Turkish Delight

We surveyed the jars of coloured candy, trays of marzipan and assorted sweetmeats while the stall keeper deftly wrapped the block of lokum we had just bought. The occasion was our first visit to Turkey and aided with a rudimentary tourist map we were trying to navigate a path through Istanbul's maze-like Grand Bazaar.
We stopped by the stall to ask for directions and decided to buy some "Turkish Delight" to take home with us.
I recalled the tacky lokum when I read Michael Reynolds' article - "Turkey’s foreign policy flip" which appeared this week in MESH (Middle East Strategy at Harvard).Referring to Turkey's foreign policy volte-face Reynolds quoted a popular Ottoman adage to illustrate the hitherto Turkish contempt for Arabs:

"There is a certain poetic irony to the Turkish dream of exporting food throughout the Middle East via Syria. Damascus’ Ottoman-era fame for its sweets gave rise to a Turkish saying that aptly summarized official Turkish attitudes from the 1920s through the end of the century toward all things Arab: Ne Şam’ın şekeri, ne Arabın yüzü, literally “Neither sweets from Damascus nor an Arab’s face,” which can be roughly translated as, I don’t want to have anything to do with the Arabs, even if they do have tasty sweets."
Now it seems the Turks think the Arabs aren't so bad after all. Turkey's Foreign minister Ahmet Davutoglu at the time of his recent visit to Aleppo uttered an entirely different phrase to describe Turkish-Syrian relations: “A common fate, a common history, a common future.”
Davutoglu is in fact the architect of Turkey's new foreign policy. Reynolds quotes from Davutoglu's book "Strategic Depth" to highlight the main points of the change. "Whereas in the past the Turkish Republic followed a policy of quasi-isolation and self-imposed quarantine from its neighbours, today it should instead seek to take advantage of the cultural and historical links it shares with other countries in its region."
Reynolds notes that for most of its existence, the Turkish Republic has enjoyed at best cool relations with Syria. During the 1980s and 1990s, Turkish-Syrian ties were outright confrontational as the two states sparred over such issues as Turkish control of the waters of the Euphrates and Syrian support for the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK) operating inside Turkey. Relations reached a crisis in 1999 when Turkey threatened to invade Syria if it continued to provide asylum for the head of the PKK, Abdullah Ocalan. This period of heightened Turkish-Syrian tension overlapped with the establishment of a security partnership with Israel that became one of the constituent elements of the regional balance of power.
Relations between Syria and Turkey began to improve slowly after 1999, while ties to Israel became noticeably more strained three years ago in the wake of the Second Lebanon War. Lately the Turkish government has protested Israel's actions during Operation Cast Lead. More recently, following the disturbances on the Temple Mount it has demanded that “respect be shown to the al-Aqsa mosque, the Noble Sanctuary, and East Jerusalem, which are sacred to Muslims.”
Among the plans Ahmet Davutoglu outlined during his visit to Syria was a programme to transform Aleppo into a major logistical hub for expanded Turkish trade with the Arab Middle East. The Turks hope to use Aleppo to meet the Arab demand for Turkish foodstuffs. I wonder if this new export route for sending Turkish Delight to Damascus won’t be like sending coals to Newcastle.
Obviously there is a link between the cold shoulder Turkey is showing us and all the hue and cry over the Goldstone Report.
Patrick Seale is not one of Israel's staunch admirers. Nevertheless, I thought the opinion he expressed under the heading "Israel’s Dangerously Battered Image" printed in the English language daily Dar al Hayat (Istanbul) worth considering.
"In international politics, image counts. A country’s reputation, the aura it projects, the esteem in which its leaders are held – these are as important as its armed services in providing protection for its citizens. Most politicians know that ‘soft power’, skillfully used, can be at least as effective as blood-drenched ‘hard power’.
I'm afraid that despite a genuine attempt to be fair I was short on patience when I read on, "This is a lesson Israel appears to have forgotten. Its pitiless treatment of the Palestinians, whether under occupation on the West Bank or under siege in Gaza – not to mention its repeated assaults on Lebanon, its 2007 raid on Syria and its relentless sabre-rattling against Iran -- have done terrible damage to its image.
The admiration which its early state-building once aroused in many parts of the world has turned into angry impatience, outrage, even contempt. "
