There are counter examples that would disprove this largely binary assumption. (Which is quite old school btw)
For example, Malaysia and Indonesia. Despite having very conservative societies (compared to Türkiye) and state penal codes closer to classical Islamic law, both countries are doing relatively well.
Specially Malaysia. By and large It is as much industrialised as Türkiye and with a similar quality of life.
Success of any particular set of political ideology to solve the 'big problem' is largely context, culture, people and time dependent. (In this case strict secularism)
One that worked well for someone is not necessarily going to be best suited for somebody else's context.
What really matters, is democracy and rule of law. (Each are mutually supportive and ensure the other. It is hard to imagine long term systematic implementation of rule of law without proper democracy) Which most Muslim countries lack, not because the populations are ultra religious and Islamist, but because since the inception, many of these countries are run by extremely corrupt political establishment (in many cases even secular dictators and elites) who are supported and kept in power by various superpowers for geopolitical reasons (as obviously they can give back much more to their masters unlike a democratic government, which would inevitably put the interest of the people and country first. And that in many cases doesn’t go well with superpowers and their regional/global interests) and that makes it even more difficult to remove them and establish democratic institutions and process in the long run.
And what really differentiate Malaysia and Indonesia from other Muslims countries is that, they have relatively established democratic processes where people can vote and has the right the choose their leader and hold them accountable to a degree. Which in return ensure relative implementation of rule of law. Hence, ultimately somewhat uninterrupted path toward development.
Other than that, concepts like secularism, human rights liberty and freedom are pretty much relative and open to interpretation.
I would also like hear what
@Rooxbar think if he is interested. He has some good and thoughtful insights in topic like that.
It's of course not a perfect binary since larger context is factor multivariate (each one having a coefficient with the matter).
There are always factors: luck based: natural resource, geographies, neighbours et al. and human based: enlightened principled decisions that can erode and override burdens (be those luck or human based).
If you study Indonesia and Malaysia (or preferably lived in the region like I have), you will know what they are for each one....be it Pancasila in Indonesia or the constitution of Malaysia (and the British legal system) that greatly constrain political Islam....especially application of these to the substantial minorities within both countries...and in the case of Malaysia for example its ability to secure and harness transmittance of development and intellectual capital its Chinese minority was able to leverage quite well in the broader world.
Where the balancing act (w.r.t larger religious based politics) did not materialise at all in the local context, you have countries like Singapore that industrialised and developed even more.
Where an excess of (luck based) natural resource superseded all basic need to develop proper balance by enlightened principle, you also have heavily islamist fundamentalist countries in Middle East that have gotten lot wealthier.....and needing little of the hard work Turkiye had to invest w.r.t Ataturks founding principles to industrialise and develop the more comprehensive longer term way (given the long term intellectual capital formed by this).
But make no mistake, given finite mental resource and time, any intellectual capital sustenance requires religion to be kept away from the exercise of the state's great power....and confined to individual, family and voluntary community.
Past the moral basis of this (that Ataturk clearly saw), there is simply the effect of finite time society has for intellectual pursuit if it rather chooses to engage substantial amounts of this on societal control by state power, using religion....as this always ends up displacing or even suppressing critical elements of enlightenment and intellectual development that are the only ticket out long term for any society.
This is why for an overall natural resource scarce country like Turkiye, it has done far far better than the vast majority of its co-religion countries worldwide.
This is exactly how Iran has also squandered immense amounts of its own potential, even with ample natural resource available to override it.
In the end, democracy and rule of law are not equals at all. Rule of law (and the law being properly crafted) is far more important given what happens (mob rule) if democracy is made supreme i.e basic rights being on the table for the collective vote and tyranny of the majority.
This is why the republic is the most important thing for a country. It defines exactly what is out of bounds for state power given its natural rights lie in the individual.
This is why Ataturk was enlightened putting certain things off the table in the Turkish Republic....like ability of religion to transmit to politics and the state's law itself.
Absolutely zero chance my great Turkish professor who mentored me, would have achieved his intellectual fortitude without Ataturk's republic...or that he would have arisen and developed same way in another co-religion country to Turkiye that chose the typical non-Ataturk route.
My great Iranian professors who I am also acquainted with over time also all have full stories to tell on the great squandering of the Ayatollah era. i.e the Ataturk state missed in their context.
There is little else to note from rest of muslim world in intellectual capital at the apex....largely again because of the apex they have denied themselves for various reasons mentally.
i.e Their decisions made, their squanderings, their mental deployments and their doubling down on things and manufacturing of new grievance sets to add to old ones....that modern Turkish republic simply never had to sink into and squelch in thanks to Ataturk et al.
Most Turks have little idea about how bad and deep that stuff can go. It is why Turkiye is a relative intellectual capital heavyweight with numbers to prove this.
But when it really finally rears its ugly head, this very forum gets created as an example....simply certain things (the anti-intellectualism essentially) bristle immediately with the Turkish sensibility and its modern psyche..... that has matured in its way the others simply did not.
