Erdoğan disappoints with rhetoric
Güncelleme Tarihi:
Oluşturulma Tarihi: Aralık 29, 2008 00:00
It is hard to find language adequate to express outrage commensurate with the horror of the Israeli raids on Gaza that over the weekend produced the largest single-day Palestinian death toll since 1948.
Outgoing American Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice failed to so. So did her boss, U.S. President George Bush. So did President-elect Barack Obama. But the most inappropriate and least helpful reaction came from Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan. Details are elsewhere in this newspaper, but here is a sample:
"These attacks, which will not contribute to the solution in the region in no way, are creating indignation in Islamic countries. I specifically say Islamic countries because we want countries outside to take the same sensitive approach. As necessary, we are all in contact by telephone whether it be myself, our president or our foreign ministry. Let’s not forget this: Violence will bring about new violence. (..) We call on international community not to remain silent and indifferent to this humanitarian tragedy." Let’s be clear. The American reaction, once again, has fallen short of what the situation demands. Rice and Bush issued separate statements placing all blame with the militant Hamas. The latest we know of Obama’ views came in his Time magazine interview just before the violence, "And seeing if we can build on some of the progress, at least in conversation, that's been made around the Israeli-Palestinian conflict will be a priority." As political analyst Gwynne Dyer said, "It is very hard to say less and still speak in a complete sentence." We are disappointed with the Americans, but not surprised.
Elsewhere, however, the reaction has been swift and universal in its condemnation of Israel for a disproportionate response to Hamas’s breaking a ceasefire with its crude rockets. Virtually every member of the European Union has noted Israel’s responsibility as has the union as a whole. Even the U.N. Security Council, which now includes Turkey, was able to present a strong front despite pressure to water down its remarks from the United States. The Council called "for all parties to address the serious humanitarian and economic needs in Gaza and to take necessary measures, including opening of border crossings, to ensure the continuous provision of humanitarian supplies, including supplies of food, fuel and the provision of medical treatment." This is the unemotional language of diplomacy.
Erdoğan’s rhetoric casts the conflict between "Islamic" nations and the "others," a gross distortion which fans the worst instincts. It undermines Turkey’s growing image as an honest broker in the region and denies peacemakers an avenue of hope. It also complicates Turkey’s hopes to use its new non-permanent seat on the U.N. Security Council as a tool to address just such cases as the difficult Palestinian-Israeli conflict. Israel’s policy is self-defeating. So is Erdoğan’s rhetoric.
"These attacks, which will not contribute to the solution in the region in no way, are creating indignation in Islamic countries. I specifically say Islamic countries because we want countries outside to take the same sensitive approach. As necessary, we are all in contact by telephone whether it be myself, our president or our foreign ministry. Let’s not forget this: Violence will bring about new violence. (..) We call on international community not to remain silent and indifferent to this humanitarian tragedy." Let’s be clear. The American reaction, once again, has fallen short of what the situation demands. Rice and Bush issued separate statements placing all blame with the militant Hamas. The latest we know of Obama’ views came in his Time magazine interview just before the violence, "And seeing if we can build on some of the progress, at least in conversation, that's been made around the Israeli-Palestinian conflict will be a priority." As political analyst Gwynne Dyer said, "It is very hard to say less and still speak in a complete sentence." We are disappointed with the Americans, but not surprised.
Elsewhere, however, the reaction has been swift and universal in its condemnation of Israel for a disproportionate response to Hamas’s breaking a ceasefire with its crude rockets. Virtually every member of the European Union has noted Israel’s responsibility as has the union as a whole. Even the U.N. Security Council, which now includes Turkey, was able to present a strong front despite pressure to water down its remarks from the United States. The Council called "for all parties to address the serious humanitarian and economic needs in Gaza and to take necessary measures, including opening of border crossings, to ensure the continuous provision of humanitarian supplies, including supplies of food, fuel and the provision of medical treatment." This is the unemotional language of diplomacy.
Erdoğan’s rhetoric casts the conflict between "Islamic" nations and the "others," a gross distortion which fans the worst instincts. It undermines Turkey’s growing image as an honest broker in the region and denies peacemakers an avenue of hope. It also complicates Turkey’s hopes to use its new non-permanent seat on the U.N. Security Council as a tool to address just such cases as the difficult Palestinian-Israeli conflict. Israel’s policy is self-defeating. So is Erdoğan’s rhetoric.