Admittedly the West Bank occupation is not beyond criticism and maybe it's possible to question the wisdom of the siege of the Gaza Strip. However conditions in the West Bank are directly correlated to the rate of terrorist activity. In recent months a waning of terrorist activity has resulted in tangible relaxation of the security measures employed there, notably the dismantling of road blocks. Gaza is under siege in response to its "pitiless" mortar and rocket bombardment of nearby Israeli towns and communities, weapons smuggling and because a kidnapped Israeli soldier is being held there.
Likewise the "repeated assaults" on Lebanon have been in response to attacks from Lebanon and the raid on Syria was made to destroy a Syrian nuclear facility.
Maybe Seale is right when he complains about Israeli "sabre-rattling" against Iran. Considering Ahmadinejad's repeated threats to wipe Israel off the map and his determination to attain "nuclear capability", we have cause to issue an occasional warning. In the end we might have to take the advice given in that epic Spaghetti Western The Good, the Bad and the Ugly " When you have to shoot, shoot don't talk."
What appears to be Iranian acquiescence (the recent IAEA agreement) may only delay an inevitable showdown.
Seale continues his tirade, “From the moment Israel started hammering Gaza last December it was clear that its insane war was a grotesque mistake, which would end up fuelling nothing but hate, and might even delegitimize Israel in the eyes of much of the world. The Goldstone report has now driven a giant nail into the coffin of Israel’s reputation by finding that, in Gaza, there was evidence that Israel ‘committed actions amounting to war crimes, and possibly crimes against humanity.’
Few outside Israel itself – and outside the shrinking ranks of its diehard supporters in the United States and Europe – would today be prepared to defend its arrogant militarists, its fanatical land-grabbing settlers and its racist politicians.”
Patrick Seale, probably Hafez al-Assad’s best known biographer visited Israel on two occasions in recent years as the guest of Israeli Middle East research institutes. At one time he described his attitude to Israel as something close to understanding. Well with friends like Seale who needs enemies.
While Patrick Seale praised the Goldstone Report, Robert L. Bernstein, chairman of Human Rights Watch from 1978 to 1998 was scathingly critical of the report and the UNHRC. In a blistering critique entitled “Rights Watchdog, Lost in the Mideast” which appeared in the New York Times this week Bernstein states,
“Human Rights Watch has lost critical perspective on a conflict in which Israel has been repeatedly attacked by Hamas and Hezbollah, organizations that go after Israeli citizens and use their own people as human shields. These groups are supported by the government of Iran, which has openly declared its intention not just to destroy Israel but to murder Jews everywhere. This incitement to genocide is a violation of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.
Leaders of Human Rights Watch know that Hamas and Hezbollah chose to wage war from densely populated areas, deliberately transforming neighborhoods into battlefields. They know that more and better arms are flowing into both Gaza and Lebanon and are poised to strike again. And they know that this militancy continues to deprive Palestinians of any chance for the peaceful and productive life they deserve. Yet Israel, the repeated victim of aggression, faces the brunt of Human Rights Watch’s criticism.”
Robert Bernstein commenting on “fact finding” said, “In Gaza and elsewhere where there is no access to the battlefield or to the military and political leaders who make strategic decisions, it is extremely difficult to make definitive judgments about war crimes. Reporting often relies on witnesses whose stories cannot be verified and who may testify for political advantage or because they fear retaliation from their own rulers. Significantly, Col. Richard Kemp, the former commander of British forces in Afghanistan and an expert on warfare, has said that the Israel Defense Forces in Gaza ‘did more to safeguard the rights of civilians in a combat zone than any other army in the history of warfare.’”
See Kemp’s testimony on youtube:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NX6vyT8RzMo

Obviously the IDF shouldn’t enjoy anything akin to “diplomatic immunity” .
Israel’s Attorney General and a number of political figures including Kadima Knesset member and former IDF spokesman Nachman Shai have suggested that some kind of investigation into Operation Cast Lead should be held.
Some military analysts advocate the establishment of a permanent IDF or independent investigating body to safeguard against possible abuses and obviate attacks by organisations like the UN Human Rights Council, termed by The Economist “an anti-Israeli outfit.”

As I recall our children refused to taste the Turkish delight we brought back from Istanbul, so we gave it to our neighbours. Later they complained that their daughter lost a filling when she ate it.


Beni 21st of October, 2009