Tweet
NEGATIVE CONSEQUENCES OF TURKEY'S FLEXIBILITY
Jomhuri-ye Eslami website
Sept 6 2011
Iran
In the name of God the Merciful, the Compassionate
Last year, after the revelation of the UN report on the military attack
by the Zionist army on the freedom ship that led to the martyring of
nine Turkish citizens, Ankara suspended all its military relations
with the Zionist regime, reduced the level of its political relations
and announced it had expelled the Zionist regime's ambassador.
The UN report on the Zionist regime's performance in this area includes
a big lesson for the men in the government of Turkey. The attack by the
Zionists on the freedom ship took place last year and Turkey has always
sought an official apology from the leaders of the Zionist regime, but
the Tel Aviv regime still refuses to give any kind of official apology.
The UN report has stoked the fires of Turkey's anger because it has
regarded the attack by the Zionist army on the freedom ship as Tel
Aviv's right. However in a few statements it has implicitly accepted
that Israel used an unnecessary level of violence but at the same time
it has even said the military embargo of Gaza is this regime's right!
This means the UN report has basically taken the side of the Zionists
and has questioned the basis for delivering aid to the oppressed
people of Gaza. This reaction from Turkey shows the Ankara government
was taken by surprise by the UN report and is quite angry that the
taking sides benefits the Zionists and hurts Ankara.
Since the Zionist regime's ambassador has returned to Tel Aviv some
time ago and is not effectively present in Ankara, this decision
by Ankara was considered just a measure to show "taking initiative"
and was done with the aim of proving Ankara is the one who decides
about this.
Despite this the contents of the UN report once again drew in hands
behind the scenes in organizing reports and specifically manipulating
texts of reports attributed to the UN. This phenomenon reminds the
men in Turkey's government that despite its mildness and flexibility
towards the West, the way they treat Turkey is not that appropriate
to Ankara's flexibility. This point is important because recently
Ankara has regularly declared its willingness to deploy in its soil
the NATO anti-missile defence shield and it thought such flexibility
could change conditions in Turkey's favour.
In fact the real aim of the NATO radar system in Turkey it to conduct
espionage operations and monitor Iran's air navigation. It was not
thought Turkey would agree to such a plan and effectively turn its
border with Iran into a hostile border; yet Ankara thought it could
achieve its objectives with this sycophancy. However the publication of
this report has proven that all Ankara's calculations and expectations
in the region have been completely blown away.
It appears Turkey has forgotten it is facing governments that easily
deny facts and even invert them. Of course it was completely unlikely
the Turkish Islamists would expect anything else from the West since
they have repeatedly tasted the bitterness of the plots of America
and its allies and when their government and its predecessors such
as Necmettin Erbakan have had crises and incidents with a sign from
these same Satanic powers, or more importantly it is unlikely they
would trust them or go along with them.
How is it possible when they have information about the Ergenekon
coup d'etat and especially awareness of the foreign connections of
the agents of the coup that the men in Turkey's government could still
trust the West and give NATO a green light as a supererogatory service?
The fact is that for some time the West and especially America in
dealing with Turkey has kept the sword sheathed and not only has Europe
always rejected Ankara's requests to enter this union but in digging
up the grave of history it is hoping by concentrating on the Ottoman
wars in the last century against the Armenians and presenting them as
genocide, it will be able to get some advantage out of the confusion.
How is it possible that Ankara could forget that its historic agreement
with Armenia defeated America's allusions? Knowledge of these obvious
things, which do not even require that much political intelligence
to understand, makes questionable Ankara's investment in the West's
interventionist projects in the region.
In the recent Syria crisis and in the effort to fan the flames of
insecurity and instability in this nation, what interest was Ankara
really seeking when it spoke in unison with the reactionary Arab
courts, Washington and Tel Aviv? What justification do the men in
the government of Turkey have for the political turnabout on the
Bahrain disasters, where one day they were calling it the "Karbala
of contemporary history" and then to strengthen the corrupt and
bloodthirsty Al Khalifah regime they played along with the Saudi
executioners and occupiers?
Turkey and the Islamists must never think flexibility towards the West
will provide them with more advantages. To the contrary, it will beset
them with brittle inconsistencies and the way out of such a dead end
will be both unknown and full of ambiguities for them.
The meaning and real concept of the publication of the manipulated
report attributed to the UN against Turkey and in the interest of
the Zionists is attributable precisely to this angle and in fact it
is evaluated as a tool to put pressure on Turkey and for negotiation
in the interest of the occupiers and NATO to get more concessions
from Turkey. One wishes the men in Turkey's government would use
their talents to understand the facts, avoid making more mistakes
and dispense with the flexibility on the projects of NATO and the West.
