Turkey

I already had the unpleasant “privilege” to read lots of anti-Turkey articles on numerous french sites, or for instance on the Hürriyet daily news, which takes up extracts of foreign articles (European Union, United States of America, ….). Thus, I didn’t want to read the last rag of Le nouvel observateur regarding Turkey. I am in a position to write that it is a rag because I read several extracts of it which were taken up by a french association that suggested a smart and long answer to the journalist of that rag (so I form a precise picture of its content). Why pollute my brain and read the anti-Turkey propaganda of that journalist of Le nouvel observateur? Why waste my time? Precisely, last march, the Hürriyet daily news took up an extract of a previous article of Le nouvel observateur. Here is the article.

And here is one extract of the article and the comment that I suggested:

““Turkey’s foreign minister is the “new grand vizier,” according to a French magazine, which also decried the Turkish government’s turn toward a “neo-Ottoman” foreign policy during the past year.” ““His doctrines are reminiscent of the pax-Ottomana, when the Ottoman Empire spanned from Sarajevo to Baghdad,” the magazine said.”

I’m realizing once more that many journalists are paid for nothing: “Money for nothing and chicks for free”! That analysis proves that the journalist of “Le nouvel observateur” needs to wake up, and to think more about Turkey before writing anything.

The journalist seems to be lost in the past. He has to know that Atatürk created Turkey as a secular republic in 1923, and that Mr Davutoğlu is the foreign minister of that republic. Turkey is improving its relations with its neighbours such as Russia, Greece, but also with Iraq, Syria, or Iran. What’s the problem? France and Germany have economic relations with Saudi Arabia and Iran, but that doesn’t disturb any journalist in France or Germany, and no one says that they shift to the east.”

More recently, another French daily suggested a very subjective article about Turkey and the AKP, but I don’t want to mention that article neither. According to that newspaper, the AKP would be “neo-islamist” (see that article about politics and religion). Another attempt to make the French afraid and wash their brain in order to make a diversion, to make forget the ethnic cleansing of Israel in Palestine (but also the silence of the USA about that subject) and what the USA do in Iraq, but also the murders of 9 Turkish citizens (including one who was also an American citizen) who were on one of the humanitarian ships en route to Gaza.

Another obvious objective of the systematic use of the word “islamism”: to make afraid the French citizens and the ones of the EU so that they object to Turkey’s EU membership.

These examples prove that Israel, with its important lobbies in the media (which aren’t all inevitably of Jewish religion), doesn’t want Turkey to be an EU member. Because if Israel wanted Turkey to be an EU member, its lobbies considerably influential would prevent the scandalous and so subjective anti-Turkish propaganda of numerous french media. These lobbies would have supported Turkey’s EU membership for a very long time. But they haven’t prevented the media from washing the brain of the French citizens regarding Turkey for ages. Maybe that Israel doesn’t want Turkey to be a member of the EU because the potential power of Turkey at the EU parliament (96 seats) disturb it.

As for the the USA, if they really wanted Turkey to join the EU, Turkey would have been a member for a very long time, wouldn’t it? Is there any concrete example that proves that the USA are in favour of the membership of Turkey to the EU? They announce officially their support to Turkey, but what have they concretely done until now? What have they done so that Turkey becomes more democratic? The USA see Turkey only as a military ally of which they take advantage of its geo-strategic position and of its military power. Turkey serves them as an army base (Incirlik – Adana) from which they watch the whole region (the Middle East, the Caucasus, ….).

It is very probable that the instigators of the coup d’état of 1980 in Turkey are the USA and their Israeli lobbies, which may have put pressure on the Turkish military and blackmailed them. The USA and some of their powerful lobbies full of hatred, as well as Israel, may also have caused the attempt of the military coup of 2003, revealed out into the open this year (previous articles: click here and there).

Although I’m not convinced, these hypothesis are serious and deserve more consideration. Furthermore, it is said that it is Turkey (with Bülent Ecevit) which rejected the European Economic Community membership offer suggested by the EEC in 1978. Well, today I have doubts about that. Maybe that it is the USA which put pressure on Turkey so that it declines that offer, which though would have undeniably guaranteed the democratic, economic and social developments of the whole Anatolia. Officially, it is said that Mr Ecevit refused the membership to the EEC because the Turkish economy was not ready to compete with the economy of the EEC countries. I don’t believe that theory anymore. Turkey refuses the membership offer of the EEC. Then a military coup beaks out. And the EEC decides to freeze its relations with Turkey “because of that military coup”. Coincidence?

