Tweet
MR. OBAMA: WHY ARE YOU COURTING THE MUSLIM WORLD IN TURKEY?
By Soraya Sepahpour-Ulrich
CounterCurrents.org
http://www.c ountercurrents.org/ulrich080409.htm
April 8 2009
Charles de Gaulle argued that authority is derived from prestige... and
prestige 'is largely a matter of feeling, suggestion and impression,
and it depends primarily on the possession of an elementary
gift, a natural attitude' ... lately gone by the fashionable term
charisma.' Mr. Obama's charisma veils what is either his inordinate
ability to manipulate, or his total ignorance of the Muslim world. His
choice of cabinet suggests it is the former.
On his first overseas tour as President of the United States, Mr. Obama
deliberately chose Turkey to make his case to Moslems and stated that
the United States is 'not at war with the Muslim world'. The choice
of country merits scrutiny.
Mr. Obama praised Kamal Ataturk as someone "whose life is not something
that can be cast in stone and marble. His greatest legacy is Turkey's
strong and secular democracy", he said. True, Mustafa Kemal Ataturk was
the founder of the modern Turkish Republic but how relevant was this in
reaching out to the Islamic world? Ataturk, perceived citizenship as
the core of legitimacy-- citizenship based on the Western philosophy
and ideology. Article 88 of Teskilat I Esasiye Kanunu 1924 ordained
that all people living in Turkey, regardless of ethnic origin or
religion were to be considered Turks (democratic values!). They had to
be patriotic and civilized. The past was erased, total elimination of
Ottoman and Islamic history, and someone else's values were borrowed -
the West, to create a national identity - a 'revolution of value'.
It is an irony that Mr. Obama chose this 'Islamic State' and praised
its founder for having rejected Islamic values (although Islam
as a 'historic heritage' of overseas Moslem such those in Bosnia
was accepted). Turkish non-Muslims such as Jews, Armenians, and
Greeks could be citizens, but not nationals. And most importantly,
the Turkish military is guardian of the Turkish Constitution and a
bottom-up Islamic party is contrary to the Constitution.
This is one reason why it must be an insult on all those who hear
it to have Mr. Obama say: "Let me be clear: the United States
strongly supports Turkey's bid to become a member of the European
Union". Joining the EU would weaken the military's interventionist
policies in guarding the Kamalist state ideology and the Turkish State
would no longer be secular if it chose to reject the Ataturk-imposed,
Western-based philosophy of citizenry.
Furthermore, as a non-EU member, America has far more leverage on
Turkey than it would if it were to become an EU member. Maintaining
the status quo, the United States can give Turkey a show of support
and coax it into betraying its national interest while serving the US
and Israel - a long time ally of Turkey's. This arrangement has not
been without rewards. The Armenian Genocide has been suppressed in
the U.S. even though it has been well recorded that six years after
the Madrid Conference, in 1939, Hitler referred to the Armenian
Genocide thus:
"It was knowingly and lightheartedly that Genghis Khan sent thousands
of women and children to their deaths. History sees in him only the
founder of a state. The aim of war is not to reach definite lines
but to annihilate the enemy physically. It is by this means that we
shall obtain the living space that we need. Who today speaks of the
massacre of the Armenians?"[i]
In 2006, France passed a bill making it an "offence to question the
Armenian genocide". How likely is it that Mr. Obama will offend Israel
and pass a bill making it an offense to question the Armenian genocide
if he truly supports Turkey to join the EU? Mr. Obama, it seems, is
not free to choose the man who would run his National Intelligence
Council - Chas Freeman was pushed out by the Israeli lobby.
Turkey has made great strides - however, one has to question
Mr. Obama's true motives. If his intentions were to have a cordial
dialogue with a Moslem nation, why was the largest Moslem populated
country such as Indonesia not chosen? Alternatively, Malaysia would
have been an excellent venue for addressing the Moslem world. What
makes Mr. Obama's sincerity questionable is the delivery of a
'massive shipment of U.S. weapons to Israel on March 22nd' (Amnesty
International Report) after the Israelis brutally massacred the Gazans.
One is left wondering why it is that Israel, with all its nukes,
its savagery, its violation of all international laws, including
the latest incident of violating the sovereignty of Sudan, blatantly
threatening Iran in violation of the basic UN Charter, is deserving
of so much friendship [read dictating to the U.S.] and foreign aid
from the United States of America, and Iran, which has not violated
any laws, is being sanctioned? Mr. Obama should realize that Charisma
cannot maintain effective leadership.
Soraya Sepahpour-Ulrich has a Master of Public Diplomacy from USC
Annenberg for Communication. She is an independent researcher with
a focus on U.S. foreign policy and the influence of lobby groups.
