Tweet
Antiwar.com Original Articles
June 24, 2010 Thursday 1:01 AM EST
Punishing Turkey
by Philip Giraldi
Jun. 24, 2010 (Antiwar.com delivered by Newstex) --
Does anyone remember the movie The Boys from Brazil? It told the
story of how a group of top Nazis had moved to Brazil where they made
a number of clones of Hitler-as-a-child that were being strategically
placed around the world to eventually bring about a Fourth Reich. The
movie ended ambiguously, with many of the Hitler children still alive
and evidently expected to eventually turn into Hitler adults. The
movie makers were clearly on to something because there have been a
lot of Hitler sightings by Israel and its friends over the past few
years. Saddam Hussein was described as a new Hitler while Iran's
President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has been depicted in even more heinous
terms as a reborn Nazi leader preparing a new Holocaust. More
recently Israel demonstrators have displayed effigies of Turkish Prime
Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan with the hairline altered and a
moustache added to create a caricature of Hitler.
The Turkish prime minister's Hitler-like leanings first appeared when
he dared confront Israel's President Shimon Peres at an international
meeting in Davos in January 2009. Referring to the slaughter of Gazan
civilians earlier that month, Erdogan told Peres "?
you know well how to kill." But if there was any lingering doubt,
Erdogan definitely became Hitler through his support of the flotilla
that sought to bring aid to Gaza three weeks ago followed by his
denunciation of the massacre initiated by Israeli commandos. His
diabolical intent was made manifest when he then demanded justice for
the nine Turkish citizens who were murdered. Hitlerization is the
price one inevitably pays for criticizing Israel or opposing its
policies.
Whenever Israel discovers that yet another foreign nation has turned
Nazi and is intent on recreating the Holocaust, the American lap dog
soon picks up the scent. Andrew Sullivan has recently described the
phenomenon as "Israel Derangement Syndrome," which he describes as a
"?form of derangement, or of such a passionate commitment to a foreign
country that any and all normal moral rules or even basic fairness are
jettisoned. And you will notice one thing as well: no regret
whatsoever for the loss of human life, just as the hideous murder of
so many civilians in the Gaza war had to be the responsibility of the
victims, not the attackers. There is no sense of the human here; just
the tribe."
The Gaza flotilla has been handled by the mainstream media in
precisely that fashion ?" blaming the victim with a unanimity that
overwhelms both justice and fairness. No humanity, no mention of the
deliberate attempt to starve Gaza most recently endorsed by alleged
United States Senator from New York Charles Schumer who said "strangle
them economically." Or, if one prefers the wisdom of Representative
Eliot Engel, also from New York, the flotilla was "filled with
hate-filled provocateurs bent on violence." Confronted by such hatred
it is surprising that the Israeli commandos were so restrained,
killing only nine passengers and wounding about forty more.
As the popular narrative in the media has unfolded, Turkey was the
aggressor and Israel yet again the victim. Turkey now has to be
punished. Congress is already considering passing the frequently
shelved Armenian Genocide resolution and Representative Mike Spence
warns "There will be a cost if Turkey stays on its present heading of
growing closer to Iran and more antagonistic to the State of Israel."
Representative Shelley Berkley agrees, saying that she would actively
oppose Turkey's attempt to join the European Union. Just exactly how
she will do that is not completely clear.
The American media and the punditry in Washington has obediently been
lining up to condemn Ankara, using two basic arguments. The first
contention is that Turkey has become a stronghold of Islamism, is
edging towards a political and economic alliance with Iran, and is
even acting friendly to terrorism-supporting neighbors like Syria.
The second narrative is that Turkey is no longer reliable due to its
support of initiatives like the flotilla and also its bid to negotiate
a solution to the Iranian nuclear program dilemma.
Those who know Turkey well realize that the country's Islamism is a
reflection of the simple fact that many Turks are deeply religious.
