Turkey, long the crossroads between Europe and Asia, is itself at a crossroads. Abdullah Gul, the country’s Foreign Minister, and a member of a political party with a deep Islamic past, yesterday failed to be elected to the presidency. Neither Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the Prime Minister, who presented his controversial minister for this post before his victory at the recent general election and has now done so again, nor Mr Gul himself, was disappointed. His elevation to this extemely sensitive role is merely a matter of time. Mr Erdogan knows that in the third and final round on August 28 a simple majority is sufficient for success and the votes exist to do this. It will be a profound moment for the country and all those who would see it as part of Europe.

The key question for all Turks, and for the country’s neighbours and partners is whether the powerful army will accept the outcome. It forced the general election by issuing an e-mail that implicitly threatened intervention if Mr Gul were elected; since then, it has made no further comment beyond reaffirming its previous views. Although still the most popular and trusted institution in Turkey, the army, which sees itself as guardian of Kemal Atatürk’s secular legacy, was taken aback by the size of Mr Erdogan’s win in the general election as well as by the strong warnings from Washington and Brussels that military intervention would be a costly blunder. It has probably therefore decided to hold its fire and see how Mr Gul performs in office.

Should the Government lose popularity, or Mr Erdogan provoke a showdown with the military establishment over Cyprus (where the Government is ready to show more flexibility than the generals), there is little doubt that the Army would try to act. Mr Gul, however, is being extremely careful to offer no hostages to fortune. He said yesterday that, if elected, he would pay “utmost importance to harmony” and would see that the rights of the people were guaranteed under law. He has made it clear that he upholds the secular Constitution, and his party has disowned its Islamist roots, insisting it should now be described as “conservative democrats” instead of Islamists.

Suspicion still runs deep, however. The head of the army has signalled that it would not quarrel with Mr Gul if elected, but said his wife would not be welcome for ceremonies at military facilities where wearing headscarves is banned. The army will push hard to ensure that its views prevail in the National Security Council, the key body that is chaired by the President and is the conduit for the military establishment’s views to the Government. Mr Gul will, technically, become Commander-in-Chief. But he knows that the man whose voice matters more is the Army Chief of Staff, whose appointment he does not control and whom effectively he cannot sack.

Mr Erdogan would be wise to remain cautious. There are already fears that, in the absence of a second chamber and with less danger of a presidential veto, he will use his increased mandate to push through an Islamist agenda, appointing top judges and civil servants according to their views. This may be unfair: there is a backlog of appointments to be made, and Mr Erdogan has been dropping hardline Islamists in favour of fresher faces. But the army, the European Union and the wider Muslim world will be watching carefully to see whether he can keep a delicate balance.