As I said yesterday, Arab rulers started to rally beside Israel attacking Turkey. “A strike of master”, that is the headline on one of Egypt’s newspapers (image above), describing the Egyptian president Mubarak position compared to the Turkish PM Erdogan’s position.
Semi-official state run Egyptian Newspaper Algomhuria attacked the Turkish position on the flotilla massacre, saying that the Turkish reaction is weak and cold compared to the Egyptian position, which was brave, rejecting the American and Israeli dictates:
The Turks used the Arabic rhetoric and words, which are same used frequently by Syria to threaten Israel … Erdogan is a voice only .. and he he can not do anything or he will face the U.S. anger. While President Mubarak’s position was a strike of a master and an example must be followed, when he decided to open the Rafah-crossing for an indefinite period allowing medical and humanitarian aid to the Gaza, and receives critical situations and patients.
The newspaper considered the Turkish position accepted the Israeli blow, and Turkey couldn’t react, adding:
The Turkish anger is following the U.S. compass of .. Ankara follows the NATO leadership, which in its turn, is controlled by Israel … Turkey’s position is suitable for a political show .. But not suitable to move against Washington .. Unlike Cairo, which has rejected dozens of decisions and orders from the U.S.
Another state run newspaper Ros Al-Yousif, says the following:
Turkish people are still angry and the Turkish politicians want to win the street, contrary to the Turkish official position, which is double-standard towards Israel, they are welcoming Israel behind closed-doors and in media conferences away from the eyes and the world and the media.
Pingback: Tweets that mention post: Egypt's media attacks Turkey's PM Erdogan -- Topsy.com
China will drop Gates, Pakistan and Iran
I have posted several op-eds in recent months criticizing the policies of Robert Gates as Secretary of Defense. Today, there is welcome news that China has spurned his request to visit China and to meet with Chinese officials.
It is highly unusual for a US ally to confront the authority of the US Secretary of Defense, as China has done. Gates hopes that Obama will rush to his defense. Gates is earning headlines with his attacks on China’s military, although it is far from certain that Gates has Obama’s support to widen the scope of this controversy.
Secretary Gates is also blundering by ascribing the worst posse motives to China for rejecting him as a security partner. Thus, a Gates’ ally told MSNBC news yesterday that China refused to invite Gates to bilateral defense consultations because China feared his pressure on Chinese military leaders for greater transparency in China’s defense planning budget. This Gates’ allegation that the Chinese leadership is afraid to face him is false. The issue of greater transparency in Chinese defense has been the subject of numerous meetings between Chinese and US defense officials in recent years, with no risk to diplomatic relations. For his part, Gates is also attempting to create a split in China’s leadership between so-called anti-Gates reactionaries on one side and pro-Gates reformers on the other side. Gates now wants Obama to assist his “Chinese reformers” by escalating this latest controversy over Gates’ visit. Enough, already. Gates should back off. The US cannot hope to retain China as a banker and a security ally if it allows Gates to insult the Chinese leadership. Gates should stop public speculation about China’s motives in blocking his visit.
Gates should also remain silent on the explosive issue of Taiwan. In particular, Gates should avoid dissmissing China’s legitimate concerns about the dangers of China’s partition again at the hands of foreign powers. If Gates reads up on Chinese history, that China faced acute threats of partition by foreign imperialists throughout most of the 19th and 20th century. The Chinese will always remember that Japanese imperialists in the years before WW II supported independence of Taiwan and Manchuria from China. Japan then invaded Taiwan and Manchuria and used them as staging areas for Japan’s full scale invasion of China.
To clarify the issues, let me suggest a new explanation for China’s distrust of Gates – in one word, Pakistan. China is aware that Gates is Obama’s most powerful advocate of Pakistan-US security cooperation, a policy that other US leaders oppose because it is directed against the interests of Afghanistan, India, and Russia. Where does China fit in? China, like the US, has been a strong ally of Pakistan for many years. No more. China has parted ways with Pakistan and Gates, as demonstrated by four recent developments.
First, just before Afghanistan President Karzai’s recent visit to the US, where Karzai met with Obama, he signed agreements with China assuring that China – not Pakistan – will take over peacekeeping duties as the US withdraws from Afghanistan. This means China and Pakistan are now in confrontation over Afghanistan. Obama needs to discover if China consulted Gates in advance of this decision? If not, China no longer trusts Gates, who has become a liability for Obama in national security affairs
Third, China is becoming suspicious of Pakistan’s intentions by improving security relations with Iran. These two Shi’ite Muslim nations are natural security partners. They are both radical Islamic states under military rule. They have the same adversaries — Afghanistan, India, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Syria, and the Arab states. They have a common border, meaning that a Pakistan-Iran security agreement would permit each state to use the other to supply strategic depth for large scale military operations. Pakistan and Iran also have significant trade complementarity, where Iran would satisfy Pakistan’s need for oil while Pakistan would supply Iran with advanced military technology, most of it obtained from the US. Finally, Pakistan and Iran share a history of illicit cooperation with North Korea in developing nuclear weapons and intermediate range missiles. In short, Gates’ dream of a US-Pakistan-Iran Axis is likely to become a nightmare for Obama, South Asia, and the Arabs, not a breakthrough to regional stability, as intended by Gates.