In my opinion, the USA and their corrupt politicians (as well as Israel) are against the EU membership of Turkey because on the one hand, they don’t want the EU to become an international political and military power, on the other hand they want to keep on influencing Turkey, because an unstable, isolated and not EU secured Turkey is easier to influence than a stable EU member Turkey. They certainly have no intention of giving way to a strong and influential EU which would counterbalance their disastrous foreign policy based on war and the business of war. Because with Turkey within it, the EU would have a passport which would enable it at last to influence positively our planet, thus disturb and even isolate the USA and their industrial and military lobbies. Anyway, the USA and Israel are already isolated in the Middle East since Turkey, with its “zero problem with the neighbours” foreign policy, creates an auspicious atmosphere for peace. An atmosphere which runs counter to the war plans of the USA and Israel.

The journalists and the lobbies in Europe and in the USA which support the extremist Israeli leaders are immoral, without any conscience. They wash the brain of the citizens. They are extremely subjective and don’t know what journalist deontology means. Their articles and their report are harmful and represent a threat for peace. Numerous French newspapers as well as several national and private TV channels which dealt with the terrorist attack of Israel against the humanitarian civilian Turkish ships (with on board citizens of the EU and of the whole world) proved it indubitably (to cap it all Israel was defended and introduced as the victim). The manner in which the majority of the French media covered that barbarian attack of Israel proved that the French media are hardly objective and independent. 9 civilian Turks of whom one of 18 years old was also American were assassinated by the “soldiers” of Israel during that attack, which was nothing less than a crime against humanity. But the blame was not laid at the door of Israel but at the one of the unarmed civilians who were attacked at 4 am – in darkness – in the international waters (in order to prevent the live broadcasts of the journalists present on board the ships). Israel attacked with warships, helicopters, and inflatable dinghies. There were even a few submarines. Incredible arsenal to stop some civilian ships full of foodstuffs and equipment bound for Gaza, which only aimed at bringing relief to the Palestinians, and at breaking their isolation shamefully and inhumanely imposed by Israel. Isolation condemned by the repetitious resolutions of the United Nations.

Why aren’t the journalists of the French dailies and of the TV channels who had the cheek to defend the Israeli murderers told to pull their socks up by their managers? Why are these disgraceful journalists who constantly make a subjective propaganda for Israel tolerated? Isn’t that appalling? Aren’t we in a democracy? Is not France a civilized country? How is it possible to tolerate articles or reports that tolerate the crimes against humanity and the anti-peace policies of Israel?

And how is it possible to tolerate in France the journalists (among them some pro-Israeli) of the TV channels and of the dailies (and some so-called film-directors) who make a heavy-going propaganda for Mr Sarkozy? These lobbies, these so-called journalists don’t know the meaning of honour. That is a shame and an insult to France. But what are the managers of these newspapers and channels doing? Why no one is denouncing that unhealthy and pathetic situation for France?

All right, everybody has the legitimate right to support their country of origin, everybody has the right to support a political party, but there are bounds. At first, we have to be diginfied. We have to be objective and honnest. And above all we must not tolerate and comdemn the crimes against humanity and the anti-peace policies. But the supporters of the Israeli extremist leaders or of Mr Sarkozy don’t do that (Mr Sarkozy decided to not take part to the vote of the Goldstone report at the United Nations, which condemned the war crimes and the crimes against humanity of Israel at Gaza).

Being united is natural, but solidarity in no way can allow a journalist or a film-maker to be deeply subjective and to mask the mistakes and the noxious policies of a country or of a politician. The negative nationalism is the curse of our societies. It is the positive nationalism that justifies the solidarity towards a country, certainly not the negative one, from which we must flee.

Being Jewish doesn’t mean supporting the Israeli extremist leaders. I don’t care either way that some Jews have some power (nevertheless we should not rise to important responsabilities owing to our respective religion but by virtue of our qualities and our competences). However, I do not tolerate the manner by which their power is used. Many misuse their power (media and politics). It’s not because we are of Jewish religion that we have to make some propaganda to mask the injustice of the extremist leaders of Israel. That is very dangerous. Religion must remain private, because if one believes in God, it’s for oneself. Parading one’s religious belonging in an indecent way is shameful. If a citizen of Jewish religion instituted legal proceedings against an anti-semite (of muslim religion) who attacked him, and that the judge was also of muslim religion, but at the same time subjective and supported the anti-semite, what would the citizen of Jewish religion think? Wouldn’t he be appalled and indignant? To the ennemies of the Jews, I would tell them that I’m Jewish. To the ennemies of the Christians, I would tell them that I’m Christian. Because we are all equal.

