Turkish column sees plan to “break up Muslim states” behind Libya attack
BBC Monitoring European
September 14, 2012

Column by Ardan Zenturk: “A `Film` and Attacking Islam”

It is quite evident that the objective is to break up Muslim countries with large populations in West Asia (Middle East) into small pieces by exploiting their internal ethnic and sectarian (in the case of Libya, tribal) divisions. This strategy, which succeeded in Iraq and Sudan and which plunged Libya into a deep chaos, is continuing to unfold in Syria in the form of a bloody ploy. Now look at what they did when they realized that they could not create a state based on the Coptic minority in Egypt.

Film, Bloodshed

Do you remember Terry Jones, the priest who nominated himself as an independent candidate in the US presidential elections of 2012? In 2010, he argued that Islam is a religion of violence and tried to burn the Koran at a special ceremony. He retreated from this repugnant plan after 20 people died in protests in the Islamic world. Nonetheless, he carried out his plan in March 2011. Terry Jones now appears before us as the supporter of an anti-Islam film that has caused turmoil first in Cairo and later in Benghazi, Libya. The only purpose of the two-hour quasi-documentary film entitled “Innocence of Muslims” is to insult the prophet of Islam in unprecedented ways. I read the storyline of the film. I cannot bring myself to write what it says about our prophet.

The director of the film is Sam Bacile, an American of Israeli origin. He has reportedly gone into hiding somewhere in the aftermath of the sharp reactions that led to the death of the US ambassador in Libya. He admits in his statement that he raised the money for his low-budget film from 100 prominent Jewish-American businessmen and companies.

This is not all. This is where the real ploy begins. Morris Sadek, the president of the National American Coptic Assembly, an organization created by Egyptian Coptic Christians who live in the United States, has announced that he supports the film. Sadek is a man who can say: “We believe sincerely that the state of Israel will someday annihilate the Muslim Arabs in Gaza and the West Bank and make all of Jerusalem its capital. Israel`s victory will be the victory of all oppressed peoples in the Middle East.”

Now what do you think about that?

Yinon Syndrome

It is of course very unfortunate that the Arab Spring process is increasingly manipulated by some circles to exhibit the elements of the Oded Yinon Plan. The said plan, which was approved by Israel in 1982, aims to break up all large Muslim states in West Asia (first the Arab countries and then Turkey and Iran). (For those who are interested see Ardan Zenturk`s 14 March 2011 article on Oded Yinon).

We are talking about a plan that forms the basis of the Western policy of turning a blind eye to Syria`s slide into an irreversible sectarian war on the excuse of Israel`s security. It is obvious that certain circles will not rest easy until a Coptic Christian state based in Alexandria, Egypt, and a Nusayri state based in Latakia, Syria, are established. It is sobering to see an alliance of Jewish capital and Coptic Christians in the United State to stage this ploy on the anniversary of the September 11 terrorist attacks.

Question of Nusayri State

Let us first recall a historical fact. The Ottoman state never viewed the Nusayris in Syria as Alevis. The French administration that was established in Syria after World War I introduced the word “Alawite” into the region. To check the surging independence movement in Syria, the French divided the country into the Sanjak of Hatay [Alexandrette], the State of Aleppo, the State of Damascus, the Alawite State, Greater Lebanon, and the Druze Administration. In other words, your standard “divide and rule” strategy... This is not a joke: The [Alawite] state that existed between 1920 and 1936 had well-defined borders and a flag.

The information coming from Syria suggests that Bashar al-Asad plans such a state as a last ditch measure and that, of course, certain global powers, chiefly Israel, support this plan.

There is also the PKK [Kurdistan People`s Congress, KGK] in a region where so many bloody ploys are being staged at the same time.

That is only normal.

Text of report by Turkish newspaper Star website on 13 September

Source: Star website, Istanbul, in Turkish 13 Sep 12

© 2012 The British Broadcasting Corporation. All Rights Reserved.