[i] Samantha Power "A Problem from Hell - America in the Age of
Genocide". Perennial 2002
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress
By Soraya Sepahpour-Ulrich
CounterCurrents.org
http://www.c ountercurrents.org/ulrich080409.htm
April 8 2009
Charles de Gaulle argued that authority is derived from prestige... and
prestige 'is largely a matter of feeling, suggestion and impression,
and it depends primarily on the possession of an elementary
gift, a natural attitude' ... lately gone by the fashionable term
charisma.' Mr. Obama's charisma veils what is either his inordinate
ability to manipulate, or his total ignorance of the Muslim world. His
choice of cabinet suggests it is the former.
On his first overseas tour as President of the United States, Mr. Obama
deliberately chose Turkey to make his case to Moslems and stated that
the United States is 'not at war with the Muslim world'. The choice
of country merits scrutiny.
Mr. Obama praised Kamal Ataturk as someone "whose life is not something
that can be cast in stone and marble. His greatest legacy is Turkey's
strong and secular democracy", he said. True, Mustafa Kemal Ataturk was
the founder of the modern Turkish Republic but how relevant was this in
reaching out to the Islamic world? Ataturk, perceived citizenship as
the core of legitimacy-- citizenship based on the Western philosophy
and ideology. Article 88 of Teskilat I Esasiye Kanunu 1924 ordained
that all people living in Turkey, regardless of ethnic origin or
religion were to be considered Turks (democratic values!). They had to
be patriotic and civilized. The past was erased, total elimination of
Ottoman and Islamic history, and someone else's values were borrowed -
the West, to create a national identity - a 'revolution of value'.
It is an irony that Mr. Obama chose this 'Islamic State' and praised
its founder for having rejected Islamic values (although Islam
as a 'historic heritage' of overseas Moslem such those in Bosnia
was accepted). Turkish non-Muslims such as Jews, Armenians, and
Greeks could be citizens, but not nationals. And most importantly,
the Turkish military is guardian of the Turkish Constitution and a
bottom-up Islamic party is contrary to the Constitution.
This is one reason why it must be an insult on all those who hear
it to have Mr. Obama say: "Let me be clear: the United States
strongly supports Turkey's bid to become a member of the European
Union". Joining the EU would weaken the military's interventionist
policies in guarding the Kamalist state ideology and the Turkish State
would no longer be secular if it chose to reject the Ataturk-imposed,
Western-based philosophy of citizenry.
Furthermore, as a non-EU member, America has far more leverage on
Turkey than it would if it were to become an EU member. Maintaining
the status quo, the United States can give Turkey a show of support
and coax it into betraying its national interest while serving the US
and Israel - a long time ally of Turkey's. This arrangement has not
been without rewards. The Armenian Genocide has been suppressed in
the U.S. even though it has been well recorded that six years after
the Madrid Conference, in 1939, Hitler referred to the Armenian
Genocide thus:
"It was knowingly and lightheartedly that Genghis Khan sent thousands
of women and children to their deaths. History sees in him only the
founder of a state. The aim of war is not to reach definite lines
but to annihilate the enemy physically. It is by this means that we
shall obtain the living space that we need. Who today speaks of the
massacre of the Armenians?"[i]
In 2006, France passed a bill making it an "offence to question the
Armenian genocide". How likely is it that Mr. Obama will offend Israel
and pass a bill making it an offense to question the Armenian genocide
if he truly supports Turkey to join the EU? Mr. Obama, it seems, is
not free to choose the man who would run his National Intelligence
Council - Chas Freeman was pushed out by the Israeli lobby.
Turkey has made great strides - however, one has to question
Mr. Obama's true motives. If his intentions were to have a cordial
dialogue with a Moslem nation, why was the largest Moslem populated
country such as Indonesia not chosen? Alternatively, Malaysia would
have been an excellent venue for addressing the Moslem world. What
makes Mr. Obama's sincerity questionable is the delivery of a
'massive shipment of U.S. weapons to Israel on March 22nd' (Amnesty
International Report) after the Israelis brutally massacred the Gazans.
One is left wondering why it is that Israel, with all its nukes,
its savagery, its violation of all international laws, including
the latest incident of violating the sovereignty of Sudan, blatantly
threatening Iran in violation of the basic UN Charter, is deserving
of so much friendship [read dictating to the U.S.] and foreign aid
from the United States of America, and Iran, which has not violated
any laws, is being sanctioned? Mr. Obama should realize that Charisma
cannot maintain effective leadership.
Soraya Sepahpour-Ulrich has a Master of Public Diplomacy from USC
Annenberg for Communication. She is an independent researcher with
a focus on U.S. foreign policy and the influence of lobby groups.
[i] Samantha Power "A Problem from Hell - America in the Age of
Genocide". Perennial 2002
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress