinks of the Turks and Turkish society. Decided to read his book. Got the book yesterday and read it all in just one sitting. And I am amazed how successfully he managed to put it all in a perspective for me, and hopefully, for the rest of the world about Turkey. Would like to recommend his book a "must" reading for many Turks, and especially the Turkish military. I also had to do my one-month military training and agree 100% of the views expressed on Pages 170-171 (hard-cover). If I may here... ".. Do you think I came home respecting my military? Of course not! I came home thinking it's a stupid organization run by stupid people." I hope this book gets circulated and read by many who is dealing with Turkey and trying to understand what goes on with in. His points about corrupt governments and the "elite" are well founded. I would also like to be positive about the future of the country, but I am not so sure. There are so many if's and lots of deadwood in the society. I hope what Mr. Kinzer points become true. Guess we will see. Mr. Kinzer, thank you for sharing your thoughts and for the great book.
Rating:
Summary: A centered, rational view of Turkey.
Review: Thank you, Mr. Kinzer. To all reading this, please buy this book if Turkey or world cultures interest you. I've heard Turkey and Turks called everything from genocides to barbarians to philistines to militarists and just as easily, I've heard the country brushed off as if it's just another fragment of a nation, a third-world country. The problem is that Turkey is only half-known, and Turkey is half-sure of what it must do. The book makes clear all the difficulties of Turkey and its search for a place in the sun. Yes, there were massacres of Armenians after their support of Russia in WWI. Yes, there have been several military coups that tortured thousands of people. Yes, the Kurdish wars were terrible and kept secret by the government. But what were the circumstances of these events? Kinzer answers all, taking the right people to task for the crimes in Turkey's past. The wonderful thing is that Kinzer doesn't shy away from the awful realities, the eccentricities, and the outright pitfalls of Turkey's quirky system. He tells it all how it is, but he obviously loves the country all the same. He just hopes it will fix its flaws as he knows it can. I am of Turkish descent but this book written by a non-Turkish American thoroughly deepened my appreciation for the country. If you're attracted by the book at all, follow your instincts and pick it up.
Rating:
Summary: how bright the future ?
Review: A truly modern Turkey governed by the rule of law would raise the Turkish people to levels of
prosperity and self-confidence they have never known before. Despite the country's political and
psychological underdevelopment, it has the resources to become a towering power. If it can
liberate
itself from its paralyzing fears and embrace true democracy, it will also serve as a magnetic
example of how the ideals of liberty can triumph over enormous obstacles. By adding moral
strength to its military strength, Turkey could become a dominant force in the Middle East,
encouraging peace and pulling Arab countries away from the social backwardness and feudal
dictatorship under which most of them now suffer. It could exert a mighty and stabilizing
influence westward to the Balkans and eastward to the Caucasus and Central Asia, becoming the
key power in a region that is strategically vital, overwhelmingly rich in oil and other resources, and
now ruled mostly by tyrants who are dragging it toward chaos.