Turkish daily examines Saudi/UAE intervention in Bahrain
BBC Monitoring European
March 17, 2011

Column by Ardan Zenturk: “Great Conspiracy Against Islam”

It is most unfortunate that the spirit of the Great Arab Revolution, which began in Tunisia and was crowned in Egypt, is turning into a deep conspiracy against Islam in Bahrain!

The Muslim lands are once again feeling the hot winds of a Shi`ite-Sunni conflict with Muslims all over the world once again feeling the need for Turkey`s peaceful and restorative face.

Saudi Arabia and the UAE have invaded Bahrain. This is a high-risk step the consequences of which are not easy to predict today.

Statements made by Saudi Arabia and the Gulf Countries Cooperation Council say that the military operation was in response to a call made by King Hamad bin Isa al-Halife in Bahrain.

Bahrain`s most powerful Shi`ite party Al-Wafaq call the military operation a clear invasion and announced to the world that it “would be defied.”

The fact that the operation “to save Bahrain from the chaos” comes from Saudi Arabia, the force that supported Egypt`s former dictator Hosne Mubarek until the very end, is causing increasing concern regarding all that is happening.

As is known, the toppled Tunisian dictator Zeynel Abidin bin Ali is in exile in Saudi Arabia. Ali Abdullah Salih, Yemen`s dictator for 32 years, is also supported by Saudi Arabia.

Iran-Saudi Clash

The reason behind all these developments is the war being fought between Saudi Arabia and Iran.

Iran is a state that recklessly uses Shi`ite populations outside its border to further its own national interests. Its political and military influence over the Shi`ite Arab population in Lebanon and Iraq is well known.

Iran has begun herding the Shi`ite population in the region to the front in order to strengthen its dominance in the Gulf of Basra. Bahrain is the first port of call in this strategy. Bahrain is a country whose population is 70 per cent Shi`ite but which has been ruled for 200 years by the Sunni Al-Halife family. The way the pro-democracy revolutions in North Africa have translated onto these lands is in the form of an Iranian-backed Shi`ite uprising!

Saudi Arabia calculated that the developments in Bahrain would soon be seen on its own soil, figuring that the Shi`ite population in the southern region with its rich oil fields was going to rebel.

US Secretary of Defence Robert Gates visited Bahrain, where the HQ of the US Fifth Fleet is located, last Saturday. The Saudi intervention occurred on the Sunday. What a coincidence!

Towards Religious Conflict

Actually, there is no difference between the military intervention taking place in Bahrain and the dispatch of French and Italian military forces by Qadaffi`s old friends Sarkozy and Berlusconi to shore up the Libyan dictator. If this kind of outside intervention is unthinkable, the something similar should not be taking place in Bahrain now. But we have grown accustomed to seeing world policy drawn along double standards.

Qadaffi`s statement “If there is military intervention in Libya then I shall join forces with Al-Qa`idah and fight a Jihad against the West” is without doubt a typical example of how the concept of religion can be so cheapened in daily clashes in these lands. What had Saddam Hussein said when he invaded Kuwait? “This Jihad is the mother of all wars...”

Prime Minister`s Warning

As developments were unfolding Prime Minister Erdogan said, “We do not want to see any new Karbala incidents” and this was exactly what Turkey was expected to say. By means of this statement Turkey drew attention to the huge slaughter that would be created by the use of Sunni military might against the masses demanding democracy in Pearl Square in the Bahrain capital of Manama.

Turkey knows that the Shi`ite-Sunni tensions taking shape along the Tehran-Riyadh line only benefit Israel. What Ankara has to do is to make Iran and Saudi Arabia abandon the policies they are pursuing.

Any tragedy in Bahrain is going to hold captive the next thousand years for Muslims.

Text of report by Turkish newspaper Star website on 17 March

Source: Star website, Istanbul, in Turkish 17 Mar 11

© 2011 The British Broadcasting Corporation. All Rights Reserved.

Italian paper Libya embassy attack seeks to destabilize Libya
BBC Monitoring European
September 13, 2012

Report by Antonella Rampino: “The Farnesina: We Must Stop Those Who Wish To Destabilize the New Libya”

Relations among the West`s various chanceries made it possible already in the first few hours after the attack in Benghazi to be certain of a few things. First of all, there is no link with the anti-Muhammad film going the rounds on YouTube because the Benghazi action was obviously very carefully planned, and some time ago too, by a well-trained group. The dynamic has yet to be reconstructed, although Italy credits the Libyan version whereby the US ambassador was not hit by one of the RPGs, in other words by a shoulder-held bazooka, but died of suffocation. As [Italian Foreign Minister] Terzi pointed out, Stevens played “an important role in the success of the uprising against Al-Qadhafi,” and he was in Benghazi - but this could be only an interesting fact for the investigation - where he had an appointment with the chairman of a major oil company, apparently Amoco.

Italy is a country that borders on Libya, and that is one of the reasons why events there are being tracked from very close up. The political concern (voiced also to the Libyans) is precisely that it is necessary to step up the pace on the road to democracy and on building the country`s institutions. Minister Terzi, who was in Malta yesterday for a common memorandum on immigration, alluded to this in the part of the communique in which the ministers voice their condolences to Hillary Clinton. (Quite apart from the influence that the attack may have on the US election), the assesssment made by the Palazzo Chigi [Italian prime minister`s official residence], the Farnesina [Italian Foreign Ministry], and the Quirinale [Italian president`s official residence], is that the timing itself (only hours before the formation of a the new government in Tripoli) is indicative of the assault`s ultimate goal, namely destabilization.

Further destabilization, one might almost call it, in view of the sluggish pace of the democratic process in the country, which is being implemented while there are still some parts of the country not under the government`s control. Only a few months ago, on the very day [Italian Prime Minister] Mario Monti was in Tripoli, Libyan President Jalil himself miraculously escaped an attempt on his life in Benghazi. But while in that instance it was a “protest” on the part of (armed) Benghazi factions that may not have been represented in the Constitution, this time the scenario is a very different matter.

Rome advised the Libyans to appoint a prime minister as soon as possible, and its advice was promptly taken. “Speed up the democratic process!” In that connection, even though it is perfectly comprehensible, regret has been voiced over the cancelation of Libyan National Council President Muhammad Magarief`s visit to Rome this Friday [ 14 September], where he was due to hold talks with [President] Napolitano, with Monti, and with [Chamber of Deputies Speaker] Fini. The Libyan National Council is the assembly whose task it was to elect the new prime minister. And of course, Italy is also carefully tracking the case of Al-Senusi, the former head of Al-Qadhafi`s secret services, who has been extradited by Mauritania but who has not been handed over to the International Criminal Court in The Hague. That is a slap in the face, of course, but it also shows, hopefully, that Libya intends to put the Al-Qahdafi system on trial.

Text of report by Italian privately-owned centrist newspaper La Stampa, on 13 September

Source: La Stampa, Turin, in Italian 13 Sep 12 p 5

© 2012 The British Broadcasting Corporation. All Rights Reserved.

Turkish column views violent reactions to controversial anti-Islam film
BBC Monitoring European
September 14, 2012

The riots in Libya and Egypt reportedly sparked by anger over a US-made film insulting the Prophet Muhammad that resulted in the killing of US Ambassador to Libya Christopher Stevens on Tuesday have led to concerns over the re-emergence of a vicious cycle of offending Islam and the violent reactions to them.

Religious authorities and intellectuals condemn and denounce violence as they point out the difference between freedom of expression and insulting sacred values and figures of billions of people.

“The Prophet would be saddened to know that three guest diplomats were killed by those who claim to be his followers in Libya,” said Imam Malik Mujahid, the chairman of the Council for a Parliament of the World`s Religions, following the attack on the US Consulate in Benghazi and the killing of the ambassador along with three of his colleagues. However, he also directed attention to an “unfortunately predictable pattern in recent years. A vicious cycle of hate is perpetuated by Islamophobes who produce material insulting Islam and Muslims, followed by violence on the part of extremists.”