Fourth, China is beginning to fear that Obama has decided to continue George W. Bush’s policy of favoring Iran at Arab expense. Thus Obama, like Bush, continues to focus the drone strikes against Arab Taliban and Arab bin-Ladin terrorists, while protecting Iranian and Pakistani terrorists that are backed by Pakistan’s military. Also, China is beginning to worry that the US has lost its way in Iraq by following an anti-Arab policy. For example, the US is alienating the Iraqi Arabs by failing to block Iranian and Kurdish efforts to partition Iraq and its oil industry. Iran seems to be receiving a US green light to annex Arab Basra and its oil, while the Iraqi Kurds are receiving a US green light to annex Arab Kirkuk and its oil.
Obama and his appointees are amused by Arab fears of Iranian and Kurdish agression. They should stop laughing. Turkey, which has the most powerful military in the Middle East due to Turkey’s NATO connections, joined the Iran-Pakistan Axis this week in a big way, with two bold moves.
First, Turkish president Erdogan provoked Iraq by inviting the separatist Iraqi Kurds and their leader Barzani to discuss sensitive issues on Turkish-Iraqi border control in the Kurdish zones, where terrorism by the PKK is widespread. Although Erdogan invited Barzani to these consultations on border issues, he did not invite the Iraqi government.
Second, Turkey dislayed its new loyalty to Iran by provoking Palestinian-Israeli conflict in Gaza. Meanwhile, the Iranian leaders will stay safely on the sidelines as a new Middle East conflict explodes.
To summarize — the US is radicalizing the Arabs by failing to deter Iranian and Kurdish aggression against the Iraqi Arabs, and by using the war on terrorism as a pretext for US attacks on the Arabs, while ignoring terrorism by Iran and Pakistan. These pro-Iran and anti-Arab policies were instituted by Robert Gates and General Petraeus. Gates in particular deserves blame for ignoring exceedingly brutal Pakistani terrorism in India (e.g. Mumbai) and Afghanistan. Gates is also ignoring Iranian terrorism in Iraq, Israel, the PA, and the Balkans, where Iran is aligned with Germany and its fascist allies from WW II including Croatia, Albania, and a small but powerful group of Holocaust deniers in the Vatican. Finally, Gates is ignoring widespread Iranian terrorism in Latin America and the Caribbean (see my next op-ed).
Osama bin Ladin is pleased with these US anti-Arab policies in Iraq and in the war on terrorism. Osama is pleased because he knows the Iranian Shi’ites will lose in their comnfrontation with the Arabs, even with US support, because the Shi’ites lack the numbers to dominate the Arab Sunni states in the Middle East. Osama is pleased because Obama has become his numnber one recruiting agent, thanks to the US bias against Arabs by Gates-formulated policies in Iraq, Pakistan, and Afghanistan. Finally, Osama is pleased by Gates’ provocations against China and Russia, which precude the formation of a US/China/Russia united front against Iranian fascism and terrorism.
In short, Obama must change course in favor of the Arabs if he intends to retain US influence in the Middle East. To this end, assuming that China has actually decided to abandon Gates and Pakistan, Obama would be wise to follow China’s policy. Thus, Obama should dismiss Gates, unless Gates agrees to refrain from all further interference in China’s internal affairs, and can answer all of the hard questions on Pakistan, Iran and the Arabs.
Scott Sullivan is an oil shill.
His views are facile and suspect.
To the article… Mubarak is pumped up with drugs& US money..
What they call in the US…“A Tin Pot Dictator”, obviously
in control of “his” media.
A true embarrassment to the nation, and people of Egypt.
I think the PM of Turkey is doing a huge mistake.
People are going to remember him getting closer to Iran and further away from the west (Israel included).
The people of Israel and the people of Turkey always had such a good relationship and it’s a shame that Erdoğan is happily destroying good faith for his narrow interests.
@andrea levin,
since israel occupated palestine, there can’t be something called “good relationship” between turkey and israel.
Israel killed innocent, armless people in mediterranean sea. Turks will never forget that.