-Stephen Kinzer, Crescent & Star Though we pay obscenely little attention, Turkey is an extraordinarily important nation and its future
may go a long way to determining whether Islam and democracy can ultimately co-exist in one
nation. Geographically and politically, Turkey occupies a unique position, squeezed between Europe
to the West and the Islamic world to the East. Though traditionally Muslim, its great revolutionary
leader Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, upon taking power in 1922 and establishing a Republic, reoriented the
nation towards the West, toward the values of the Enlightenment and the institutions of secular
democracy. But still today, despite the continuing devotion of Turks to the person and ideas of
Ataturk, it remains an open question as to whether the democracy can endure. Stephen Kinzer was the NY Times correspondent in Turkey for four event filled years and his passion
for the country and its people is infectious. In conversational but admonitory style he manages both
to educate Westerners as to the history and cultural richness of Turkey while also honestly depicting
its internal problems, many of them unresolved, and firmly prodding Turks to deal with them, as a
great nation must. One very effective device Kinzer uses is a series of brief interludes each dealing with one element of
Turkish life. These include : the fez; raki, the national drink; the nargile, or water pipe; the nation's
three favorite sports--camel fighting, oil wrestling, and cirit (a form of jousting); the literature of
Nazim Hikmet; and the romantic endeavor of swimming the Bosphorus. These quick chapters provide
a rich and fascinating texture to go along with the history. The hero of the story is very much Ataturk, who at least in Kinzer's portrait seems to have been one
of the most remarkable national leaders of the 20th Century. Like Peter the Great in Russia and the
Shah in Iran, which not coincidentally are the two other equally troublesome Eurasian democracies,
he found it intolerable that his people should be so far behind the West in terms of technology, wealth
creation and self governance, and so, using dictatorial means, he imposed Western institutions an an
often reluctant populace and tried eliminating persistent vestiges of the Ottoman past. That the
Republic endures, is allied with NATO, has a strategic partnership with Israel, and is on the verge of
entering the EU is testimony to his success. But the too frequent necessity for the armed forces to step
in and depose governments, the oppression of the Kurd minority, and the very real fear of a takeover
of government by radical Islamicists, illustrates just how tenuous the democracy remains. Kinzer is extremely optimistic about Turkey's future and feels that it can afford to face its past more
honestly than it has--including such issues as the Kurds, Cyprus, and the Armenian massacre--and can
take the risk of loosening the Kemalist grip on society, the military backed determination of Turkey's
elites that no threat to Kemal Ataturk's legacy will be permitted. I certainly hope that he is right,
though I'm not as confident. Even as this book hits the stores, Turkey has decided to allow the United States to operate out of
Turkish airbases in the war on terrorism. Once again, Turkey is proving itself to be a far more
important ally than we in the West give it credit for. Hopefully Stephen Kinzer's excellent book will
educate many Americans as to the unique and potentially vital role in world affairs that Turkey, with
its uneasy blend of democracy and Islam, may play in the coming decades. We have a far larger stake
in the outcome of Turkey's internecine struggles than we seem to realize. GRADE : A-
Rating: 
Summary: The book consists of conclusory, subjective commentary.
Review: "Crescent and Star," subtitled "Turkey Between Two Worlds," deserves 5 stars for its scholarly-sounding title and for the dignified and attractive graphics on the cover. However, Crescent and Star is not a scholarly book, and it is certainly not a history book. The book tends not to relate facts, but instead it provides a string of subjective, conclusory paragraphs. For reasons unkwown, the text is decorated with fragmentary story-telling. Accordingly, the content of the book deserves two stars. Subjective remarks can be found on page 18: "You in the West also had long periods of backwardness and intolerance, a Turkish diplomat once told me as we walked along a quiet corridor in the foreign ministry in Ankara. You had dictatorships, civil wars, religious fanaticism, the Inquisition, all kinds of horror. Then, over a period of centuries, you climbed out of that hole." (page 18). More conclusory commentary is found on page 19: "For decades, each of Turkey's important political parties has been run by a single individual, sometimes with a tiny coterie of coconspirators. These few figures choose candidates for public office by using a single criterion: blind obedience." (page 19). Irrelevant commentary is found on page 73: "Erbakan was a white-haired, grandfatherly figure, surprisingly elegant in appearance. He moved delicately, gestured calmly and spoke softly. For most of our two hours together, he smiled indulgently as he drifted from cliché to cliché, not showing much in the way of analytical power or concentrated intelligence." (page 73). We find another