Mr. Obama: Why Are You Courting the Muslim World In Turkey?
By Soraya Sepahpour-Ulrich
08 April, 2009
Countercurrents
http://www.countercurrents.o rg/ulrich080409.htm
Mr. Obama: Why Are You Courting the Muslim World In Turkey?
By Soraya Sepahpour-Ulrich
08 April, 2009
Countercurrents.org
Charles de Gaulle argued that authority is derived from
prestige… and prestige ‘is largely a matter of feeling, suggestion
and impression, and it depends primarily on the possession of an
elementary gift, a natural attitude’ … lately gone by the
fashionable term charisma.’ Mr. Obama’s charisma veils what is either
his inordinate ability to manipulate, orhis total ignorance of the
Muslim world. His choice of cabinet suggests it is the former.
On his first overseas tour as President of the United States,
Mr. Obama deliberately chose Turkey to make his case to Moslems and
stated that the United States is `not at war with the Muslim
world’. The choice of country merits scrutiny.
Mr. Obama praised Kamal Ataturk as someone `whose life is not
something that can be cast in stone and marble. His greatest legacy is
Turkey’s strong and secular democracy’, he said. True, Mustafa
KemalAtaturk was the founder of the modern Turkish Republic but how
relevant wasthis in reaching out to the Islamic world? Ataturk,
perceived citizenship as the core of legitimacy– citizenship based on
the Western philosophy and ideology. Article 88 of Teskilat I Esasiye
Kanunu 1924 ordained that all people living in Turkey, regardless of
ethnic origin or religion were to be considered Turks (democratic
values!). They had to be patriotic and civilized. The past was erased,
total elimination of Ottoman and Islamic history, and someone else’s
values were borrowed – the West, to create a national identity – a
`revolution of value’.
It is an irony that Mr. Obama chose this `Islamic State’ and praised
its founder for having rejected Islamic values (although Islam as a
`historic heritage’ of overseas Moslem such those in Bosnia was
accepted). Turkish non-Muslims such as Jews, Armenians, and Greeks
could be citizens, but not nationals. And most importantly, the
Turkish military is guardian of the Turkish Constitution and a
bottom-up Islamic party is contrary to the Constitution.
This is one reason why it must be an insult on all those who hear it
to have Mr. Obama say: `Let me be clear: the United States strongly
supports Turkey’s bid to become a member of the European
Union’. Joining the EU would weaken the military’s interventionist
policies in guarding the Kamalist state ideology and the Turkish State
would no longerbe secular if it chose to reject the Ataturk-imposed,
Western-based philosophy of citizenry.
Furthermore, as a non-EU member, America has far more leverage on
Turkey than it would if it were to become an EU member. Maintaining
the status quo, the United States can give Turkey20a show of support
and coax it into betraying its national interest while serving the US
and Israel – a long time ally of Turkey’s. This arrangement has not
been without rewards. The Armenian Genocide has been suppressed in the
U.S. even though it has been well recorded that six years after the
Madrid Conference, in 1939, Hitler referred to the Armenian Genocide
thus:
`It was knowingly and lightheartedly that Genghis Khan sent thousands
of women and children to their deaths. History sees in him only the
founder of a state. The aim of war is not to reach definite lines but
to annihilate the enemy physically. It is by this means that we shall
obtain the livingspace that we need. Who today speaks of the massacre
of the Armenians…'[i]
In 2006, France passed a bill making it an `offence to question
theArmenian genocide’. How likely is it that Mr. Obama will offend
Israel and pass a bill making it an offense to question the Armenian
genocide if he truly supports Turkey to join the EU? Mr. Obama, it
seems, is not free to choose the man who would run his National
Intelligence Council – Chas Freeman was pushed out by the Israeli
lobby.
Turkey has made great strides – however, one has to question
Mr. Obama’s true motives. If his intentions were to have a cordial
dialogue with a Moslem nation, why was the largest Moslem populated
country such asIndonesia not chosen? Alternatively, Malaysia would
have been an excellent venue for addressing20the Moslem world. What
makes Mr. Obama’s sincerity questionable is the delivery of a `massive
shipment of U.S. weapons to Israel on March 22nd’ (Amnesty
International Report) after the Israelis brutally massacred the
Gazans.
One is left wondering why it is that Israel, with all its nukes, its
savagery, its violation of all international laws, including the
latest incident of violating the sovereignty of Sudan, blatantly
threatening Iran in violation of the basic UN Charter, is deserving of
so much friendship [read dictating to the U.S.] and foreign aid from
the United States of America, and Iran, which has not violated any
laws, is being sanctioned? Mr. Obama should realize that Charisma
cannot maintain effective leadership.
Soraya Sepahpour-Ulrich has a Master of Public Diplomacy from USC
Annenberg for Communication. She is an independent researcher with a
focus on U.S. foreign policy and the influence of lobby groups.
[i] Samantha Power `A Problem from Hell – America in the Age of
Genocide’. Perennial 2002