A belated Napoleon in Birošima (Beirut-shima) and Beirut

The largest explosion since Hiroshima, which occurred in a residential area of Beirut, was named "Biroshima" in some Arab press. The sight and effects of the explosion were truly of a scale comparable only to Hiroshima. With a death toll approaching 200, more than 5000 wounded, and tens of thousands of homes completely destroyed or rendered unusable, the trauma this explosion caused in Lebanon, not only physically but morally, deserves the description Biroshima.

But an important difference is that Lebanon is at present not at war with anyone, and the real cause of the explosion is still unknown. It may be the result of a bombing, or it may be the result of a fire caused by an accident that arose internally through sheer negligence. If it was done by an outside intervention, by a rocket, we are in a situation where no one would look for a perpetrator. The usual suspect is Israel, and Israel always more than deserves this status of suspect.

But whether the explosion is the result of an accident or, even though it has denied from the beginning that it played such a role, was carried out by Israel, in any case it was clear that it would draw attention to Iran's role in Lebanon through Hezbollah and would probably force Iran to review its roles in the Islamic world. Because although Hezbollah has said that there were no ammonium nitrate depots at the point of the explosion, the port is under its control and it will not be able to explain why that enormous quantity of material had been at that point for 6 years, and this causes it in any case to be the first target of the Lebanese people's anger.

On the occasion of this incident, Hezbollah's role in Lebanon is being questioned for the first time so strongly by the Lebanese people themselves. Beirut was one of the 4 Sunni capitals over which it was always proud to hold sway. To none of the other three Sunni capitals did it bring anything other than destruction, death and constant instability. It is truly impossible to understand what in this it is proud of. Indeed, now, in the face of such an incident in Lebanon, Iran cannot find anyone to bear witness to it in good faith.

From the first moment it heard of this incident, Turkey rushed to help, mobilizing humanitarian aid organizations, civil society organizations such as AFAD, Kızılay, IHH and Sadakataşı. The first leader to call Lebanese President Michel Aoun was Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan. When Erdoğan called to convey condolences and wishes for recovery to Michel Aoun, the cargo planes carrying Turkey's aid and teams had long since taken off, about to land in Beirut.

Erdoğan conveyed to Aoun that Turkey, with all its means, is and will be beside the brotherly Lebanese people. The very next day, a delegation including Vice President Fuat Oktay and Foreign Minister Mevlüt Çavuşoğlu visited Beirut and extended hands of concrete aid to Lebanon from there. It was announced that ambulance planes had been mobilized for the wounded and that all of Turkey's hospitals were open and ready for their treatment. It was also announced that Mersin Port was open to Lebanon's use to temporarily meet Lebanon's needs in place of the destroyed Beirut Port.

Turkey has very serious preparedness against both social and natural disasters within the country. For years it has shown a performance that will be an example to the whole world in coping with the problems produced by the migration from Syria. At the same time, Turkey, also an earthquake country, has acquired important, rapid and effective rescue and relief experience against natural disasters. That the first aid teams to reach Lebanon were from Turkey is at the same time a situation that the deep historical and cultural ties between Turkey and Lebanon make obligatory for Turkey.

Turkey did not provide this aid with any calculation in mind. When Beirut burns, people's hearts in Turkey are scorched. When a hand of cruelty touches the people in Beirut, in Damascus, in Tripoli, in Baghdad, Turkey feels the pain in the very heart of the citizen in Istanbul, in Antep, in Ankara, in Mersin, in Yozgat. How could the French President, a Napoleon wannabe, possibly feel this?

Macron was also in Lebanon one day before the Turkish delegation. We had the opportunity to hear plenty of comparisons of these two visits from broadcasts reflecting the feelings of the Arab people. An Arab journalist was making the following comment, one that was made in similar form many times:

"Macron came with his colonial arrogance and haughtiness, belittled our own President, showed disrespect, and wanted to use the Lebanese people, who were occupied with their own pain, as a tool in his rivalry with Turkey. He had the air of someone trying to smuggle goods out of a fire. What did he offer the Lebanese people as a result of this visit; has anyone heard or known? He came, gave instructions to the Lebanese people like a colonial figure, and left, giving nothing. Although he is someone with a score to settle with the Maronites, he committed the greatest insolence of history toward the Maronite President during the press statement. Whereas the Turkish delegation that came representing Erdoğan had sent their aid even before coming to the meeting. During their visit too they were received by the Lebanese people exactly as expected. With cheers in which a great enthusiasm and a feeling of gratitude were expressed for Erdoğan."

Turkey's only concern during this incident is to bind its brothers' wounds, to get Lebanon back on its feet. Yet Macron's calculations, which he could not hide, got tangled around his feet. Even during such a visit, from atop the rubble, he did not hold back from expressing his feelings against Turkey.

Whatever he is trying to look for under and over the rubble in Libya, it will be hard for him to find it from now on, because the age is no longer the age of Napoleons, and in any case no Napoleon will come out of Macron.