example of the book's tact of not providing facts, but of instead providing commentary about facts: "Turkey's refusal to confront events surrounding the 1980 coup cannot continue forever. Criminal investigations may not be the best way to determine what actually happened during that period, but some way must be found. Turks need to know how their country fell into near anarchy during the late 1970s and who ordered the imprisonment and abuse of Orhan Taylan and so many other citizens after the coup." (page 95) Another example of "story-telling" occurs on page 116: "We were led to the local police station, and as I crossed the threshold I felt an involuntary shudder. Who knew how many unfortunates, guilty or otherwise, had been brought through this door for rough, perhaps very rough, interrogation sessions?" (page 116) More subjective, fact-free commentary can be found on page 177: "Turks are becoming steadily more European and that is good, because it means they are embracing ideas and perspectives that will make their lives richer and more fulfilling." (page 177). I believe that the book would make better reading if the author had provided more facts, rather than stringing dozens of conclusory paragraphs together. If the author had drafted a fact-based book, rather than drafting conclusory commentary, then the reader would have the enjoyment of coming to a few conclusions herself or himself. The book leaves you with an empty feeling. The book under review has a writing style like that of Time Magazine, but even worse. Both leave you with an empty feeling of having been tricked into reading a page or two of indistinct impressions (rather than of interesting facts). Two stars. For a reader already familiar with recent history of Turkey, or for a reader who has lived in Turkey, this book is likely to be captivating reading. Here, the book will allow the reader to compare her or his own subjective reactions to life in Turkey with the subjective, conclusory thoughts of Mr. Kinzer. However, for a novice reader interested in learning why, for example, Turkey has been more successful in adapting to the modern world than other countries to the immediate east, this book will not be the answer.
Rating:
Summary: One Sided look At Historical events
Review: Stephen Kinzer has spent time in Turkey and does report of truths on some political issues, but goes into a world of some historical points that he believes to be true. He has no evidence in some of these points he makes. He is not a historian and can not accurately claim some of these events he mentions. On the political side of things he may have an opinion, but opinions are just that. Let us remember that Stephen Kinzer was there as a journalist and certain points journalists make are not always clear and concise.
Rating:
Summary: Good Read About an Important Country
Review: Turkey will go down as one of the most important countries of the 21st Century as it is both the most successful example of a secular country with an Islamic majority population and because its location makes it a bridge between Europe and the Middle East. Kinzer provides a good snapshot of Turkey and obviously has great respect and affection for the country. This usually translates into a good book, though one that falls into a personal narrative or interpretation a bit too frequently.
The book is a solid introduction to modern Turkey and how the father of the country, Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, dragged it kicking and screaming into modern times and towards a Western orientation. Kinzer also provides the reader a good introductory picture of how secularism is lived and enforced in the present day.
The accounts of Turkey's socio-political issues are also quite good. The reader is left with an understanding of both internal issues, such as Turkey's stance towards Armenians and Kurds, as well as external issues, such as Turkey's relationship with its archrival Greece.
The least persuasive aspect of the book is Kinzer's take on the military's role in the enforcement of the country's secularism. Contrary to popular belief, such enforcement is not meddling with politics, but is instead the constitutional role of the military. Certainly this goes against the grain of most secular societies' civilian control over the military. However, as Turkey is hands down the most successful secular country with a Muslim majority, one should be very hesitant to tinker with it. After all, if it's not broken, don't fix it.
Despite this, Kinzer argues that the military should loosen its enforcement of secularism to allow more democracy to flourish. Certainly a nice concept, but there is too little discussion of the unfortunate currents of fundamentalist Islam that exist within the country and which just might knock secularism off its perch. Kinzer was the Istanbul bureau chief for the New York Times and, while this certainly makes him qualified to write on Turkey, it also opens him up to a criticism that could be made of many Times reporters, specifically that they assume the masses have the same values as the educated journalistic elite (or can be "enlightened" to adopt those views). This is a mistake journalists make time and again in the U.S. and I had the strong feeling reading this book that the same mistake was being made but towards a different society, in this case Turkey.