It does not mean that Turkish democracy is dead and the desire to make
the state more reflective of religious sentiment will be held in check
by the many Turks in the judiciary and military who see themselves as
guardians of the secular constitution. Educated Turks in liberal urban
environments are also frequently not religious at all and many are
hostile to expressions of piety. It is absolutely in the United
States' national interest to encourage the development of political
systems in Muslim majority countries that accommodate both democratic
pluralism and religiosity. Turkey is far from perfect but it is a
good example of how such a system might develop and should be
encouraged, not subject to criticism that really has nothing to do
with the Turks themselves and everything to do with Israel.
As for the claim that Turkey is sliding eastward, Turks have always
seen themselves as a bridge between east and west and establishing a
modus vivendi with one's neighbors is just good politics and good
business in the Near East. As for the charge that Turkey is no longer
reliable, one only has to note that nearly the entire world excepting
only Israel supports the lifting of the siege of Gaza while many
nations welcomed Turkey and Brazil's initiative to resolve the
stand-off over Iran's nuclear ambitions. The United States,
inevitably lining up in support of Israel and seemingly willing to go
to war with Iran on Tel Aviv's behalf, is, as usual, politically
isolated in its support of policies that will go nowhere and
accomplish nothing.
The hysteria about Turkey is, if anything, more intense at the various
neocon think tanks and in their websites on the internet where leading
supporters of Israel are calling not only for punishing Turkey but
also for kicking it out of NATO. The Jewish Institute for National
Security Affairs (JINSA) has led the charge. JINSA is the home base
of leading neocons to include John Bolton, Michael Ledeen, Joshua
Muravchik, Richard Perle and Kenneth Timmerman. A JINSA report issued
on June 8th cited Turkey for its "anti-Semitic ravings" and
recommended that Washington "seriously consider suspending military
cooperation?as a prelude to removing it" from NATO. The hue and cry
was shortly thereafter picked up by the other neocon heroes who
continue to feature on the mainstream media in spite of their
inability to get anything right. The National Review Online's Victor
Davis Hanson called Turkey a "?sponsor of Hamas, ally of theocratic
Iran, and fellow traveler with terrorist sponsoring Syria" conditions
that are "antithetical to its NATO membership." Professor Eliot Cohen
of Johns Hopkins University added in a June 7th Wall Street Journal
op-ed that "A combination of Islamist rule, resentment at exclusion
from Europe, and a neo-Ottomanist ideology that envisions Turkey as a
great power in the Middle East have made Turkey a state that is often
plainly hostile not only to Israel but to American aims and
interests."
In a Weekly Standard article on June 21st, Elliot Abrams chimed in
with more of the same, observing that "it's obvious that our formerly
reliable NATO ally Turkey has become a staunch supporter of the
radical camp. In the flotilla incident, it not only sided with but
also sought to strengthen the terrorist group Hamas." As always the
neocons speak with one voice in defense of Israel, making it appear
that the entire process is orchestrated, which, of course, it is.
Will the neocons marginalize Ankara and succeed in forcing Turkey out
of NATO? Difficult to say, but one should fully expect moves by
Congress to do just that or to pressure Turkey in such a way as to
make Ankara withdraw from the alliance.
Turkey is a vital strategic partner for Washington. With its large
population and thriving economy, it might well be the indispensible
nation in the arc of states running from the Mediterranean to central
Asia. It has a long history of friendship towards the United States
combined with a national interest that compels it to encourage
stability among the countries that it borders and more broadly
throughout the Middle East. In spite of misgivings about specific
policies, it houses a major US airbase at Incirlik and has supported
Washington's nation building efforts in Afghanistan. But now it must
be punished because it has crossed the line by opposing the
kleptocracy Israel. And it will be punished, first pilloried in the
US media, a process which is underway right now, and then by the US
Congress and White House, which will together find some subtle and
not-so-subtle ways to bring Ankara to heel. And the loser in all of
this will be the American people, who will alienate a good and staunch
friend in the Middle East and make another unnecessary enemy.
