LEADING NEWS SOURCE FOR TURKEY AND THE REGION

SEMİH İDİZ > Shimon Peres has a point

Israeli President Shimon Peres’ speech to the European Parliament in Strasbourg on Tuesday, in which he called for an intervention in Syria to stop the massacres, was very much in line with similar calls that Turkey has been making.

According to the Israeli president the free world “cannot stand by when a massacre is carried out by the Syrian president against his own people and his own children.” These are exactly the sentiments that Turkish Prime Minster Recep Tayyip Erdoğan and Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu have been expressing. However, there is a subtle difference in what Peres is sa ying.

Turkey, as well as other countries in the Middle East that want an international intervention in Syria, have generally been looking to the West, and particularly to the U.S., when calling for this. Their criticisms and barbs in the absence of any intervention in Syria have also been directed to the West.

This can be clearly seen in the way Erdoğan blasts the West for supporting France’s intervention in Mali, while it does nothing for Syria. Peres, however, has broached an important subject in this regard.
Why don’t the Islamic countries in the region, including Turkey - even though it is not an Arab country - get organized under the umbrella of the Arab League to lead such an intervention in order to stabilize the situation in Syria?

The question is even more valid when we hear all the remarks, not just from Turkey but also from Qatar and Saudi Arabia, about the sad plight of the Syrian people who are facing the attacks of a brutal dictator while the world watches on.

The non-Islamic world may have its cynical reasons for just looking on, and there is also a valid point Peres made during his speech to the European Parliament. Any intervention by Western forces would be perceived yet again as foreign intervention in the region.

Peres did not say it, but those opposed to such an intervention would also doubtless find an “Israeli hand” in it. So why has the Arab League, as an Arab and Islamic organization, not been more active in Syria?

Of course, officials from the organization would dispute this and point to the many meetings they have had, and decisions they have arrived at on the topic. But it has hardly been in the picture in an effective way in any crisis that concerns the Arab world, generally preferring to hide behind the coat tails of the U.N. or some other international organization, rather than taking a leading role itself.

This is plain to see from the time Saddam first invaded Kuwait in August 1990, and through the two Gulf wars. I have many Arab friends who see all this and look at the Arab League as joke. It is all very well to rail on about the divisions in the U.N. Security Council and bemoan the way this is obstructing meaningful action on Syria, but have Arab countries been any more unified than the members of the Security Council when it comes to international disputes that concern them closely? The answer is, obviously, no.

However, if an organization comprising 22 countries, which is empowered by its members, and has wealth and collective military might, had been more unified and active, it may even have been able to prevent the first and second Gulf wars.

But would Arab countries in the region, most of which are dictatorships themselves, want such an empowered Arab League, which could intervene against them in the future too? The answer, again, is obviously no.

But if Arab countries cannot achieve such unity and use their collective strength in meaningful ways to bring order and stability to their own back yards, it is clear that they will always be led by the nose by others when it comes to regional crises.

All that will be left for them, then, is to complain about “the perfidious intentions of the West,” while they too sit and watch the massacre of innocent people from a distance, blaming others for not doing anything to stop this.

Many in Turkey and the Arab world will be angry with Peres for bringing up this matter, telling him to concern himself more with the plight visited on the Palestinians by Israel. But he has a point.

March/14/2013

Send to friend »

READER COMMENTS

Click for Hürriyet Daily News comment guidelines

Blue Dotterel

3/16/2013 11:21:13 PM

@Baris, he prepared the ground with elections last May. Democracy is not the issue, US imperialism is. In case you haven't noticed, all the wars in the ME over the past 10 years have been fueled by the US and its NATO and GCC allies. Not a single legitimate democracy has emerged from any of them. Indeed, democracy is being eroded in the EU and US, and does not exist in the GCC tyrannies. The war is against Syria's independence. None of these wars are about real democracy. Don't be so naive.

Baris

3/16/2013 2:45:14 PM

Blue Dotterel, If by "Salafist mercenaries " you mean the jihadists, I don't support them. I don't support anyone who kills innocent people. That's why I don't support Assad, either. Democracy IS the issue here, just as it is for the entire ME. That's why we have so much unrest in the ME where Salafists or other mercenaries can find an arena in which to operate freely. If Assad loves his country, he should prepare the ground for a democratic Syria and leave. But he won't, he's a dictator.

Blue Dotterel

3/15/2013 7:34:13 PM

@Baris, The Syrian people support the Baath Party and Assad. They do not support the terrorists destroying their society. They support Assad because of his modernism, tolerance, and secularism. The real question is why do you support the Salafist mercenaries backed by NATO and the GCC. Democracy is not the issue here. Syria's independence is the issue, and the Syrian people are aware of it. They do not want to be let by intolerant racist fundamentalists. Why do you want them to be?

turkic voice

3/14/2013 10:56:27 PM

No names but most of you are so naive and blinded, this so called liberation of these nations is to securer those profitable construction deals and loans to pay for them. Be it labia Iraq or Syria

Baris

3/14/2013 10:05:25 PM

Blue Dotterel, why do you equate the Baath regime with the Syrian people? When was the last time they won the free vote of the Syrian people? Why is NATO responsible for the bloodshed? If Esad was representing Syrian people ,why does he allow his army and air force bomb the Syrian people? I'm afraid your obsession with US corporate capitalism makes you overlook the fact that Esad, just like his late father, is a dictator refusing to let go off power, even at the cost of thousands of deaths.

ismail demir

3/14/2013 9:08:37 PM

Turkey or other muslim countries could not intervene Syria, because they may face nuclear threat from Russia.If Turkey and Arabic countries try to produce nuclear weapon to deter Russia, it will lead military confrontation with America as happens in Iran now.

Blue Dotterel

3/14/2013 6:15:46 PM

Mara, et. al. Oil is also a factor for Qatar. Qatar wants a pipeline through Saudi, Jordan and Syria to the Mediterranean. Assad favors a pipeline from Iran through Iraq and Syria to the Mediterranean. This is the main reason Saudi and Qatar are arming and financing the mercenaries attacking the Syrian state. The geopolitical ignorance of some of the commentators here is astounding. You really need to expand your reading alternatives.

Blue Dotterel

3/14/2013 6:09:22 PM

Baris, Mara, Turk Down Under, Red tail; this attack on Syria is more than about oil, but oil is one of the factors, only it is Iranian oil. You really need a course in geopolitics 101 if you don not understand that the attack on Syria is the first strike in an eventual war on Iran. Iran is rich in oil reserves and the US wants to control them, if possible. Of course removing Russia from the Mediterranean is another goal, and an ally of the Palestinians and Lebanese, but oil is factor.

Blue Dotterel

3/14/2013 6:03:51 PM

Baris, the Arab league is run religious tyrants Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and Bahrain whose people have long been far more oppressed than Syria's. You seriously want these people to attack the far more tolerant and secular Assad. The Arab league should stay out of Syria for the Syrian peoples' sake (a little late for that, of course). Their mercenaries have caused enough damage already.

Blue Dotterel

3/14/2013 5:56:14 PM

Baris, the war is being carried to Syria, not the other way around. It is the GCC and NATO who are responsible for the bloodshed, and responsible for continuing. "We have here is a dynasty which uses violence and bloodshed to prolong its rule, regardless of how many people die." Its called US corporate capitalism. Assad is still in power because he has the support of the Syrian people.
< >

WRITE COMMENT

MOST POPULAR

AcerPro S.I.P.A HTML & CSS Agency