Perhaps it would be better for the military to loosen its grip, as Kinzer suggests. The problem I am focusing on in this review is that Kinzer has not made a solid enough argument for it. Instead he suggests a rather radical adjustment to the Turkish system with an analysis that left me, not necessarily in disagreement, but instead unconvinced. His position is simply conclusive in nature without the necessary support to prop it up.
Obviously an author is allowed to throw his take into the mix. Despite some questions over his policy suggestions, however, I recommend this book to gain a good understanding of an important player on the world stage.
Rating:
Summary: A Great Primer
Review: This book is about where Turkey has been and where it is going. It assess both internal (Strengths and Weaknesses) and external (opportunities and threats) forces that are driving Turkey's grand strategy. It is a great primer on Turkey, b/c it provides a historical perspective on the current political situation. Kinzer has an insider's understanding of Turkish Culture and an outsider's ability to remain objective.
Highly Recommended.
Rating:
Summary: The book consists of conclusory, subjective commentary.
Review: "Crescent and Star," subtitled "Turkey Between Two Worlds," deserves 5 stars for its scholarly-sounding title and for the dignified and attractive graphics on the cover. However, Crescent and Star is not a scholarly book, and it is certainly not a history book. The book tends not to relate facts, but instead it provides a string of subjective, conclusory paragraphs. For reasons unkwown, the text is decorated with fragmentary story-telling. Accordingly, the content of the book deserves two stars. Subjective remarks can be found on page 18: "You in the West also had long periods of backwardness and intolerance, a Turkish diplomat once told me as we walked along a quiet corridor in the foreign ministry in Ankara. You had dictatorships, civil wars, religious fanaticism, the Inquisition, all kinds of horror. Then, over a period of centuries, you climbed out of that hole." (page 18). More conclusory commentary is found on page 19: "For decades, each of Turkey's important political parties has been run by a single individual, sometimes with a tiny coterie of coconspirators. These few figures choose candidates for public office by using a single criterion: blind obedience." (page 19). Irrelevant commentary is found on page 73: "Erbakan was a white-haired, grandfatherly figure, surprisingly elegant in appearance. He moved delicately, gestured calmly and spoke softly. For most of our two hours together, he smiled indulgently as he drifted from clich? to clich?, not showing much in the way of analytical power or concentrated intelligence." (page 73). We find another example of the book's tact of not providing facts, but of instead providing commentary about facts: "Turkey's refusal to confront events surrounding the 1980 coup cannot continue forever. Criminal investigations may not be the best way to determine what actually happened during that period, but some way must be found. Turks need to know how their country fell into near anarchy during the late 1970s and who ordered the imprisonment and abuse of Orhan Taylan and so many other citizens after the coup." (page 95) Another example of "story-telling" occurs on page 116: "We were led to the local police station, and as I crossed the threshold I felt an involuntary shudder. Who knew how many unfortunates, guilty or otherwise, had been brought through this door for rough, perhaps very rough, interrogation sessions?" (page 116) More subjective, fact-free commentary can be found on page 177: "Turks are becoming steadily more European and that is good, because it means they are embracing ideas and perspectives that will make their lives richer and more fulfilling." (page 177). I believe that the book would make better reading if the author had provided more facts, rather than stringing dozens of conclusory paragraphs together. If the author had drafted a fact-based book, rather than drafting conclusory commentary, then the reader would have the enjoyment of coming to a few conclusions herself or himself. The book leaves you with an empty feeling. The book under review has a writing style like that of Time Magazine, but even worse. Both leave you with an empty feeling of having been tricked into reading a page or two of indistinct impressions (rather than of interesting facts). Two stars. For a reader already familiar with recent history of Turkey, or for a reader who has lived in Turkey, this book is likely to be captivating reading. Here, the book will allow the reader to compare her or his own subjective reactions to life in Turkey with the subjective, conclusory thoughts of Mr. Kinzer. However, for a novice reader interested in learning why, for example, Turkey has been more successful in adapting to the modern world than other countries to the immediate east, this book will not be the answer.
| 
