Responding to Turkey

This morning, the Turkish government took one more step toward becoming a pariah state while pretending that it was threatening action against Israel, which it considers to be one. I do not make this statement without understanding the broader implications of it. Turkey is not only leaving the Democratic West behind, but is rapidly trying to assert itself as a leader of the anti-Democratic West. Turkey has, over the past few years, under Erdogan’s rule, refused to allow US forces to cross Turkish territory in invading Iraq, something that cost lives by forcing the US to invade solely from the South and allowing Iraqi forces to defend much more effectively, it has aided an abetted Iran in avoiding working with Turkey’s NATO allies concerning its nuclear weapons program, it has asserted itself into the Arab League as an opponent of Israel, demanding that Israel withdraw to the 1967 border fully, it has sponsored a flotilla of militants designed to aid Hamas in combating Israeli security measures, it officially recognizes Hamas as a freedom fighting organization, not as a terrorist organization unlike all of its theoretical allies, and it now threatens to ban Israeli aircraft from utilizing its airspace even for civilian travel.

In my mind, this takes Turkey out of the role of an ally of Israel, the United States, or NATO and consequences should follow. The hope, clearly present during the Bush administration and thus far in the Obama administration, that Turkey would somehow moderate and that Erdogan and his aim for Turkey to reestablish the Ottoman Empire would fall by the wayside has all but evaporated. Turkey is rapidly becoming a serious, even a grave, problem for Democracy in the Middle East. It poses at least as great a threat to the future of American foreign policy in the region as Iran and is being treated as if it has done nothing wrong. The United States needs to state publicly that Turkey’s actions and rhetoric are jeopardizing its standing as an ally of the West and that the consequences for continuing on this path will be severe.

Haaretz has, as many in the media have for every problem encountered by Israel, blamed Israel for the deteriorating relationship. It was because of the “botched” Israeli raid that everything fell apart. Not because of the terrorist supporting Islamist Hamas loving attitude of the government of Turkey which has allied itself with Israel’s enemies! Not because of the fact that Turkey sponsored an effort to break a blockade being conducted by its “ally” in order to aid its mortal enemy! No, it was because Israel failed to allow the flotilla to reach Gaza! Or perhaps, it levies this criticism because Haaretz knows how to prevent a passenger ship carrying several hundred people including violent militants from reaching shore without causing a humanitarian disaster or an outcry by disabling the ship in the middle of the ocean and holding hundreds of activists hostage for weeks while foreign governments condemn Israel. The more I have looked at what Israel did, the fewer options make sense. Once Turkey sponsored this flotilla, there was no good result to be obtained. Once activists on board turned themselves into militants, a result of nine fatalities is practically miraculously mild. It is an amazing result achieved by exceedingly well trained soldiers who subdued dozens more actively hostile militants without lethal force while saving the lives of their companions which were in danger of being lost.

The only real question that must be asked concerning Israeli action is the following, “Is the blockade a needed security measure?” If it is then those trying to break it are threatening Israeli security. Doing so is an act of war. Turkey committed an act of war against Israel and now seeks that Israel apologize and pay damages for having defended itself against said act of war. In fact, if the world had any sanity, Israel would be seeking an apology from Turkey. The United States, which supports Israel’s blockade of the terrorist Hamas entity, should be demanding one from Turkey as well for a whole lot more.

This entry was posted in Gaza, Hamas, Israel, Israel Derangement Syndrome, Media Bias, Turkey and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to Responding to Turkey

  1. Russ says:

    Ah, but does the United States actually support the Israeli blockade of Gaza? That is far from clear. So far, Obama has seemed to try to be the un-Bush. If Bush supported Israel, then Obama must oppose Israel.

  2. Y says:

    only terrorism-lovers could consider the raid “botched”. to people who are AGAINST terrorism, nine dead terrorists is quite a success. too bad there weren’t more. haaretz is showing its true colours.

  3. Tom Frank says:

    Rabbi;

    Let us not forget Operation Eagle Claw, the failed attempt to rescue the hostages from Iran in 1979.

    Had the mission started in Turkey, the distances would have been much shorter and the likelihood of success much higher. Yet it was conducted in a way that really reduced the possibility of success.

    Knowing that the folks planning the mission were not incompetent, I can think of only one reason why they would have not used Turkey – they couldn’t. Whether Turkey said no, or Carter refused to ask for permission, I don’t know.

    But it may be an even earlier example of Turkish intransigence costing American lives…for which they really should pay a price.

    Can a country be removed from NATO? We don’t need them as a counter to the Soviets any longer…in fact, perhaps we could suggest Turkey as a peace offering to Putin.

    Seems fair to me.

Comments are closed.