To conclude, there is an attempt from Israel and the israeli lobbies to discredit Turkey (and the AKP) which is becoming at last a regional and world superpower. In fact, we have to remind that the terrorist attack of Israel against the humanitarian Turkish ships aimed at tarnishing the image of Turkey and of the AKP (by making believe that there were terrorists and weapons aboard) in the eyes of the whole world, because the increasing international influence of Turkey disturbs the Israeli extremist leaders and their war plans.
Loads of governments of the EU just slightly criticize Israel. And a lot of incompetent politicians of the EU and numerous media criticize unfairly the way Turkey criticizes Israel. A reminder: at Davos Mr Erdoğan criticized Mr Peres (who claimed that Israel works for peace – here is my article in french about that) and what Israel did at Gaza. And what did Israel do? It “took revenge”: at first as a kid against the Turkish ambassador of Tel Aviv (a reminder). Then, Israel assassinated 9 Turkish citizens who were on one of the humanitarian civilian ships full of provisions en route to Gaza (another article about that subject).
Something else: Mr Netanyahu answered to the international commission which investigates the illegal attack of Israel in the international waters: “The problem with Turkey started at Davos”. Revealing, isn’t it? Isn’t that answer the proof that the Israeli leaders took revenge because the Turkish prime minister Mr Erdoğan criticized Mr Peres and Israel? Ins’t it the proof that the Israeli leaders are very dangerous kids or mentally ill people unfit to rule Israel?
On the one hand, most of the media as well as loads of politicians of the EU and of the USA ought to stop tolerating the terrorist and anti-peace actions of the israeli extremist leaders, on the other hand, instead of attacking Turkey on all fronts, instead of sabotaging the EU-Turkey negotiations while at the same time reproaching Turkey for improving its economic and political relations with its neighbours of muslim religion, they should support Turkey and its legitimate pro-peace policy and at last act for justice.

Best regards,

Cem

PS. Why reproach Turkey for improving its economic and political relations with its neighbours of Muslim religion? Turkey doesn’t improve its relations with the countries of the Middle East because these ones are of Muslim religion, but quite simply because their relations have to be improved, quite simply because these countries are the neighbours of Turkey. Turkey also improves its ties with Russia or Greece. Turkey also improves its ties with the countries of Asia, Africa or south America. When it comes to the countries of Muslim religion, the EU and the USA reproach Turkey for “shifting to the east” (besides, the United States of America and the European Union have close relations with the countries of the Middle East and they take advantage of their oil but apparently they “don’t shift to the east”), but there is no reproach when it comes to the countries of Christian religion. That’s strange.

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on Facebook0Share on Google+0Share on LinkedIn0
Author :
Print

Comments

  1. Cem Bey, merhaba

    I follow your posts on HDN with great interest and this is my first visit to your blog.
    I still haven’t read your post in full, but before taking the time to do it I wanted to leave a small comment :
    “Le Nouvel Observateur” is not a serious newspaper that you can compare with Radikal, BBC news and the New York Times.
    Leaving aside the format (weekly magazine), you have to take into account the fact that most of the articles are meant to impress rather than to inform, and to convey a false sense of understanding of the world to the privileged (but uninformed) Parisian elite who is reading it.
    They are feeding them with an upper-class version of “Paris Match” (and a left-wing version of “Le Figaro Magazine”).

    In summary, don’t give too much importance to the funny clichés of Ottoman sultans and Vizirs. They are merely feeding the readership with the orientalist clichés that they want to hear.
    Not that these images are 100% wrong in some respects, but if a few of your paragraphs could change the Parisian mentality as easily as they can be fooled with oriental carpets, you would be a great magician indeed :)

    Saygılarımla,
    Michael

  2. Good afternoon,

    I’ve just read an interesting and revealing article of ABhaber (in Turkish):

    >> http://www.abhaber.com/haber.php?id=32689

    A former diplomat of the EU commission who is an expert regarding Turkey told ABhaber that the United States of America actually don’t want Turkey to be an EU member, because thanks to an EU member Turkey, the EU would become a global player, in other words the EU would become a rival of the USA in the world. Thus, that membership is not in their interest.

    I only translated a few lines of this Turkish article because what this diplomat said to ABhaber is what I wrote in my current article that deals with the stance of the USA regarding Turkey’s EU membership.

    Furthermore, this former EU diplomat also said to ABhaber that if the USA really wanted Turkey to be an EU member, they would have had convinced the EU (after the 80’s) to make it an EU member.

    I also wrote that here >> http://turkey.blogactiv.eu/2010/11/19/some-news-regarding-turkey-v/

    I am very pleased to note that my theory is true.

    My article regarding the true stance of the USA about Turkey’s EU membership is also available in French here:

    >> http://turkey.blogactiv.eu/2010/09/22/israel-et-les-etats-unis-damerique-leur-position-concernant-ladhesion-de-la-turquie-a-lunion-europeenne/

    Thank you for reading

    Best regards,

    Cem

Comments are closed.