Tweet
The New Anatolian
Sept 2 2006
Opinions
Can Turkey stay neutral?
by Kemal Balci
Next Tuesday, Parliament will make an important decision about sending
Turkish troops to the Lebanese-Israeli border. The decision that
Parliament will make will lead to greater consequences than taking the
risk of sending Turks into the line of fire. The decision to be made
will determine which side Turkey will take in the deepening fault line
both at home and in the world. The issue doesn't show the tiniest
resemblance to sending troops to Congo, Kosovo or Afghanistan to
assume a peacekeeping task in these places.
It's becoming less and less possible to stay neutral in the
international polarization, which is becoming more evident with the
Israeli attack on Lebanon. The Turkish Republic can't alienate itself
from the Western world as it has been turning itself towards this
world since its foundation. Even though the aggressive Bush
administration determined the fronts, Turkey has no chance other than
siding with the U.S. and the European Union countries. The
U.S. allowed the killing of thousands of innocent children, women, the
ill and the elderly using Israel as a tool to reshape the Middle
East. The EU countries, which always claim that they are very
sensitive about human rights, remained silent and therefore approved
the unjust and cruel attack of Israel.
It doesn't seem possible to consider the problem simply an example of
the clash of civilizations. There were not many countries in the
Islamic world that opposed the massacre in Lebanon. Egypt, which is
aspiring to become the leader of Muslim countries, Lebanon's neighbor
Jordan and particularly Saudi Arabia were content to just watch while
Lebanon was being devastated. Even worse, they acted as though Lebanon
was populated solely by Shiite people and that Hezbollah represented
all of Lebanon. Neither the Druze, who seem to be the sole owners of
the Lebanese mountains, nor Armenians, who express their hostility to
Turks every chance they get, nor Maronites or the others resisted the
Israeli attacks.
As everybody knows, the Israeli attack on Lebanon is a signifier for
the operation into Syria and the one on Iran, which will be a major
war. Turkey, which is surrounded by fire on all fronts, will be stuck
in a corner and won't be able to stay neutral. It will have to side
with one party in the end and will have to change its attitude of
remaining passive so as not to alienate anyone.
What's to be done then? Which path should Turkey pursue to stay out of
this global war without harming its fragile economy, historical and
religious responsibilities, and humanitarian and moral values?
Both fronts are making considerable efforts to remove these suspicions
from the Turkish subconscious. On the one hand, Iran makes an
unexpected move against Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) terrorism, an
issue that Turkey is very sensitive about. It started to bomb the PKK
bases in northern Iraq, as it's unable to launch an operation into the
region because of the lack of U.S. approval. Meanwhile, Damascus,
which allowed the PKK to stay in Syria for years, is acting warm
enough to plan to spend their vacations in Turkey.
The United States, meanwhile, tried to prepare the groundwork for
Turkey to stand by its side and to take on an active role. The
unexpected but high-profile visit of the king of Saudi Arabia to
Turkey should also be seen from that angle. The government is already
eager to aid to the fragile Turkish economy, which is under greater
pressure today due to rising oil prices.
The Turkish government is also aware that the decision to send troops
may give new momentum to its dormant ties with the European Union. On
the U.S. side, it would be an important point to bring to the table
when Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan meets with President George
W. Bush next month. Erdogan might be calculating the benefits that
this gift would provide to his government.
But it is very difficult to proceed along the labyrinths and slippery
slopes of the Middle East. Turkey is still slightly sad over losing
its strategic value as the southeastern flank of Europe, a role it
enjoyed during the Cold War. Moreover, Turkey is aware that various
attempts to divide Turkey come from the Western world. But none of
this would prevent Turkey from turning its back on the Western
world. Leaving aside any affiliation to the Iran-Syria axis, Turkey
won't even consider being neutral when there is polarization. Gray
areas in the New World Order are very small. Like in the movie
"Sophie's Choice," the choice (in the movie, to save only one of his
children from the Gestapo) is in fact a non-choice.
