The Turks' Unrequited Love for Palestinians - by Burak Bekdil

...That was "From Palestine with Love" -- to Turkey. Without caring much about whether the Palestinians love the Turks, the Turks keep on loving to love the Palestinians. Political Islam has its many prerequisites. If one of them is unconditionally to hate Israel and the Jews; the other is an unconditional devotion to the "Palestinian cause." Turkey's leaders successfully fulfill both prerequisites.

Turkish Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu
(pictured left with Fatah leader Mahmoud Abbas
and right with Hamas leader Khaled Mashaal)
now finds his affection and emotional
support for the Palestinian cause unrequited.

Burak Bekdil..
Gatestone Institute..
04 February '16..

Although it came as no surprise, Turkish Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu, in his weekly parliamentary group speech last December, spoke like a Palestinian politician, not a Turkish one:

"The most oppressed people of the 20th and 21st centuries is the Palestinian people ... Our support will continue until Jerusalem becomes the capital of independent Palestine ... No one should doubt our devotion to the Palestinian cause ... We won't forget Palestine, Gaza, Jerusalem, not even in our dreams ... We do politics for this holy way."

He then narrated an anecdote:

"We were in the front rows when three months ago the Palestinian flag was hoisted at the United Nations. In November 2012, I was the only representative, as [then] foreign minister, from the Islamic world when Palestine was given non-member status at the United Nations general assembly. I sat with [Palestinian leader] Mahmoud Abbas when the Palestinian flag was hoisted recently and we hugged ... That's why I felt honored on behalf of my nation to witness the hoisting of the Palestinian flag at the United Nations. Inshallah [God willing] that flag will one day be waved in Jerusalem ... Whatever is wrong for Palestine is wrong for us too."

What generous Turkish affection for the Palestinian flag and leader! But both history and present times would forcefully remind one that the Turks' love affair for the Arabs in general, and the Palestinians in particular, is quite unrequited.

First, the flag. The colors of the Palestinian flag (red, white, green and black) are pan-Arab colors. The Palestinian flag is almost identical to that of the Arab Socialist Ba'ath Party. It is also very similar to the flags of Jordan and Western Sahara. Before being the Palestinian flag, it was the flag of the short-lived Arab Federation of Iraq and Jordan. All of these flags draw their inspiration from the Arab Revolt against Ottoman Turkey (1916-1918).

In short, the flag the Turkish prime minister proudly witnessed while being hoisted at the UN is an inspiration of the flag used by the Arab Palestinian nationalists in the first half of the 20th century, which was the flag of the 1916 Arab Revolt against Davutoglu's beloved Ottoman Empire. The Arabs, including Palestinians, joined the Allies to fight the Turks during the war.

Why Hamas Feels So at Home in Turkey - A Marriage Made in Heaven

...Thirty-four years ago, the people of Konya had to take to the streets to shout "Death to the Jew," wave Palestinian flags and chant all possible Quranic slogans -- and clash with the military for doing it. Today, they enjoy the Islamist ritual at the regional congress of the country's ruling party, with "a son of their city" running the show from the seat of the prime minister. Thirty-four years ago, their hearts and minds were united with their Palestinian brothers, but a public "Jerusalem meeting" could earn them a jail sentence. Today, failing to stand by the "Palestinian cause" could earn someone a jail sentence, if not a good public beating. Sadly, this is how democracy has evolved in Turkey.

Hamas leader Khaled Mashaal was given a hero's
welcome by Turkish Prime Minister Ahmet
Davutoglu last month.

Burak Bekdil..
MEF/The Gatestone Institute..
01 January '15..


In the heat of August 1980, Necmettin Erbakan, leader of the now-defunct National Salvation Party and founding father of political Islam in Turkey, published two articles, "Jerusalem and Zionism," and "Anarchy and Zionism." In the latter, he likened Zionism to an "octopus with numberless arms." Some of those arms were "communism, capitalism, freemasonry and racism."

