Tweet
DOES AMERICA WANT TO EMBARRASS TURKEY IN FRONT OF THE ARABS?
Middle East Monitor-
Oct 24 2014
by Rabee Al-Hafidh
Friday, 24 October 2014 10:43
Does America want to involve Turkey in the Syrian swamp? This question
does not carry surprises and its answer, whether yes or no, does not
signify anything. Senior Turkish officials have made statements to
the media saying, our entry into Syria is being likened to Saddam's
entry into Kuwait and America's support for us does not prevent Russia
from playing the role of America in 1991 and putting Turkey before
international courts.
However, questions regarding America's commitment to defend Turkey
in the face of any aggression on the one hand and its aggression and
harassment of Turkey on the other are all legitimate. It is nothing
new for America to harass Turkey and put it in an awkward position
politically and in terms of local and international security.
Politically, America was behind the coup staged by the army against
the civilian rule in 1980, which disrupted Turkey's renaissance for
two decades and put it in a state of political and economic paralysis.
Militarily, Turkey discovered, at some point during its war with the
PKK, that its enemy is fighting it with weapons from Turkey's ally,
i.e. America.
Strategically, America wields the sword represented by the Armenian
file from time to time at carefully chosen moments in order to inflict
maximum embarrassment and blackmail the Turkish government.
Meanwhile, the "Sevres issue" (in reference to the secret Treaty of
Sevres signed during the First World War which aimed to divide Turkey
and was exposed by Russian Bolsheviks) controls the Turks' view of
America, as they are wary of NATO desires to divide their country. On
the other hand, America also has doubts especially after Turkey
refused to allow the American army to invade Iraq from its territories.
NATO's answer to this not only concerns the Turks, but the region
as a whole, as it is viewed as a danger and as a phenomenon aimed at
weakening the state in the region and fragmenting its communities.
Such concerns are justified due to the evidence of the events in Iraq,
Syria, Yemen and Bahrain.
In this phenomenon, Turkey represents the last remaining model that
the region can use to re-shape itself and advance once again. The
stories of history indicate that a Seljuk or Ottoman-Turkish axis
was instrumental in re-shaping the region's communities after each
Persian raid, which the Arab societies were an arena for.
Light is shed on the extent of the damage that America allows to be
inflicted on Turkey from the strategic value Turkey was given upon
its acceptance into America's "club" (NATO) in 1952. For America,
the poor agricultural underdeveloped country that was exhausted by
WWI was nothing more than a geographic area adjacent to the Soviet
Union that it could use to build its military bases and a secular
army that has lost its intellectual value and its only job was to
pull the trigger in any direction it was ordered to.
America used the Turkish army in its war in Korea in 1953 in order
to fight in a country it did not know, against an enemy it had no
hostility towards and alongside an ally that was recently its mortal
enemy. That same army has immensely changed today, its leader changed,
and it regained its affiliation and loyalty to its own country. Its
rebellion and rejection of America's request to invade Iraq from its
territory in 2003 is a clear manifestation of its new creed.
America's need for Turkey is limited to the state Turkey was in 1952
when it played the role entrusted to it to the best of its ability
during the most critical times, i.e. during the Cold War.
America's need for Turkey does not require Turkey to be the sixth
ranked economy in Europe and it does not require Turkey's inflation
rate to drop from 30 per cent to 7 per cent. It also does not need
Turkey to double the average annual citizen income ten-fold, as well
as doubling the number of airports and universities in a matter of
10 years. In addition to this, Turkey's free health services reach
every village and mountain summit and the network of highways and
fast trains extend across its mountains; none of this is necessary
to America and its removal is not harmful.
On the other hand, ailing Europe is not pleased with the largest
airport in the world moving from Europe to the city of Istanbul
and for the youth in the Middle East and Africa to leave Europe's
prestigious universities for Turkey, as well as its hospitals. It is
also displeased that Turkey has become an economic giant. None of this
is a requirement for the West's relations with its Turkish NATO ally.
America has preferred "Turkey's Islam" to the "Arab Islam" and Turkey
is not considered to be a fundamentalist giant by Washington. Instead,
it is considered a recovered state system and civil society, which,
over the past nine decades of the modern state's life, has acted as an
incubator in order for its societies to gain cultural rehabilitation
and recover its identity after the Sykes-Picot operation, performed
in the context of comprehensive social re-engineering of the region.
America's view of the region's communities is in harmony with what the
English espionage pillars expressed in the aftermath of WWI, i.e. the
war did not achieve its greatest objective in terms of the Islamic
East which was eliminating the "Eastern Question" (the name of the
West's battle against the Islamic East by dismantling its regional
regimes and social structure). The objective was not considered to
be complete because these communities posed the same political and
social interfaces that were posed during the Ottoman times.