Sad, but that's the truth.
Sept 2 2006
Opinions
Can Turkey stay neutral?
by Kemal Balci
Next Tuesday, Parliament will make an important decision about sending
Turkish troops to the Lebanese-Israeli border. The decision that
Parliament will make will lead to greater consequences than taking the
risk of sending Turks into the line of fire. The decision to be made
will determine which side Turkey will take in the deepening fault line
both at home and in the world. The issue doesn't show the tiniest
resemblance to sending troops to Congo, Kosovo or Afghanistan to
assume a peacekeeping task in these places.
It's becoming less and less possible to stay neutral in the
international polarization, which is becoming more evident with the
Israeli attack on Lebanon. The Turkish Republic can't alienate itself
from the Western world as it has been turning itself towards this
world since its foundation. Even though the aggressive Bush
administration determined the fronts, Turkey has no chance other than
siding with the U.S. and the European Union countries. The
U.S. allowed the killing of thousands of innocent children, women, the
ill and the elderly using Israel as a tool to reshape the Middle
East. The EU countries, which always claim that they are very
sensitive about human rights, remained silent and therefore approved
the unjust and cruel attack of Israel.
It doesn't seem possible to consider the problem simply an example of
the clash of civilizations. There were not many countries in the
Islamic world that opposed the massacre in Lebanon. Egypt, which is
aspiring to become the leader of Muslim countries, Lebanon's neighbor
Jordan and particularly Saudi Arabia were content to just watch while
Lebanon was being devastated. Even worse, they acted as though Lebanon
was populated solely by Shiite people and that Hezbollah represented
all of Lebanon. Neither the Druze, who seem to be the sole owners of
the Lebanese mountains, nor Armenians, who express their hostility to
Turks every chance they get, nor Maronites or the others resisted the
Israeli attacks.
As everybody knows, the Israeli attack on Lebanon is a signifier for
the operation into Syria and the one on Iran, which will be a major
war. Turkey, which is surrounded by fire on all fronts, will be stuck
in a corner and won't be able to stay neutral. It will have to side
with one party in the end and will have to change its attitude of
remaining passive so as not to alienate anyone.
What's to be done then? Which path should Turkey pursue to stay out of
this global war without harming its fragile economy, historical and
religious responsibilities, and humanitarian and moral values?
Both fronts are making considerable efforts to remove these suspicions
from the Turkish subconscious. On the one hand, Iran makes an
unexpected move against Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) terrorism, an
issue that Turkey is very sensitive about. It started to bomb the PKK
bases in northern Iraq, as it's unable to launch an operation into the
region because of the lack of U.S. approval. Meanwhile, Damascus,
which allowed the PKK to stay in Syria for years, is acting warm
enough to plan to spend their vacations in Turkey.
The United States, meanwhile, tried to prepare the groundwork for
Turkey to stand by its side and to take on an active role. The
unexpected but high-profile visit of the king of Saudi Arabia to
Turkey should also be seen from that angle. The government is already
eager to aid to the fragile Turkish economy, which is under greater
pressure today due to rising oil prices.
The Turkish government is also aware that the decision to send troops
may give new momentum to its dormant ties with the European Union. On
the U.S. side, it would be an important point to bring to the table
when Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan meets with President George
W. Bush next month. Erdogan might be calculating the benefits that
this gift would provide to his government.
But it is very difficult to proceed along the labyrinths and slippery
slopes of the Middle East. Turkey is still slightly sad over losing
its strategic value as the southeastern flank of Europe, a role it
enjoyed during the Cold War. Moreover, Turkey is aware that various
attempts to divide Turkey come from the Western world. But none of
this would prevent Turkey from turning its back on the Western
world. Leaving aside any affiliation to the Iran-Syria axis, Turkey
won't even consider being neutral when there is polarization. Gray
areas in the New World Order are very small. Like in the movie
"Sophie's Choice," the choice (in the movie, to save only one of his
children from the Gestapo) is in fact a non-choice.
Sad, but that's the truth.