Before that, in much of the 1970s, Turkey had been captured by political violence. It had killed on average a dozen people each day in clashes mainly between ultra left- and ultra right-wing militants.

The sole source of anarchy and chaos in Turkey, Erbakan then wrote, was Zionism.

Shortly after the publication of Erbakan's articles, on Sept. 6, 1980, his party organized the infamous "Jerusalem meeting" in the central Anatolian city of Konya, an Islamist stronghold to this day. Thousands, including children, shouted "Death to the Jew" and marched through the city. Six days after the demonstration, the military staged a coup d'état. The generals not only wanted to crush warring extremists, but also religious fundamentalists.

Little has changed in Konya's political demographics since the 1980 coup. It still boasts being the center of Turkish political Islam even though, ironically, the city's name is a Turkish distortion of its original medieval Greek name "Ikonion." This August, three-quarters of residents of Konya voted for Recep Tayyip Erdogan, who became the president of the country, with 51.5% of the nationwide vote. Like most of Turkey's cabinet ministers and ruling MPs, Erdogan comes from the ranks of Erbakan's school of political Islam.

But these days Konya is even more loudly proud of one of "its own sons." Former Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu, Erdogan's choice, was elected party leader and prime minister this summer.

Last weekend, Davutoglu gathered a regional party congress in his native Konya, where enthusiastic locals and party loyalists called him "a true grandson of the Ottomans."

The party congress looked like any other congress of the ruling Justice and Development party [AKP]: a fawning crowd, cheering, singing and shouting pro-Davutoglu (and pro-Erdogan) slogans, and waving Turkish and Palestinian flags. But there was more.

Davutoglu's guest of honor at the party congress in Konya was Khaled Mashaal, head of Hamas's political bureau and the darling of Messrs Erdogan and Davutoglu -- a feeling that is apparently not unrequited.

Best Efforts Aside, Why Turkey is Gone for Good by Caroline Glick

...THE SWORD-WIELDING restaurateur who responded to the mere presence of Jewish diners in his establishment with murderous rage is no more exceptional than lynch mobs in Ramallah. And as Turkey’s economic plight worsens and Erdogan’s embrace of Iran and jihadist groups tightens, Turkey’s behavior will only become more extreme, unappeasable and dangerous....

Caroline Glick..
carolineglick.com..
14 February '14..

Last Thursday, two Turkish businessmen stopped for lunch in a fish restaurant during a business trip to Edirne in the Babaeski region.

At some point during their meal, the restaurant owner figured out that they were Jews.

Rather than show them the hospitality Turkey is renowned for, he said he won’t serve Jews, and began cursing them and the Torah. He then took a long knife off the counter and threatened to kill them.

The men ran for their lives.

Anti-Semitic attacks have become regular events in Turkey. In December, after leaving an anti-corruption rally in Istanbul, a young woman was attacked by 10 to 15 supporters of Prime Minister Recip Tayyip Erdogan who had just left a support rally for the premier.

They accused her of being a Jew, as they beat her up.

In an interview with The Times of Israel, Turkish opposition MP Ayken Kerdemir said that Erdogan has cultivated Turkish anti-Semitism. “He is not only capitalizing on the existing sentiments, Kerdemir explained. Erdogan is “fueling some of that anti-Israel and anti-Semitic feeling… with his rhetoric, conspiracy theories, campaign slogans and actions.”

Kerdemir explained that Erdogan’s cultivation of anti-Semitism in Turkish society will continue to affect Turkey’s behavior and social values long after he is gone. “Even after Erdogan and AKP are gone, even if [the opposition party] CHP comes to power, it will take us quite some time to mend inter-societal relations through dialogue, awareness raising and sensitivity training.”

Once you let that genie out of the bottle, it is very hard to stuff it back inside.

Erdogan’s anti-Semitism is not opportunistic. He isn’t simply exploiting a popular prejudice for his own benefit. He is an anti-Semite. And his anti-Semitism informs his behavior toward Israel.

