This article appears as part of the Unspun: Scottish Politics newsletter.
If Scotland was independent – which it clearly isn’t – then Humza Yousaf’s stunt of inviting Turkey’s authoritarian strongman Recep Tayyip Erdoğan to Edinburgh would be relatively uncontroversial.
It would understandably upset human rights activists, particularly due to Ankara’s treatment of its Kurdish minority, and would rightly be seen by many as cosying up to a rather unsavoury specimen.
But the leader of an independent nation could brush all that aside. Yousaf could simply say meeting any foreign leader is standard practice, and shut the row down.
However, Yousaf – in what can only be interpreted as an excessive desire to hang with the big boys – has walked into a minefield.
He’s managed to infuriate just about everyone: his own left-wing, his Green partners in government, unionists and opposition parties, and Westminster.
He looks clumsy, foolish, out of his depth – and worse, he’s playing with fire. This isn’t about Scotland having to stay ‘in its box’.
Read more:
Unspun | Neil Mackay: Sturgeonism slain as Yousaf tacks right in fear of Forbes
As an independence supporter, I want Scotland punching above its weight. It’s important that even as a devolved power we have good relationships with other nations and some diplomatic clout.
But Turkey is no ordinary nation. It’s a troublesome Nato ally. Its record on democracy is dodgy to say the least. And Erdoğan is a key player in the Middle East, a region that is, frankly, rather fraught just now.
The handling of such relationships is down to the British government. Yousaf risks jeopardising UK-Turkey affairs.
Let’s say, for argument’s sake, the British government doesn’t currently want Erdoğan here, due to some diplomatic reason. How might Yousaf’s bumbling overtures affect foreign policy?
Defending his invite, Yousaf said: “Why wouldn’t we wish to have a Nato ally here?”
Well, Hungary is in Nato, and Yousaf isn’t rushing to bring the rather despicable Viktor Orban to Edinburgh.
While Turkey may be a Nato ally, it’s a very awkward one, which has made the defence of Europe and Ukraine problematic.
Turkey initially blocked the entry of Sweden and Finland into Nato following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, due to Kurdish separatists finding safe haven in the two countries. Finland has now entered the alliance, and Turkey has softened on Sweden.
Is this the best Nato ally Yousaf could find to hang out with?
Read more:
Unspun | Neil Mackay: As an indy-supporting writer, I owe readers an explanation
There’s also a whiff of Yousaf compromising himself. His wife’s family escaped Gaza after Turkey intervened.
Nadia El-Nakla also attended a Palestine summit organised by Turkey’s First Lady, Emine Erdoğan, with the partners of government leaders.
Yousaf insists there’s no link. That may be true, but it looks naive at best.
The FM insisted he’d raise Turkey’s human rights record during any visit. Yet he added a strange caveat saying he’d do so “in a way that also recognises we’re on a human rights journey as are other countries”.
Britain is far from perfect, but our human rights record is not comparable with Turkey.
Yousaf has also needled many in his own party. His initial meeting with Erdoğan at Cop28 caused Kurdish-born SNP councillor Roza Salih to say she was “disgusted and disappointed” by Yousaf.
Read more:
Roza Salih: Immigrants like me can help strengthen the Scotland I love
He’s angered his partners in government, the Greens. The Humanist Society of Scotland describes Yousaf’s behaviour as “short-sighted” due to Turkey’s “sustained attack on civil liberties”.
Evidently, opposition parties and unionists are equal parts infuriated at needless overreach, and cock-a-hoop at Yousaf’s stupidity.
Read Neil every Friday in the Unspun newsletter.
Worse, Yousaf’s lumpen hubris could cost Scotland dearly on the world stage. After Yousaf’s first unauthorised meeting with Erdoğan, Foreign Secretary David Cameron threatened to close down Scottish Government offices in UK embassies.
In the world of foreign affairs, Yousaf’s Turkish venture might quite rightly be described as 'blow-back'.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel