Iranian Affairs:
By Abdülhamit Bilici
Turkish Newspaper Todays Zaman
| “Things are getting worse for Iran and, most unfortunately, it is heading down a road that cannot be reconciled with the sensitivities of the ‘Islamic revolution.’ Iran is following a strategic line in which Shiism is closely interwoven with Persian nationalism. It is investing in promoting Shiism in a Muslim geography.” | |
| The following excerpt is from the beginning of Ahmet Taşgetiren’s article, “Writing about Iran,” in the Aksiyon newsweekly. You may or may not agree with him, but Taşgetiren certainly deserves appreciation for his outspokenness and courage. Indeed, it is no easy task to write about Iran in this country. Any writing critical of Iran will quickly trigger armies of people ready to refute your Islamic identity and declare you an American or Israeli agent. These reactions mostly come from our own citizens, rather than from Iranians. I am not even referring to the blind proponents of Iran. In such cases, the following question intrigues me: Are there any such pro-Turkish group in other countries like our pro-Iranian Turks? One can understand why groundless criticism or slander receives such a reaction or counter-insults. But if Iran is in question, these groups do not tolerate even the most fair of criticism. They perceive it as hostile to even report on what Iranian dissidents could write about in the relatively free atmosphere that existed until recently. Many people do not want to deal with such reactions and opt for acting or speaking diplomatically or remaining silent altogether. Of course, the romantic interest in Iran’s successful Islamic revolution, respect for Iran’s victimization due to years of ongoing embargoes and the country’s image as fighting big and little devils like Israel and the US are factors that tend to deflect criticism. The attack directed against any critical remark is obvious: If you criticize Iran, then you are working for Israel or the US. It is as if one cannot criticize Iran as well as Israel and the US. As my attentive readers will remember, when the ruling Justice and Development Party (AK Party) was late in opposing the “Sunni” Muammar Gaddafi, who treated his people like rats and set his military against them, I had asked, “Is Turkey on Gaddafi’s side?” in my article dated March 5, 2011. Perhaps this criticism served as a small incentive for the government to make up its mind about lending support to the Libyan people. Similarly, when the Syrian government started to oppress its own people in the same manner Serbians treated Bosnians in 1990s, I called on Turkish people, including Islamists, to watch the developments, in my article, “Send the Mavi Marmara to Syria.” I didn’t think about the Sunni identity of Gaddafi or the Shiite identity of Bashar al-Assad when I wrote those articles. When the Baath regime in Syria started to kill its own people, Turkey and the whole Muslim world expected Iran to exhibit a similarly consistent and moral attitude. All of us, particularly Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan and Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu, who attach great importance to developing good relations with Iran, were wrong. Indeed, the Iranian regime forgot about humane, moral and Islamic concerns and chose to back the Baath regime for merely strategic considerations. But those who would criticize Iran for doing so will be accused of Americanism. As a matter of fact, Iran started to see the effects of its contradictory policy: In the past, posters of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, or Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah decorated the streets of Egypt, Syria and elsewhere in the Middle East, but after Iran started to pursue this sectarian policy, sympathy sharply declined. The wave of changes in the region, known as the Arab Spring, is referred to as the “Islamic awakening” in the official discourse of Iran, but there is not a single person who says that s/he is taking Iran as a model despite this country being the first to undertake an Islamic revolution. Isn’t it tragic? A simple news bulletin aired on the Press TV, Iran’s government-run international TV channel, which I happened to watch while in Tehran last week, is enough to show the distorted quality of Iran’s policy. The first news story was from Bahrain: “Protest from demonstrators who were dismissed from their jobs after bloody raids by Saudi-backed security forces.” The second one was about the increasing unemployment rate in Saudi Arabia despite the country’s oil wealth. The incidents in Syria, where 20-30 people die every day, ranked third, but it was presented along with news of pro-Assad rallies in Damascus. The messages highlighted were as follows: “We support Assad’s democracy program; Arab League monitors are insincere; we are against foreign conspiracies.” Actually, if it were not for the tension mutually created by the US and Israel on one side and Iran on the other, this contradictory position of Iran could be seen more clearly, and perhaps Iran would have to change its position as regards Syria and Iraq. But the nuclear tension and polemics with Israel help to delay the real crisis. But how long can it be postponed? |
ليست هناك تعليقات:
إرسال تعليق