In Kerdemir’s view, Erdogan’s uncontrollable hatred of Jews makes it impossible for him to agree to reconcile Turkey’s relations with Israel.

As he put it, “Erdogan’s core values vis-à-vis Jews and Israel prevent him from dealing with this issue in a tolerant, embracing and sustainable way.”

Against this backdrop it should surprise no one that this week Erdogan sunk prospects for a renewal of Turkish ties with Israel.

And from our Turkish friends - The historic march of our holy nation...

...I recall mentioning in this column twice: “On a fine February afternoon at the Cafe Nicola in Lisbon in 2011, my Lebanese friend sipped his wine, turned to me and explained the real meaning of the glittering ‘Turkish model’ for the Arab Spring: ‘[Turkey is a model] because anyone who stands against Israel is a friend of Arabs.’ Then he added: ‘But that thinking has only built temporary alliances which later easily turned into longer-term hostilities among the Arabs.’”

Burak Bekdil..
Hurriyet Daily News..
16 August '13..

In a speech in Sarajevo in October 2009, Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu heralded: “As in the 16th century, when the Ottoman Balkans were rising, we will once again make the Balkans, the Caucasus and the Middle East, together with Turkey, the center of world politics in the future. That is the goal of the Turkish foreign policy, and we will achieve it.”

That mission has been partly accomplished. Most headlines on world politics refer to the former (and present) Ottoman lands: Civil war in Syria; nearly 1,000 Muslims killed by other Muslims in Iraq in a span of a month; a military coup in Egypt and hundreds of deaths; and simply blood, sweat and tears across Turkey. The Balkan and Caucasus nations should be happy not to have joined the former Ottoman lands to become the center of world politics.

In an April 2012 speech, Mr. Davutoğlu was even more specific: “On the historic march of our holy nation, the AK Party signals the birth of a global power and the mission for a new world order. This is the centenary of our exit from the Middle East... whatever we lost between 1911 and 1923, whatever lands we withdrew from, from 2011 to 2023 we shall once again meet our brothers in those lands. This is a … historic mission.”

Some of the other foreign policy goals Mr. Davutoğlu had earlier specified as part of that bounden historic mission was to “pray altogether at the al-Aqsa mosque in the Palestinian capital al-Quds (otherwise mistakenly known by the world as Jerusalem)” and to “pray together in a liberated Damascus.” It is not certain yet how soon the foreign minister will add to this portfolio “praying altogether in a liberated Cairo,” but there is every indication that “meeting our brothers” in the former Ottoman lands is becoming increasingly riskier.

Crossing the border into Syria could be a lethal adventure unless the traveler is a jihadist bound for Raqqa or Deir ez-Zor, or a Kurdish paramilitary patrolling in Ras al-Ayn or Hasaka. As for praying in Damascus, Mr. Davutoğlu could always seek permission from Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. Iraq and Iran could be less lethal but equally unadvised for the neo-Ottoman traveler.

A “passage to the Gaza Strip” has not been made possible even for Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan – undoubtedly an embarrassment for a sultan. Meanwhile, Mr. Davutoğlu’s quest to pray at the al-Aqsa mosque in the Palestinian capital al-Quds may have to wait for a few more centuries, if not longer. Instead, Mr. Davutoğlu could always pray at a mosque of his choice in Cairo, likewise a former Ottoman land, to be followed by a gathering of Muslim Brothers in al-Adawiya square: a nice package tour in another center of world politics, the emergency rule in Cairo permitting.

Israeli-Turkish Detente? Nice Try But...

...More importantly, though, I thought the “apology” might be justifiable as a realpolitik move if it led to restored Israeli-Turkish strategic cooperation. The critics pooh-poohed that possibility as well, stressing Erdogan’s nature as an anti-Israeli, anti-Semitic Islamist. They had good foundations for saying that; but the history was a bit more complicated.

