The left cannot pretend that Israel is the only problem

Until Hamas renounces violence and stops arms smuggling, the problem will only get worse.

I do not know you, Mehdi, so I will not presume anything about you. I am saddened that you think to presume that I do not find the events a tragic, needless loss of life, just because I raise challenging political dilemmas. It is above all else a huge human tragedy. It was also clearly an absolute mistake by Israel that has caused it considerable diplomatic damage.

However, your approach is a manifestation of the problem, in that you seem unable to engage in a discussion about the serious policy and political problems relating to Israel that beset the international community. Serious dilemmas are faced by those that both want peace in the Middle East and also want to stop the suffering of innocents on all sides.

Given your presumption about me, you may be surprised to note that I think the arbitrary way that Israel appears to determine what foodstuffs enter Gaza is punitive, self-defeating and wrong. Furthermore, it detracts from the serious issues that I raised about the smuggling of arms, and the need to support Abu Mazen to ensure the peace process stands a chance. What is happening in Gaza is heartbreaking, but being a bleeding-heart liberal will not help resolve the wider issues.

What the people of Gaza need is for the international community to focus on the following: stop the smuggling of arms, get Hamas to renounce violence, and release Gilad Shalit. Then it will look as though we are not rewarding terror and keep the hope and chance of peace alive. This will in turn make reconciliation between Hamas and Fatah possible and then elections (which Hamas refuses to hold at present).

The best hope for Gaza is for Salam Fayyad to be able to extend his state-building programme there.

No matter how much you accuse me of not caring about human suffering, Mehdi, you can't get round these questions. Israel should answer the questions you raise about what is allowed into Gaza, but you have to acknowledge that the issue is not simple. There are enough good people in the US, UK, EU, PA and Israel that want to resolve this problem and have spent a very long time trying to sort it out. However, whatever Israel allows into Gaza, until Hamas renounces violence and stops arms smuggling, the problem will only get worse.

I feel it is equally shocking to hear someone on the left ignore the human rights abuses inflicted by Hamas, not least upon its own people. Even Amnesty International accepts Hamas is guilty of war crimes. Israel is guilty of many things, but we help no one, least of all the people of Gaza, by pretending that Israel is the sole problem.

Lorna Fitzsimons is chief executive of the Britain Israel Communications and Research Centre.

Special subscription offer: Get 12 issues for £12 plus a free copy of Andy Beckett's "When the Lights Went Out".

GETTY
Show Hide image

Erdogan’s purge was too big and too organised to be a mere reaction to the failed coup

There is a specific word for the melancholy of Istanbul. The city is suffering a mighty bout of something like hüzün at the moment. 

Even at the worst of times Istanbul is a beautiful city, and the Bosphorus is a remarkable stretch of sea. Turks get very irritated if you call it a river. They are right. The Bosphorus has a life and energy that a river could never equal. Spend five minutes watching the Bosphorus and you can understand why Orhan Pamuk, Turkey’s Nobel laureate for literature, became fixated by it as he grew up, tracking the movements of the ocean-going vessels, the warships and the freighters as they steamed between Asia and Europe.

I went to an Ottoman palace on the Asian side of the Bosphorus, waiting to interview the former prime minister Ahmet Davu­toglu. He was pushed out of office two months ago by President Recep Tayyip Erdogan when he appeared to be too wedded to the clauses in the Turkish constitution which say that the prime minister is the head of government and the president is a ceremonial head of state. Erdogan was happy with that when he was prime minister. But now he’s president, he wants to change the constitution. If Erdogan can win the vote in parliament he will, in effect, be rubber-stamping the reality he has created since he became president. In the days since the attempted coup, no one has had any doubt about who is the power in the land.

 

City of melancholy

The view from the Ottoman palace was magnificent. Beneath a luscious, pine-shaded garden an oil tanker plied its way towards the Black Sea. Small ferries dodged across the sea lanes. It was not, I hasten to add, Davutoglu’s private residence. It had just been borrowed, for the backdrop. But it reminded a Turkish friend of something she had heard once from the AKP, Erdogan’s ruling party: that they would not rest until they were living in the apartments with balconies and gardens overlooking the Bosphorus that had always been the preserve of the secular elite they wanted to replace.

Pamuk also writes about hüzün, the melancholy that afflicts the citizens of Istanbul. It comes, he says, from the city’s history and its decline, the foghorns on the Bosphorus, from tumbledown walls that have been ruins since the fall of the Byzantine empire, unemployed men in tea houses, covered women waiting for buses that never come, pelting rain and dark evenings: the city’s whole fabric and all the lives within it. “My starting point,” Pamuk wrote, “was the emotion that a child might feel while looking through a steamy window.”

Istanbul is suffering a mighty bout of something like hüzün at the moment. In Pamuk’s work the citizens of Istanbul take a perverse pride in hüzün. No one in Istanbul, or elsewhere in Turkey, can draw comfort from what is happening now. Erdogan’s opponents wonder what kind of future they can have in his Turkey. I think I sensed it, too, in the triumphalist crowds of Erdogan supporters that have been gathering day after day since the coup was defeated.

 

Down with the generals

Erdogan’s opponents are not downcast because the coup failed; a big reason why it did was that it had no public support. Turks know way too much about the authoritarian ways of military rule to want it back. The melancholy is because Erdogan is using the coup to entrench himself even more deeply in power. The purge looks too far-reaching, too organised and too big to have been a quick reaction to the attempt on his power. Instead it seems to be a plan that was waiting to be used.

Turkey is a deeply unhappy country. It is hard to imagine now, but when the Arab uprisings happened in 2011 it seemed to be a model for the Middle East. It had elections and an economy that worked and grew. When I asked Davutoglu around that time whether there would be a new Ottoman sphere of influence for the 21st century, he smiled modestly, denied any such ambition and went on to explain that the 2011 uprisings were the true succession to the Ottoman empire. A century of European, and then American, domination was ending. It had been a false start in Middle Eastern history. Now it was back on track. The people of the region were deciding their futures, and perhaps Turkey would have a role, almost like a big brother.

Turkey’s position – straddling east and west, facing Europe and Asia – is the key to its history and its future. It could be, should be, a rock of stability in a desperately un­stable part of the world. But it isn’t, and that is a problem for all of us.

 

Contagion of war

The coup did not come out of a clear sky. Turkey was in deep crisis before the attempt was made. Part of the problem has come from Erdogan’s divisive policies. He has led the AKP to successive election victories since it first won in 2002. But the policies of his governments have not been inclusive. As long as his supporters are happy, the president seems unconcerned about the resentment and opposition he is generating on the other side of politics.

Perhaps that was inevitable. His mission, as a political Islamist, was to change the country, to end the power of secular elites, including the army, which had been dominant since Mustafa Kemal Atatürk created modern Turkey after the collapse of the Ottoman empire. And there is also the influence of chaos and war in the Middle East. Turkey has borders with Iraq and Syria, and is deeply involved in their wars. The borders do not stop the contagion of violence. Hundreds of people have died in the past year in bomb attacks in Turkish cities, some carried out by the jihadists of so-called Islamic State, and some sent by Kurdish separatists working under the PKK.

It is a horrible mix. Erdogan might be able to deal with it better if he had used the attempted coup to try to unite Turkey. All the parliamentary parties condemned it. But instead, he has turned the power of the state against his opponents. More rough times lie ahead.

Jeremy Bowen is the BBC’s Middle East editor. He tweets @bowenbbc

This article first appeared in the 28 July 2016 issue of the New Statesman, Summer Double Issue