Bashir is widely viewed in most parts of the world as an illegitimate dictator presiding over a pariah state guilty of crimes against humanity. He is a seemingly strange bedfellow for Turkey's AKP (Justice and Development Party)  trying to prove to many domestic and Western observers of its balanced, well-calibrated foreign policy, and its attachment to international norms.

Turkey has been trying to persuade the world, not very successfully, that there was no Armenian genocide in 1915. The picture of President Abdullah Gül smiling at a joint press conference is hardly going to convince skeptics that Turkey even knows what genocide means, and it will certainly raise doubts in supporters of Turkey. After all, Bashir's Sudan has been accused of a relentless campaign of ethnic cleansing that has left over 200,000 Sudanese dead and more than 2 million driven from their homes. This has prompted some (including the United States government) to suggest rightly or wrongly, it amounts to genocide. To many around the world, Bashir whitewashes his massive crimes against humanity and Gül and Erdoğan avert their gaze.

Bashir's visit is hardly surprising—it is yet another step in a developing relationship. It follows the visit of Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan to Sudan in March 2006 for an Arab League summit. With a side-trip to Darfur and relatively benign comments about the situation, Erdoğan was perceived as issuing a statement of support for the Sudanese government. Just two weeks ago, Turkish Defense Minister Vecdi Gönüi was in Khartoum to discuss military cooperation between the two countries, and what some suspect to be negotiations over Turkish arms sales to Khartoum. The AKP's leader's actions are in stark contrast to the Foreign Ministry's advice and former President Sezer's refusal to accept Bashir's invitation to visit.

Put in these stark terms it is hard to find logic behind the government's actions, but this may be not giving the Turkish leadership enough credit. There are some counter-explanations worth considering.

An alternative foreign policy?

Perhaps, the AKP government is carving out an alternative foreign policy role for itself  that of a genuine intermediary, even mediator, in some of the world's most intractable conflicts involving Arab and Moslem factions and identity issues. It is certainly true that one needs to be in communication with all the parties to dispute to convey to them what needs to be done to resolve it. By perceiving to cozy up to Bashir, Turkey is also buying much-needed credibility in his eyes, and may position itself to become an important interlocutor for peace in Darfur. However, there is little to support this explanation. To date, talks between Ankara and Khartoum have been dominated by negotiations over trade, investment, energy and military issues, all areas that Turkey's would-be partners in the EU are increasingly avoiding.

Alternatively perhaps Ankara believes that support for Bashir is the key to peace in Darfur, and that discordant rebel movements must be brought under control. After all after four years western policy is virtually bankrupt. Its one major achievement is helping keep 2 million displaced people alive, not in getting them home or bringing peace to the region. Ankara could be signaling a willingness to go down a different path to resolving the Darfur conflict  real politik overcoming morality  and seeking success where the West has failed, by bolstering Bashir and his forces to go after the rebels. That would be a unique policy. In addition, it is conceivable that the Turkish government believes all Darfur needs is a little more humanitarian assistance which Erdoğan promised  a gesture described as indicative of the Turkish government's profound humanitarian concern for the people of Darfur. Turkish aid to Darfur's people so far has been minor.

In some countries and perhaps in Turkey many believe the AKP government is intent on promoting Islamic unity and perceive the Sudan as a Muslim country being unfairly treated by the West, whatever the scale of horrors being perpetrated.

One thing is certain: The Turkish government has taken a serious diplomatic move, opening it up correctly for censure unless it can better explain its intentions and policies. Failing to do so and provide relevant details of the meetings with Sudanese leaders, it will be condemned as a diplomacy that supports a disgraceful dictatorship without benefiting the innocent victims of Darfur in any meaningful manner.

No amount of expressions of sympathy for the victims of Darfur will save Gül and Erdoğan from the pointed questions clouding Bashir's visit.

Morton Abramowitz is Senior Fellow at the Century Foundation and former U.S. ambassador to Turkey. This article was first published in the Turkish Daily News.