P. David Hornik..
Frontpage Magazine..
12 July '13..

Last March 22, at the tail-end of President Obama’s visit to Israel, Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu “apologized” over the phone to Turkish prime minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan for the 2010 Mavi Marmara incident—in which Israeli commandos, in fighting for their lives against a club- and knife-wielding mob of Turkish Islamists, killed nine of the attackers.

The apology drew sharp criticism, mainly from Israeli and U.S. conservatives. Some blamed Netanyahu for allegedly cravenly giving in to Obama; some blamed Obama for allegedly pressuring Netanyahu into the move.

I didn’t join the critics at the time. First of all, there was Netanyahu’s wording. He told Erdogan he “apologized for operational errors that may have led to a loss of life.” In fact, it’s agreed in Israel that the commandos’ landing on the ship was poorly planned, and if done differently could have averted a violent eruption.

That doesn’t mean Israel actually had anything at all to apologize for. It didn’t; the Turkish side had instigated the aggression. But Netanyahu did not say he “apologized” for the fact that his soldiers had defended themselves, which indeed would have been deplorable. It was a nuance worth noting.

More importantly, though, I thought the “apology” might be justifiable as a realpolitik move if it led to restored Israeli-Turkish strategic cooperation. The critics pooh-poohed that possibility as well, stressing Erdogan’s nature as an anti-Israeli, anti-Semitic Islamist.

They had good foundations for saying that; but the history was a bit more complicated. Although Erdogan and his Islamist AKP had first taken office in 2003, the strategic relations had continued after that point. In 2005 Erdogan visited Israel with a large group of businessmen, held talks with Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, laid a wreath at the Yad Vashem Holocaust memorial in Jerusalem, and said Iran’s nuclear program was a threat not just to Israel but to the whole world.

True, relations started to sour before the Mavi Marmara when Erdogan—not a huge fan of Israeli self-defense against terrorists—objected to Israel’s 2008-2009 operation against Hamas in Gaza. Already in October 2009, Erdogan barred Israel from participating in an aerial exercise with Turkey, the U.S., and Italy.

Inverting reality - The world of Erdoğan

Fresnozionism.org..
01 March '13..

News item:

ANKARA, Turkey (AP) — U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry on Friday waded into the controversy over comments by Turkey’s prime minister equating Zionism to a crime against humanity, rebuking the leader of the NATO ally by saying such remarks complicate efforts to find peace in the Middle East.

Kerry said the Obama administration found the statements by Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan “objectionable” and he stressed the “urgent need to promote a spirit of tolerance, and that includes all of the public statements made by all leaders” at a news conference in Ankara with Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu.

“We not only disagree with it; we found it objectionable,” Kerry said.

Far be it from me to be unappreciative when our administration does something positive. Erdoğan’s statement was indeed ‘objectionable’, although I find the formulation that it “complicates efforts to find peace” somewhat stupid. As if that’s the issue!

The problem is that the statement is far more than just objectionable. Because if Zionism is a crime against humanity, then the existence of the Jewish state is also a crime, a crime committed by the Jewish people, and the only acceptable redress for the ‘victims’ of this crime is to take the state away from the Jews and give it to them.

Erdoğan is inverting reality. The truth is that the Jewish people suffered centuries of oppression and mistreatment in their diaspora, and finally succeeded in returning home. In a rare moment of collective moral clarity, the nations of the world recognized the rightness of this solution to the ‘Jewish problem’ and implemented it in the declaration of the Palestine Mandate. Although this moral moment was short — the British quickly fell back into darkness and tried to prevent the creation of a Jewish state — it came into being despite their efforts.

Fresnozionism - Obama silent as Erdoğan erases Israel from family of nations

Fresnozionism.org..
11 June '12..







Yesterday I wrote that the US had allowed Turkey to veto Israeli participation in a counterterrorism forum. This isn’t the first time. Raphael Ahren writes,

Turkey has since [the Mavi Marmara affair] blocked Israeli participation in several international events. Last week, the World Economic Forum held a “special meeting” on the Middle East, North Africa and Eurasia in Istanbul. No Israeli officials were present, possibly because Erdoğan, who partially funded the conference, demanded that they not be invited. Last month, Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu vetoed Israel’s participation in a NATO summit of heads of state and government in Chicago. Then, too, an Israeli diplomatic official said: “We didn’t plan on attending the summit anyway.”