In other words, an event the size of WWI which brought about the
first change in the world's political map in six centuries, was
unable to bring about complete socio-cultural changes in the region,
despite the fact that, as a result of the war, Arab-Turkish relations
reached a long dormant social and cultural state. The political and
social changes in Turkey today represent a new transformation in
these relations.
The Arab political system's self-assessment of its performance is no
different than Europe's self-assessment of its performance. Turkey
has become involved in Arab affairs, just as Abdel Nasser's Egypt and
Saddam Hussein's Iraq were in the past. Its flags are raised in Arab
streets instead of their own flags and the names of their leaders are
being used to name newborns. More importantly, this is not the work of
political or Islamist activists, but that of people far from political
influences and political Islam with the most humility in the community.
This is a scene that intimidates and concerns the Arab governments,
as they see it as the return of the Ottoman Empire, which wasn't ruled
by religion as much as it was ruled by social norms stemming from
Islam and a conservative political system. This system maintained
the characteristics of the region's communities and this is what
societies want from their states, and they find this in Turkey.
Everything that is happening in Turkey today is not consistent with
the official regional mood (Arab and Iranian) or the international
mood, and everything that occurs inconsistently with their moods are
met with their temperaments. Therefore, the Arab's official money is
being showered on the secular and spiritual parties and institutions
in Turkey that are opposed to the current Turkish government, while
American weapons are falling from the skies on the organisations
opposed to Turkey which represent an extension of the PKK, which is
on America's terrorism list.
Iran's hands are also getting involved in moving the sectarian
minorities in and around Turkey and it holding successive international
security conferences for planning military activities across the
Turkish borders. The "nations of the earth" will participate in these
activities and Turkey will look like the black sheep in a white herd.
The main idea of the current official regional scene is there is no
place for Turkey in the vicinity of surroundings that are handed
over to the rule of militias; there is no place for the state's
economy in the vicinity of the black market and smuggling of natural
resources; there is no place for a multi-ethnic, multi-doctrinal,
and multi-religious majority community in an area of minorities;
there is no place for civilised Islam in the face of sectarianism.
There is no harm in removing the current government in Turkey, along
with the prosperity and stability it has brought about, and allowing
the secularists along with their failures and turbulences to take over,
keeping Turkey as mere land in America's eyes. Getting rid of Turkey
is an end and harassing it is a means to that end.
Translated from Al Jazeera net, 22 October, 2014
https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/articles/europe/14841-does-america-want-to-embarrass-turkey-in-front-of-the-arabs
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress
Middle East Monitor-
Oct 24 2014
by Rabee Al-Hafidh
Friday, 24 October 2014 10:43
Does America want to involve Turkey in the Syrian swamp? This question
does not carry surprises and its answer, whether yes or no, does not
signify anything. Senior Turkish officials have made statements to
the media saying, our entry into Syria is being likened to Saddam's
entry into Kuwait and America's support for us does not prevent Russia
from playing the role of America in 1991 and putting Turkey before
international courts.
However, questions regarding America's commitment to defend Turkey
in the face of any aggression on the one hand and its aggression and
harassment of Turkey on the other are all legitimate. It is nothing
new for America to harass Turkey and put it in an awkward position
politically and in terms of local and international security.
Politically, America was behind the coup staged by the army against
the civilian rule in 1980, which disrupted Turkey's renaissance for
two decades and put it in a state of political and economic paralysis.
Militarily, Turkey discovered, at some point during its war with the
PKK, that its enemy is fighting it with weapons from Turkey's ally,
i.e. America.
Strategically, America wields the sword represented by the Armenian
file from time to time at carefully chosen moments in order to inflict
maximum embarrassment and blackmail the Turkish government.
Meanwhile, the "Sevres issue" (in reference to the secret Treaty of
Sevres signed during the First World War which aimed to divide Turkey
and was exposed by Russian Bolsheviks) controls the Turks' view of
America, as they are wary of NATO desires to divide their country. On
the other hand, America also has doubts especially after Turkey
refused to allow the American army to invade Iraq from its territories.
NATO's answer to this not only concerns the Turks, but the region
as a whole, as it is viewed as a danger and as a phenomenon aimed at
weakening the state in the region and fragmenting its communities.
Such concerns are justified due to the evidence of the events in Iraq,
Syria, Yemen and Bahrain.
In this phenomenon, Turkey represents the last remaining model that
the region can use to re-shape itself and advance once again. The
stories of history indicate that a Seljuk or Ottoman-Turkish axis
was instrumental in re-shaping the region's communities after each
Persian raid, which the Arab societies were an arena for.
Light is shed on the extent of the damage that America allows to be
inflicted on Turkey from the strategic value Turkey was given upon
its acceptance into America's "club" (NATO) in 1952. For America,
the poor agricultural underdeveloped country that was exhausted by
WWI was nothing more than a geographic area adjacent to the Soviet
Union that it could use to build its military bases and a secular
army that has lost its intellectual value and its only job was to
pull the trigger in any direction it was ordered to.
