Democratically-elected war

The angry Mr. Erdogan was trying to quote that article while David Ignatius, the moderator, was trying to remind him of the time limitations. Naturally, Today’s Zaman interviewed the anti-Israeli Jewish professor (on Feb. 7).

In that interview, Mr. Shlaim declared that his sympathy was with Mr. Erdogan. He also said that Israeli President Shimon Peres made a very strong defense of a controversial subject. Quite naturally, Mr. Shlaim further commented, Mr. Erdogan wanted to respond to the defense of "what isÉ indefensible."

Interestingly, in response to Zaman’s preceding question as to how would he assess Mr. Peres’s speech, Mr. Shlaim said: "I am afraid I have not seen Mr. Peres’s speech. I was told that his tone was very aggressive, offensive and uncompromising."

That was very interesting indeed. The Oxford professor commented first on a speech, then admitted he had not seen that speech but had heard that it was bad enough to justify his criticism. How scientific that is can always be debated. But Professor Shlaim made other interesting remarks too.

For example, he argued that it was high time for Western governments to engage with Hamas although he admitted that Hamas is described as a terrorist organization. But it is much more than that, he said. "It is a political partyÉ it has a military wing which does practice terrorÉ

Killing civilians is wrongÉ But the important thing is that Hamas, despite all its faults, has been democratically elected. Hamas represents the Palestinian people."

What should we make of all that? Rephrasing Mr. Shlaim’s words, we can conclude that: Hamas is a terrorist organization, the Palestinians democratically elected a terrorist organization, the important thing is not if an organization does practice terror but if it is democratically elected, a terrorist organization represents the Palestinian people, Western governments should engage with terrorists if terrorists are democratically elected.

Very well. Mr. Erdogan could probably not agree with Mr. Shlaim more. These days the House of the Justice and Development Party, or AKP, looks like "Hamas-occupied territory" anyway.Â

But let’s suppose for a moment Mr. Shlaim’s argumentation is "defensible" unlike Mr. Peres’s speech at Davos which Mr. Shlaim did not see but thinks was "indefensible."

What if the Israeli people’s democratic choice at the ballot box resulted in a government that practices even more disproportionate use of force than the latest offensive on Gaza? A government whose actions could earn it the tag "terrorist" by many including Professor Shlaim?

What if the Israelis democratically elected leaders who would give orders for 20 more Gaza offensives with 20 times more civilian deaths? Will Messrs. Erdogan and Shlaim defend that too on the grounds that "the important thing is that the Israeli government which does practice atrocities is democratically elected?"

There are already clear signs that Arabs were following the Israeli exit polls with concern, fearing a rise in power of the right. They fear a hawkish government in Israel that includes Likud and other right wing parties will "derail the peace process."

But what peace process? Now listen to the "democratically-elected" Hamas about the peace process. It was Hamas’s spokesman, Fawzi Barhum speaking on the exit polls: "We don’t differentiate between Zionist leaders as they all committed crimes against our people during many years and are competing to commit more."

And by the way, why does Mr. Erdogan categorically refuse to talk to the pro-Kurdish Democratic Society Party whose members of parliament too are democratically elected politicians?

Mr. Erdogan’s explanation is that "he won’t speak to them until they denounced the [Kurdistan Workers’ Party, or] PKK as a terrorist organization."

And meanwhile, he suggests Western governments should unconditionally speak to Hamas, which itself is a terrorist organization. Oh, how very marvelous!