Considering that the Mavi Marmara affair was orchestrated by the Turkish regime, following other provocations — a visit by Hamas leader Haniyeh to Turkey in 2006 (and this year), and a theatrical display by Erdoğan in 2009 at the Davos economic forum, this behavior is not surprising. Turkey under Erdoğan’s AKP has made enmity with Israel a fundamental part of its program to become the major power in the Middle East, as US influence there fades.

What is particularly interesting is the way the US, under Obama, seems to be playing along.

Tobin - Turks Turned Their Backs on America Before Dumping Israel

Jonathan S. Tobin
Commentary/Contentions
04 September '11

http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2011/09/04/turkey-israel-erdogan-us/#more-766440

In the view of some critics of Israel, Turkey’s decision to downgrade its diplomatic ties with the Jewish state is more than just a setback. It is seen as further evidence of Israel’s intransigence as the Netanyahu government allowed its foolish pride to alienate an important ally and unnecessarily heighten the nation’s diplomatic isolation.

But this false narrative doesn’t just get the dispute between Israel and Turkey wrong. It is based on a misreading of the fundamental shift in Turkey’s foreign policy that predates the Gaza flotilla dustup that served as the spark for the current contretemps. It is important to remember that long before Turkey tried to break the blockade of Hamas-run Gaza, its Islamic government had not only distanced itself from Israel but had begun to turn its back on the United States.


No blame should attach to Netanyahu for Turkey’s decision to expel Israel’s ambassador and to reduce the level of its own representation in the Jewish state. The long negotiations between the two countries over the content of the United Nations report on the Mavi Marmara incident blew up because Turkey had no intention of accepting anything close to a compromise. Netanyahu was ready to express “regret” for the deaths of several Turkish nationals who were killed while resisting an Israeli boarding party. But as even the final UN report noted, Israel’s blockade of the terrorist state in Gaza was legal. The report also said the Israeli soldiers who landed on the ships were attacked by the Turks in an act of organized and violent resistance and had a right to defend themselves. That a UN report would fundamentally vindicate Israel’s position shows how unreasonable Turkey has been.

For Israel to go beyond an expression of regret to a full “apology” for its actions as the Turks demanded would have opened up the door to attempts to hold the Israeli soldiers in question accountable in international courts. It would also have compromised Israel’s right of self-defense against Hamas or any party, such as the Turks in the flotilla, seeking to re-supply the terrorists.

However, the problem here is not just that Israel was in the right, but the cooling off of relations with Turkey predated the argument over the flotilla. The once close ties between Israel and Turkey, and in particular, their militaries, had begun to fray ever since the latter’s government was taken over by Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s Islamic Justice and Development Party in 2003. Turkey’s tilt toward Hamas and away from Israel is an inevitable consequence of Ankara’s desire to become a leader in the Islamic world in the fashion of the Ottomans rather than to be an integral part of Europe and the West. No apology from Israel or diplomatic concessions made to the Palestinians can restore the former relationship.

The lack of perspective about Turkey’s diplomatic offensive against Israel is all the more egregious because it also ignores Erdoğan’s policy shift away from the United States. In 2003, Turkey’s decision not to allow coalition troops to use their territory in the effort to depose Saddam Hussein in Iraq not only was a blow to the U.S.-Turkey alliance but set in motion circumstances that ultimately helped create the insurgency. Since then, Turkey has consistently set itself apart from its NATO allies on a host of security issues. Erdoğan’s desire to strengthen Turkey’s trade ties with Iran has fatally undermined the sanctions the United States has sought to impose on the Islamist regime’s effort to gain nuclear capability.