America used the Turkish army in its war in Korea in 1953 in order
to fight in a country it did not know, against an enemy it had no
hostility towards and alongside an ally that was recently its mortal
enemy. That same army has immensely changed today, its leader changed,
and it regained its affiliation and loyalty to its own country. Its
rebellion and rejection of America's request to invade Iraq from its
territory in 2003 is a clear manifestation of its new creed.
America's need for Turkey is limited to the state Turkey was in 1952
when it played the role entrusted to it to the best of its ability
during the most critical times, i.e. during the Cold War.
America's need for Turkey does not require Turkey to be the sixth
ranked economy in Europe and it does not require Turkey's inflation
rate to drop from 30 per cent to 7 per cent. It also does not need
Turkey to double the average annual citizen income ten-fold, as well
as doubling the number of airports and universities in a matter of
10 years. In addition to this, Turkey's free health services reach
every village and mountain summit and the network of highways and
fast trains extend across its mountains; none of this is necessary
to America and its removal is not harmful.
On the other hand, ailing Europe is not pleased with the largest
airport in the world moving from Europe to the city of Istanbul
and for the youth in the Middle East and Africa to leave Europe's
prestigious universities for Turkey, as well as its hospitals. It is
also displeased that Turkey has become an economic giant. None of this
is a requirement for the West's relations with its Turkish NATO ally.
America has preferred "Turkey's Islam" to the "Arab Islam" and Turkey
is not considered to be a fundamentalist giant by Washington. Instead,
it is considered a recovered state system and civil society, which,
over the past nine decades of the modern state's life, has acted as an
incubator in order for its societies to gain cultural rehabilitation
and recover its identity after the Sykes-Picot operation, performed
in the context of comprehensive social re-engineering of the region.
America's view of the region's communities is in harmony with what the
English espionage pillars expressed in the aftermath of WWI, i.e. the
war did not achieve its greatest objective in terms of the Islamic
East which was eliminating the "Eastern Question" (the name of the
West's battle against the Islamic East by dismantling its regional
regimes and social structure). The objective was not considered to
be complete because these communities posed the same political and
social interfaces that were posed during the Ottoman times.
In other words, an event the size of WWI which brought about the
first change in the world's political map in six centuries, was
unable to bring about complete socio-cultural changes in the region,
despite the fact that, as a result of the war, Arab-Turkish relations
reached a long dormant social and cultural state. The political and
social changes in Turkey today represent a new transformation in
these relations.
The Arab political system's self-assessment of its performance is no
different than Europe's self-assessment of its performance. Turkey
has become involved in Arab affairs, just as Abdel Nasser's Egypt and
Saddam Hussein's Iraq were in the past. Its flags are raised in Arab
streets instead of their own flags and the names of their leaders are
being used to name newborns. More importantly, this is not the work of
political or Islamist activists, but that of people far from political
influences and political Islam with the most humility in the community.
This is a scene that intimidates and concerns the Arab governments,
as they see it as the return of the Ottoman Empire, which wasn't ruled
by religion as much as it was ruled by social norms stemming from
Islam and a conservative political system. This system maintained
the characteristics of the region's communities and this is what
societies want from their states, and they find this in Turkey.
Everything that is happening in Turkey today is not consistent with
the official regional mood (Arab and Iranian) or the international
mood, and everything that occurs inconsistently with their moods are
met with their temperaments. Therefore, the Arab's official money is
being showered on the secular and spiritual parties and institutions
in Turkey that are opposed to the current Turkish government, while
American weapons are falling from the skies on the organisations
opposed to Turkey which represent an extension of the PKK, which is
on America's terrorism list.
Iran's hands are also getting involved in moving the sectarian
minorities in and around Turkey and it holding successive international
security conferences for planning military activities across the
Turkish borders. The "nations of the earth" will participate in these
activities and Turkey will look like the black sheep in a white herd.
The main idea of the current official regional scene is there is no
place for Turkey in the vicinity of surroundings that are handed
over to the rule of militias; there is no place for the state's
economy in the vicinity of the black market and smuggling of natural
resources; there is no place for a multi-ethnic, multi-doctrinal,
and multi-religious majority community in an area of minorities;
there is no place for civilised Islam in the face of sectarianism.
There is no harm in removing the current government in Turkey, along
with the prosperity and stability it has brought about, and allowing
the secularists along with their failures and turbulences to take over,
keeping Turkey as mere land in America's eyes. Getting rid of Turkey
is an end and harassing it is a means to that end.
Translated from Al Jazeera net, 22 October, 2014
https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/articles/europe/14841-does-america-want-to-embarrass-turkey-in-front-of-the-arabs
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress