Germany's test with Gaza and Turkey's difference

One effect of Gaza and the Al-Aqsa Flood is that they have subjected all the claims, and all the claimants, advanced in the name of democracy, human rights, modernism, progress and enlightenment to a genuine test of sincerity. Of course, we have all seen together that this test has produced by no means successful results for any of these claimants.

Gaza has also exposed how democratic and how respectful of human rights Germany is, the leader of the EU, which has taken on the leadership of European values and which we have seen constantly and distastefully lecturing Turkey in particular on democratic criteria. Moreover, it has on this occasion exposed the tragic situation that Germany, beyond its claims about democracy and human rights, has no independent existence.

Because Turkey, by chance, has applied for EU membership, Germany has come to have a say over it. Within its own country, Germany is a complete society of display when it comes to democratic freedoms. It very skillfully gives the impression that every kind of view can be defended with ease, that every kind of view can organize and do politics, and moreover that every kind of lifestyle can be put on show. More than freedom for LGBT, encouraging support is given in the name of freedom. All the opponents who flee from Turkey, whether Kurdist, political Alevist or extreme left, are not merely taken in as asylum seekers,

they are also supported. All of this is done in the name of democracy and constantly in order to lecture Turkey.

A COUNTRY OF DISPLAY FOR DEMOCRACY AND FREEDOMS

In a stunning show of democratic and tolerant self-confidence it is unsurpassed. But when the subject is Israel, how great an illusion all this freedom, self-confidence and democratic convention is becomes immediately clear as day.

There, a chasm suddenly opens up between the state and the feelings, values and expectations of the people. Whatever Israel does, whether it commits genocide or war crimes, whether it has not the slightest connection with the "h" of law, whether it behaves like an organ mafia or any kind of gang state, not a single word against it is ever heard from Germany, not even as alms. The world was shaken while the Israeli genocide in Gaza was taking place, and Germany continued to express its concern that protesters were drawn to anti-Semitic rhetoric against Israel. We watched with astonishment as Jürgen Habermas, the most famous living German philosopher, failed to see the genocide in Gaza and still spoke of Israel's right to defend itself. From Habermas, whose many years of theoretical performance in the name of emancipation and ideal communication situations we have watched, we wished to hear a word that Palestinians too might be a party to this ideal communication, but in vain.

German Chancellor Merz, on an official visit to Turkey, again voiced criticisms at the press conference with President Erdoğan concerning Turkey's legal system and judicial independence. Noting that Turkey's progress in the process of integration with Europe passes through full compliance with the Copenhagen criteria, he said, "Some decisions made in Turkey do not meet these conditions." At the same meeting, in response to a question directed at him, he did not refrain from saying that he still regards the many crimes Israel has committed within the framework of the "right to self-defense," and that they stand with Israel and will continue to do so.

"DON'T YOU, AS GERMANY, SEE WHAT IS HAPPENING IN GAZA?"

One cannot help asking what could put a person (a chancellor) in such a state of inconsistency with himself within a few minutes. President Erdoğan turned in astonishment and asked, "Don't you, as Germany, see what is happening in Gaza?" What might it not be seeing? What the whole world can see. A complete genocide has been carried out for more than two years. Not a stone has been left standing on a stone; hospitals, schools, mosques, churches, aid organizations and their volunteers have been bombed and killed. All of this is documented, all of it is happening live before the eyes of the world. What kind of veil is there between Germany and the truth that prevents it from seeing these things?

Never mind, has it not seen? Erdoğan listed them again: "It has massacred more than 60 thousand people, most of them children, women and the elderly; it is carrying out a genocide. Hamas has no bombs in its hands, no nuclear weapons. But all of these weapons are in Israel's hands. Using these weapons, Israel, for example, last night (despite the ceasefire) struck Gaza again with these very bombs. By striking Gaza, they have always been endeavoring to discipline it with hunger and genocide… It is blocking food from being sent to Gaza. It is blocking both the Red Crescent and the Red Cross from delivering aid."

If the German Chancellor had the slightest concern or aptitude for consistency on Turkey's legal criteria and on human rights, he would have said a few words to Israel too. But he does not say them, because he cannot. Because the bitter truth is that Germany, since the Second World War, has had no independent existence of its own. When Israel is concerned, it is struck down from all its claims, all its criteria collapse, all its values are razed to the ground. In this state, could Germany have anything to teach Turkey, or any criterion by which it could be an example?

In this state it is not Turkey that needs Germany but Germany that has a severe need of Turkey. The first thing it can learn from Turkey is to be able to be independent, to be able to be consistent with its own claims. Whether it can really learn this is another matter. The situation is tragic and perhaps very hard, but surely it cannot be hopeless. It requires a little courage, a little honesty.

THROUGH THE EYES OF ABDULLAH AL-NAFISI: THE DIFFERENCE OF TURKEY

In a podcast broadcast the other day, I noted down some assessments about Turkey by the famous Kuwaiti political scientist Abdullah al-Nafisi. The subject was in fact partly about the roles that other countries are playing today in countries such as Syria, Sudan, Yemen and Libya.

As is known, in these days massacres no less than Gaza's, savage events that condemn people to starvation, are taking place in Sudan. There is what the Rapid Support Forces are doing, backed by the UAE, who have no claim or project for Sudan other than plunder and marauding. Starting from the Syrian example, Nafisi expresses Turkey's difference. I will content myself with conveying his words, perhaps to return to them later:

"The Turks, that is, the Ottoman State, ruled the region of Damascus for 400 years. For this reason they have very detailed knowledge of the region and of the minorities. They treat the Arab states with dignity; that is, they are not unruly. There is no roughness in the Turks' relations with Syria. If you sit and talk especially with Turkish officials, for example Hakan Fidan, President Erdoğan, Ibrahim Kalin, who is now in charge of security, and other names in the ruling party, you see that they have an attitude of gravity and not rushing. When the Turks entered Syrian lands they would build mosques, schools and health centers there, pave roads and provide security; that is, they were not an oppressive authority. For this reason there are great signs that the Turks will be welcomed in Syria, because the Turks' historical past with the Syrians has been encouraging. For this reason I too believe that the Turkish project will have a future in the region.

The side where the Turks are lacking is the intellectual dimension; they are practical people. They work on military affairs, control of territory, administration and bureaucracy. But they do not have the kind of intellectual depth that you see in leadership. For this reason they need to strengthen their intellectual arsenal together with the Arabs.

At least for now, this is how it is."