From: A. Papazian
June 24, 2010 Thursday 1:01 AM EST
Punishing Turkey
by Philip Giraldi
Jun. 24, 2010 (Antiwar.com delivered by Newstex) --
Does anyone remember the movie The Boys from Brazil? It told the
story of how a group of top Nazis had moved to Brazil where they made
a number of clones of Hitler-as-a-child that were being strategically
placed around the world to eventually bring about a Fourth Reich. The
movie ended ambiguously, with many of the Hitler children still alive
and evidently expected to eventually turn into Hitler adults. The
movie makers were clearly on to something because there have been a
lot of Hitler sightings by Israel and its friends over the past few
years. Saddam Hussein was described as a new Hitler while Iran's
President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has been depicted in even more heinous
terms as a reborn Nazi leader preparing a new Holocaust. More
recently Israel demonstrators have displayed effigies of Turkish Prime
Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan with the hairline altered and a
moustache added to create a caricature of Hitler.
The Turkish prime minister's Hitler-like leanings first appeared when
he dared confront Israel's President Shimon Peres at an international
meeting in Davos in January 2009. Referring to the slaughter of Gazan
civilians earlier that month, Erdogan told Peres "?
you know well how to kill." But if there was any lingering doubt,
Erdogan definitely became Hitler through his support of the flotilla
that sought to bring aid to Gaza three weeks ago followed by his
denunciation of the massacre initiated by Israeli commandos. His
diabolical intent was made manifest when he then demanded justice for
the nine Turkish citizens who were murdered. Hitlerization is the
price one inevitably pays for criticizing Israel or opposing its
policies.
Whenever Israel discovers that yet another foreign nation has turned
Nazi and is intent on recreating the Holocaust, the American lap dog
soon picks up the scent. Andrew Sullivan has recently described the
phenomenon as "Israel Derangement Syndrome," which he describes as a
"?form of derangement, or of such a passionate commitment to a foreign
country that any and all normal moral rules or even basic fairness are
jettisoned. And you will notice one thing as well: no regret
whatsoever for the loss of human life, just as the hideous murder of
so many civilians in the Gaza war had to be the responsibility of the
victims, not the attackers. There is no sense of the human here; just
the tribe."
The Gaza flotilla has been handled by the mainstream media in
precisely that fashion ?" blaming the victim with a unanimity that
overwhelms both justice and fairness. No humanity, no mention of the
deliberate attempt to starve Gaza most recently endorsed by alleged
United States Senator from New York Charles Schumer who said "strangle
them economically." Or, if one prefers the wisdom of Representative
Eliot Engel, also from New York, the flotilla was "filled with
hate-filled provocateurs bent on violence." Confronted by such hatred
it is surprising that the Israeli commandos were so restrained,
killing only nine passengers and wounding about forty more.
As the popular narrative in the media has unfolded, Turkey was the
aggressor and Israel yet again the victim. Turkey now has to be
punished. Congress is already considering passing the frequently
shelved Armenian Genocide resolution and Representative Mike Spence
warns "There will be a cost if Turkey stays on its present heading of
growing closer to Iran and more antagonistic to the State of Israel."
Representative Shelley Berkley agrees, saying that she would actively
oppose Turkey's attempt to join the European Union. Just exactly how
she will do that is not completely clear.
The American media and the punditry in Washington has obediently been
lining up to condemn Ankara, using two basic arguments. The first
contention is that Turkey has become a stronghold of Islamism, is
edging towards a political and economic alliance with Iran, and is
even acting friendly to terrorism-supporting neighbors like Syria.
The second narrative is that Turkey is no longer reliable due to its
support of initiatives like the flotilla and also its bid to negotiate
a solution to the Iranian nuclear program dilemma.
Those who know Turkey well realize that the country's Islamism is a
reflection of the simple fact that many Turks are deeply religious.