Those who wish to blame Netanyahu for the loss of Israel’s Turkish alliance have short memories. Long before the Turks provoked and then dumped Israel in their pursuit of greater influence among Muslims, they did the same to the United States. Rather than wondering what Israel can do to abase itself in order to regain Turkey’s good will, the better question to ask is what actions the United States Congress and the Obama administration can now take to show their displeasure with Ankara.

If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.
.

Yet another bad idea

Fresnozionism.org
08 June '11



http://fresnozionism.org/2011/06/yet-another-bad-idea/


Yesterday I called the Obama Administration “the most anti-Israel … ever.”

I can’t guess how much is caused by incompetence and how much by animosity toward Israel, but the screwups continue. Barry Rubin summed them up this morning in a remarkable 200 words (more or less):

1. Obama demands freeze on all Israeli construction in existing settlements, undoing 16 years of U.S. and Palestinian Authority (PA) acceptance of that policy. PA makes that its basic demand and won’t talk. No sanctions by Obama against PA. No talks.


2. Israel calls bluff and freezes; PA won’t talk. Obama demands freeze extended to Jerusalem. Israel complies. PA still won’t talk. Freeze expires and PA won’t talk unless new freeze. No sanctions by Obama against PA. No talks


3. Obama calls for 1967 borders with swaps. His plan: Israel turns over the entire West Bank, then they talk about the swaps! PA makes that their basic demand and won’t talk. (You can fill in the next two sentences).


4. PA makes merger deal with Hamas, antisemitic, anti-American, terrorist group that advocates genocide; expels Christians from the Gaza Strip; teaches children to be suicide bombers; rejects the peace process; and is client of Iran, Syria, and Muslim Brotherhood. (You can fill in the next two sentences).


5. PA forces Obama to veto unilateral independence demand at the UN making US “more unpopular” in Arab and Muslim world, destroying what has been just about his highest foreign policy priority. (You can fill in the next two sentences).

But there’s even more:

The Obama Administration may soon present the Turkish government with a proposition to stop the upcoming flotilla to Gaza and restore relations between Ankara and Jerusalem, the Turkish daily Today’s Zaman reported on Friday.


The offer, first reported by Turkish newspaper Hurriyet, would involve Ankara hosting peace talks between Israel and the Palestinians, according to the report. The White House is expected to soon officially make the offer to Turkey. — Jerusalem Post

If this is correct, it’s an awful idea. Turkish PM Erdoğan has ramped up anti-Israel and antisemitic feelings in Turkey since he came to power, with quantum leaps on the occasion of the Gaza war and the Mavi Marmara affair — whose fatal turn was clearly premeditated at the highest levels of the Turkish government. Erdoğan has moved his country out of the American orbit and into the Iran-Syria-Hamas axis. Giving Turkey influence over negotiations involving Israel’s security is like asking the wolf to mediate between the fox and the hens.

Turkish general elections are scheduled for next week. This proposal, whether or not it is serious, will certainly give Erdoğan’s AK party a boost. Even Obama sees Turkey as a major regional player, they can trumpet, thanks to our brilliant Prime Minister.

There’s no doubt that Turkey would have conditions for restoring relations with Jerusalem as well — Erdoğan has mentioned an apology and compensation paid to Turkey for the dead terrorists of the Mavi Marmara before — and he would almost certainly demand that Israel recognize a Palestinian government containing Hamas and lift the sea blockade of Gaza.

Erdoğan is also anti-American — but since when was that a reason to not ‘engage’? An AKP victory weakens America in the Middle East. Why is Obama helping them?

So we have the Obama administration a) helping Israel’s enemies win elections, b) proposing that said enemies influence critical decisions about Israel’s security, c) helping them press their absurd claims against Israel and last but not least, d) strengthening the Islamist bloc in the Middle East to our own disadvantage.

There is little chance that Israel would agree to meet the Palestinians in Erdoğan’s Turkey. How does this proposal advance the cause of peace?

Let me repeat one of my favorite lines:

Stupid or evil? You decide.


If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.
.