Tweet
FURY OF THE LOBBIES
Ali Bulac
www.worldbulletin.net
Feb 24 2009
Turkey
Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan's showdown in Davos inevitably hurt
bilateral relations between Turkey and Israel. High-level officials
from both sides have made harsh statements.
To some degree, these statements are understandable. However, when
they cross the line and the parties' attitudes and stance become
harsher, the criticisms turn into serious problems, causing unpleasant
results. A recent column by David L. Phillips from The Boston Globe
(Feb. 20) is one such example. Phillips relies on a threatening tone.
"If Erdogan wants to restore his reputation as a statesman and
a reliable partner of the West, Turkey must repair its ties with
Israel, normalize relations with Armenia, and welcome ships from
Cyprus. Becoming an advocate for Hamas is a mistake. Turkey's future
lies with the West. The Islamist street leads away from Europe to
the Middle East," he writes.
This is obviously not trying to be polite. It is arrogant and crosses
the line of criticism. A country like Turkey is not afraid of such
threats; it won't consider the threats referred to by Phillips.
In fact, Erdogan's response to Peres in Davos should not be
exaggerated. Other Arab countries have done the same. Muammar Qaddafi
described the Arab leaders as cowards for their failure to do anything
vis-a-vis the civilian massacres in Gaza. The Algerian parliament
adopted a resolution making all diplomatic and commercial relations
with Israel a crime. Morocco's King Muhammad VI declared that he
would not humiliate and embarrass himself by participating in any Arab
summit that failed to take effective action against the anguish of the
Gazans. We also know a lot about the initiatives of the emir of Qatar
under the roof of the UN Security Council. Iran, while displaying a
balanced reaction, never wavered in its position vis-a-vis Israel.
All these examples show that the prime minister's reaction to the
attacks leaving 1,380 dead bodies behind was pretty normal. Besides,
the Israeli prime minister paid an official visit to Turkey five
days before the attacks to discuss the fifth round of peace talks
with Syria; during this visit, he did not make any mention whatsoever
about the attack on Gaza. According to Turkey, a country like Israel,
which masterfully concealed its plans, cannot be trusted anyway because
Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert undermined Turkey's prestige and
image in the eyes of Syria.
Jewish lobbies in the US falsely believe that they are strong enough to
make their agenda accepted. This is not true. Prime Minister Erdogan's
legitimacy and status is derived from the support and endorsement of
Turkish people because Turkey is a democratic country. It is true ours
is not a perfect democracy, however, it could be comfortably said that
Turkey's democracy is way better and far more advanced than that of
Israel. A democracy that makes 1.5 million Arab citizens second class
citizens and where 85 percent of the people approve of the civilian
massacres deserves close scrutiny. The lines between the military will
and power and the civilian administration are not clear and visible;
criteria determining these lines are blurred. The role of democratic
reactions should be taken into account when developing a stance and
position with respect to Israel, Armenia and Cyprus. This was the
primary factor behind the rejection of the notorious March 1 motion
by the Turkish Parliament.
In the end, it seems that Erdogan's rage and reaction remained
unfruitful and did not culminate in concrete action. Considering the
close military, diplomatic and logistical relations between Turkey
and Israel, it is obvious that this reaction did not harm Israel. For
instance, if Turkey had canceled its agreement on training Israeli
pilots and commandos in Turkey, we might have concluded that Erdogan's
reaction was based on some concrete action.
When it comes to the Jewish lobbies' threats with respect to the
Armenian genocide claims, this is not something Turkey should be
worried about. There will be no difference between the endorsement of
the claims by the US Congress and the approval of the same allegations
by parliaments of other countries. Besides, the Jewish lobbies will
be most affected by this because they will lose the monopolistic
power over the "genocide" issue.
Ali Bulac
www.worldbulletin.net
Feb 24 2009
Turkey
Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan's showdown in Davos inevitably hurt
bilateral relations between Turkey and Israel. High-level officials
from both sides have made harsh statements.
To some degree, these statements are understandable. However, when
they cross the line and the parties' attitudes and stance become
harsher, the criticisms turn into serious problems, causing unpleasant
results. A recent column by David L. Phillips from The Boston Globe
(Feb. 20) is one such example. Phillips relies on a threatening tone.
"If Erdogan wants to restore his reputation as a statesman and
a reliable partner of the West, Turkey must repair its ties with
Israel, normalize relations with Armenia, and welcome ships from
Cyprus. Becoming an advocate for Hamas is a mistake. Turkey's future
lies with the West. The Islamist street leads away from Europe to
the Middle East," he writes.
This is obviously not trying to be polite. It is arrogant and crosses
the line of criticism. A country like Turkey is not afraid of such
threats; it won't consider the threats referred to by Phillips.
In fact, Erdogan's response to Peres in Davos should not be
exaggerated. Other Arab countries have done the same. Muammar Qaddafi
described the Arab leaders as cowards for their failure to do anything
vis-a-vis the civilian massacres in Gaza. The Algerian parliament
adopted a resolution making all diplomatic and commercial relations
with Israel a crime. Morocco's King Muhammad VI declared that he
would not humiliate and embarrass himself by participating in any Arab
summit that failed to take effective action against the anguish of the
Gazans. We also know a lot about the initiatives of the emir of Qatar
under the roof of the UN Security Council. Iran, while displaying a
balanced reaction, never wavered in its position vis-a-vis Israel.
All these examples show that the prime minister's reaction to the
attacks leaving 1,380 dead bodies behind was pretty normal. Besides,
the Israeli prime minister paid an official visit to Turkey five
days before the attacks to discuss the fifth round of peace talks
with Syria; during this visit, he did not make any mention whatsoever
about the attack on Gaza. According to Turkey, a country like Israel,
which masterfully concealed its plans, cannot be trusted anyway because
Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert undermined Turkey's prestige and
image in the eyes of Syria.
Jewish lobbies in the US falsely believe that they are strong enough to
make their agenda accepted. This is not true. Prime Minister Erdogan's
legitimacy and status is derived from the support and endorsement of
Turkish people because Turkey is a democratic country. It is true ours
is not a perfect democracy, however, it could be comfortably said that
Turkey's democracy is way better and far more advanced than that of
Israel. A democracy that makes 1.5 million Arab citizens second class
citizens and where 85 percent of the people approve of the civilian
massacres deserves close scrutiny. The lines between the military will
and power and the civilian administration are not clear and visible;
criteria determining these lines are blurred. The role of democratic
reactions should be taken into account when developing a stance and
position with respect to Israel, Armenia and Cyprus. This was the
primary factor behind the rejection of the notorious March 1 motion
by the Turkish Parliament.
In the end, it seems that Erdogan's rage and reaction remained
unfruitful and did not culminate in concrete action. Considering the
close military, diplomatic and logistical relations between Turkey
and Israel, it is obvious that this reaction did not harm Israel. For
instance, if Turkey had canceled its agreement on training Israeli
pilots and commandos in Turkey, we might have concluded that Erdogan's
reaction was based on some concrete action.
When it comes to the Jewish lobbies' threats with respect to the
Armenian genocide claims, this is not something Turkey should be
worried about. There will be no difference between the endorsement of
the claims by the US Congress and the approval of the same allegations
by parliaments of other countries. Besides, the Jewish lobbies will
be most affected by this because they will lose the monopolistic
power over the "genocide" issue.