It does not mean that Turkish democracy is dead and the desire to make
the state more reflective of religious sentiment will be held in check
by the many Turks in the judiciary and military who see themselves as
guardians of the secular constitution. Educated Turks in liberal urban
environments are also frequently not religious at all and many are
hostile to expressions of piety. It is absolutely in the United
States' national interest to encourage the development of political
systems in Muslim majority countries that accommodate both democratic
pluralism and religiosity. Turkey is far from perfect but it is a
good example of how such a system might develop and should be
encouraged, not subject to criticism that really has nothing to do
with the Turks themselves and everything to do with Israel.
As for the claim that Turkey is sliding eastward, Turks have always
seen themselves as a bridge between east and west and establishing a
modus vivendi with one's neighbors is just good politics and good
business in the Near East. As for the charge that Turkey is no longer
reliable, one only has to note that nearly the entire world excepting
only Israel supports the lifting of the siege of Gaza while many
nations welcomed Turkey and Brazil's initiative to resolve the
stand-off over Iran's nuclear ambitions. The United States,
inevitably lining up in support of Israel and seemingly willing to go
to war with Iran on Tel Aviv's behalf, is, as usual, politically
isolated in its support of policies that will go nowhere and
accomplish nothing.
The hysteria about Turkey is, if anything, more intense at the various
neocon think tanks and in their websites on the internet where leading
supporters of Israel are calling not only for punishing Turkey but
also for kicking it out of NATO. The Jewish Institute for National
Security Affairs (JINSA) has led the charge. JINSA is the home base
of leading neocons to include John Bolton, Michael Ledeen, Joshua
Muravchik, Richard Perle and Kenneth Timmerman. A JINSA report issued
on June 8th cited Turkey for its "anti-Semitic ravings" and
recommended that Washington "seriously consider suspending military
cooperation?as a prelude to removing it" from NATO. The hue and cry
was shortly thereafter picked up by the other neocon heroes who
continue to feature on the mainstream media in spite of their
inability to get anything right. The National Review Online's Victor
Davis Hanson called Turkey a "?sponsor of Hamas, ally of theocratic
Iran, and fellow traveler with terrorist sponsoring Syria" conditions
that are "antithetical to its NATO membership." Professor Eliot Cohen
of Johns Hopkins University added in a June 7th Wall Street Journal
op-ed that "A combination of Islamist rule, resentment at exclusion
from Europe, and a neo-Ottomanist ideology that envisions Turkey as a
great power in the Middle East have made Turkey a state that is often
plainly hostile not only to Israel but to American aims and
interests."
In a Weekly Standard article on June 21st, Elliot Abrams chimed in
with more of the same, observing that "it's obvious that our formerly
reliable NATO ally Turkey has become a staunch supporter of the
radical camp. In the flotilla incident, it not only sided with but
also sought to strengthen the terrorist group Hamas." As always the
neocons speak with one voice in defense of Israel, making it appear
that the entire process is orchestrated, which, of course, it is.
Will the neocons marginalize Ankara and succeed in forcing Turkey out
of NATO? Difficult to say, but one should fully expect moves by
Congress to do just that or to pressure Turkey in such a way as to
make Ankara withdraw from the alliance.
Turkey is a vital strategic partner for Washington. With its large
population and thriving economy, it might well be the indispensible
nation in the arc of states running from the Mediterranean to central
Asia. It has a long history of friendship towards the United States
combined with a national interest that compels it to encourage
stability among the countries that it borders and more broadly
throughout the Middle East. In spite of misgivings about specific
policies, it houses a major US airbase at Incirlik and has supported
Washington's nation building efforts in Afghanistan. But now it must
be punished because it has crossed the line by opposing the
kleptocracy Israel. And it will be punished, first pilloried in the
US media, a process which is underway right now, and then by the US
Congress and White House, which will together find some subtle and
not-so-subtle ways to bring Ankara to heel. And the loser in all of
this will be the American people, who will alienate a good and staunch
friend in the Middle East and make another unnecessary enemy.
From: A. Papazian