The unpleasant memories of similar cases, such as the Danish cartoons that offended Muslims in 2005 which led to the bombing of the Danish Embassy in Pakistan and the deaths of hundreds of people in several other riots, or the announcement of the burning of the Quran by Pastor Terry Jones in 2010 which led to violent protests in Afghanistan with casualties, have proven that acts that are considered offensive by Muslims have not been well managed and only cause further antagonism between Muslims and the West.

The violent riots in the Muslim world only serve to strengthen Islamophobia and contribute to the creation of hatred and bias towards the more than 1.5 billion Muslims around the world. The perpetrator of the attacks in Norway in 2011 which killed 69 innocent people, Anders Behring Breivik, referred to the work of American Islamophobes in his 1,500-page “manifesto,” which displays how hate speech can breed violence that only results in more violence.

“The producers of such offensive works have a common theme: to say that Islam is full of violence,” said Mustafa Akyol, the author of the book “Islam without Extremes,” adding that the “violent reaction to them only proves their argument right.” Emphasizing that “freedom of thought is not freedom of violence,” Akyol pointed to “the importance of civilized reaction to these [manifestations offending Islam].”

President Abdullah Gul, Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs as well as the president of the Religious Affairs Directorate, Professor Mehmet Gormez, have all condemned the attack, saying that Islamic references cannot explain such acts of violence. “Nothing can justify use of violence, no matter how provocative or shallow the film that is said to be the cause of the violence is,” added Gormez in reaction to the killing of the US ambassador.

The Vatican also issued a statement on Wednesday, saying that “unjustified offence and provocations” against Muslims have “sometimes tragic results” that “nourish tension and hatred” and unleash “unacceptable violence,” while adding that respect for “beliefs, texts, outstanding figures and symbols” of all religions is “essential” for peaceful coexistence.

The fine line between hate speech and freedom of expression becomes even more blurred in issues related to religion. Nilgun Gelili from the Hrant Dink Foundation said “no expression of hatred should be considered freedom,” also stating that the foundation sometimes discusses where freedom of expression ends and where hate speech begins.

After strongly condemning the tragic killing of the ambassador in Libya, human rights lawyer and Today`s Zaman columnist Orhan Kemal Cengiz said the film, which was made in California, where anti-Semitism is not tolerated, is “close to hate speech.” Directing attention to the “double standards in the US,” where there are strong laws against criticizing even the state of Israel while ignoring a film that openly insults Muslims, Cengiz also talked about the “terribly primitive reactions to those offences which only help the racists.”

Another liberal intellectual, Professor Mehmet Altan, recalled previous events such as the burning of the Quran and called the course of events which led to the violent riots, first in Libya and Egypt and then in Yemen on Thursday “a provocative game” and warned against falling into a trap that would only increase polarization. “Where there is no rule of law, there is violence,” said Altan as he emphasized establishing a Western-style culture in terms of handling criticism.

As the debate over hate speech against Islam comes onto the agenda once again, the vagueness over the film “Innocence of Muslims” has since grown, according to the news agencies, as several key facts about the maker of the film, Sam Bacile, have proven to be either false or questionable. Bacile told the AP he was 56 but identified himself on his YouTube profile as 74. He also said he is a real estate developer, but does not appear in searches of California state licenses, including the Department of Real Estate.

In addition, Hollywood and California film industry groups and permit agencies said they had no records of the project under the name “Innocence of Muslims,” but a Los Angeles film permit agency later found a record of a movie filmed in Los Angeles last year under the working title “Desert Warriors.” A man who answered a phone number listed for the Vine Theatre, a faded Hollywood movie house, confirmed that the film had run for at least a day, and possibly longer, several months ago, arranged by a customer known as “Sam.”

Bacile had earlier called Islam “a cancer” and said he intended the film to be a provocative political statement condemning the religion. The film was reportedly promoted by an extreme anti-Muslim Egyptian Christian campaigner in the US. Excerpts from the film dubbed into Arabic were posted on YouTube.