Jomhuri-ye Eslami website
Sept 6 2011
Iran
In the name of God the Merciful, the Compassionate
Last year, after the revelation of the UN report on the military attack
by the Zionist army on the freedom ship that led to the martyring of
nine Turkish citizens, Ankara suspended all its military relations
with the Zionist regime, reduced the level of its political relations
and announced it had expelled the Zionist regime's ambassador.
The UN report on the Zionist regime's performance in this area includes
a big lesson for the men in the government of Turkey. The attack by the
Zionists on the freedom ship took place last year and Turkey has always
sought an official apology from the leaders of the Zionist regime, but
the Tel Aviv regime still refuses to give any kind of official apology.
The UN report has stoked the fires of Turkey's anger because it has
regarded the attack by the Zionist army on the freedom ship as Tel
Aviv's right. However in a few statements it has implicitly accepted
that Israel used an unnecessary level of violence but at the same time
it has even said the military embargo of Gaza is this regime's right!
This means the UN report has basically taken the side of the Zionists
and has questioned the basis for delivering aid to the oppressed
people of Gaza. This reaction from Turkey shows the Ankara government
was taken by surprise by the UN report and is quite angry that the
taking sides benefits the Zionists and hurts Ankara.
Since the Zionist regime's ambassador has returned to Tel Aviv some
time ago and is not effectively present in Ankara, this decision
by Ankara was considered just a measure to show "taking initiative"
and was done with the aim of proving Ankara is the one who decides
about this.
Despite this the contents of the UN report once again drew in hands
behind the scenes in organizing reports and specifically manipulating
texts of reports attributed to the UN. This phenomenon reminds the
men in Turkey's government that despite its mildness and flexibility
towards the West, the way they treat Turkey is not that appropriate
to Ankara's flexibility. This point is important because recently
Ankara has regularly declared its willingness to deploy in its soil
the NATO anti-missile defence shield and it thought such flexibility
could change conditions in Turkey's favour.
In fact the real aim of the NATO radar system in Turkey it to conduct
espionage operations and monitor Iran's air navigation. It was not
thought Turkey would agree to such a plan and effectively turn its
border with Iran into a hostile border; yet Ankara thought it could
achieve its objectives with this sycophancy. However the publication of
this report has proven that all Ankara's calculations and expectations
in the region have been completely blown away.
It appears Turkey has forgotten it is facing governments that easily
deny facts and even invert them. Of course it was completely unlikely
the Turkish Islamists would expect anything else from the West since
they have repeatedly tasted the bitterness of the plots of America
and its allies and when their government and its predecessors such
as Necmettin Erbakan have had crises and incidents with a sign from
these same Satanic powers, or more importantly it is unlikely they
would trust them or go along with them.
How is it possible when they have information about the Ergenekon
coup d'etat and especially awareness of the foreign connections of
the agents of the coup that the men in Turkey's government could still
trust the West and give NATO a green light as a supererogatory service?
The fact is that for some time the West and especially America in
dealing with Turkey has kept the sword sheathed and not only has Europe
always rejected Ankara's requests to enter this union but in digging
up the grave of history it is hoping by concentrating on the Ottoman
wars in the last century against the Armenians and presenting them as
genocide, it will be able to get some advantage out of the confusion.
How is it possible that Ankara could forget that its historic agreement
with Armenia defeated America's allusions? Knowledge of these obvious
things, which do not even require that much political intelligence
to understand, makes questionable Ankara's investment in the West's
interventionist projects in the region.
In the recent Syria crisis and in the effort to fan the flames of
insecurity and instability in this nation, what interest was Ankara
really seeking when it spoke in unison with the reactionary Arab
courts, Washington and Tel Aviv? What justification do the men in
the government of Turkey have for the political turnabout on the
Bahrain disasters, where one day they were calling it the "Karbala
of contemporary history" and then to strengthen the corrupt and
bloodthirsty Al Khalifah regime they played along with the Saudi
executioners and occupiers?
Turkey and the Islamists must never think flexibility towards the West
will provide them with more advantages. To the contrary, it will beset
them with brittle inconsistencies and the way out of such a dead end
will be both unknown and full of ambiguities for them.
The meaning and real concept of the publication of the manipulated
report attributed to the UN against Turkey and in the interest of
the Zionists is attributable precisely to this angle and in fact it
is evaluated as a tool to put pressure on Turkey and for negotiation
in the interest of the occupiers and NATO to get more concessions
from Turkey. One wishes the men in Turkey's government would use
their talents to understand the facts, avoid making more mistakes
and dispense with the flexibility on the projects of NATO and the West.