Text of report in English by Turkish newspaper Today`s Zaman website on 13 September

Source: Zaman website, Istanbul, in English 13 Sep 12

© 2012 The British Broadcasting Corporation. All Rights Reserved.

Turkish column questions interpretation of democracy in Arab world
BBC Monitoring European
September 14, 2012

Column by Burak Bekdil: “Are you enjoying your Arab Spring?”

According to Los Angeles Times, US Ambassador to Libya, J. Christopher Stevens, was a model diplomat who was “idealistic, eager and brave, and seen by some in Benghazi as `a friend to all Libyans.`” Mr Stevens, God bless his soul, may have been idealistic, eager and brave, but apparently he was seen by some others in Benghazi not as a friend to all Libyans. As we celebrate a fresh month of democracy in the Arab world, Mr Stevens became the first American ambassador to die in the line of duty since 1988.

Officially, Mr Stevens and three other embassy personnel were killed because of a film which some Libyans perceived as blasphemous against Islam. You may choose to be naive enough to believe this. Ah, it`s because of that film! It was not. Without that film, your Islamist, who now enjoys his understanding of democracy, would find another good reason to fire another rocket in the name of jihad.

About three months ago I mentioned in this column how in Tunisia Salafis burned police stations, cafes and bars, lashed out at tourists and students, attacked dramatists and ransacked art exhibitions (Enjoy Your Arab Spring, this column, June 20, 2012). As a result, Tunisia, the “success story of the Arab Spring,” had to impose a curfew on eight regions, including the capital, Tunis. And the United States, Belgium, Switzerland and Austria had issued travel warnings urging caution to their citizens planning trips to “success story” Tunisia. That was long before the film that allegedly prompted the attack on US diplomats in Libya was produced.

Meanwhile in “now democratic” Libya, the National Transitional Council had ordered the military to use “all means necessary” to end clashes in the country`s west. And in the country`s south, more than 20 people had been killed in inter-tribal clashes.

But most ironically, a vehicle carrying Britain`s ambassador to Libya had been attacked by propelled grenades in Benghazi. Only a few days before that, a bomb had gone off just outside the US consulate in the same city, the “cradle of last year`s uprising supported by the US and Britain.”

So you still think that the idealistic American ambassador who was “a friend to all Libyans” was killed because of a blasphemous film? But that`s funnier than believing that deposing dictators will bring in democracy to the Arab Spring basin countries. This wishful process may always establish fair, ballot-box democracy, but that`s a lot different from democracy.

The Arabs` Western friends had better make available in their contingency planning an answer to the simple and equally realistic question: What do we do if a democratically elected government based on a nation`s free will decided to annihilate the rest? What if a majority thinks it`s their right to kill if someone acts in a way they would deem “blasphemous” to their faith? Will it be democracy if a majority intimidated the minority through presumably legitimate means? See Exhibit A with a crescent and star on top.

Behind fancy words of eulogy for Mr Stevens, the realists at the State Department might be thinking that the ambassador was merely a casualty in an effort to build democracy in selected parts of Muslimdom, just like thousands of soldiers who have died in various battles fought in foreign lands. In half a year it will have been a decade after Washington and its allies decided to depose the dictator of Baghdad and push the button for what would have been the Iraqi Spring. Oh but it`s the same malady: The Americans are always good at destructing but not quite so at constructing.

But optimism is always good. It refreshes hope. And it sells. I should close with my optimism in the final paragraph of “Enjoy Your Arab Spring:”

“Luckily, the first 18 [now 21!] tumultuous months of the Arab Spring have passed. Once we deal with the next 180 tumultuous months, then the final 1,800 tumultuous months will be very easy to tackle.”

Text of report in English by Turkish privately-owned, mass-circulation daily Hurriyet website on 14 September

Source: Hurriyet website, Istanbul, in English 14 Sep 12

© 2012 The British Broadcasting Corporation. All Rights Reserved.