In this mailing:
- Oleksandr Feldman: First They Came for Mila Kunis
- Yaakov Lappin: Air Strike in Syria - The Opening Move?
- Veli Sirin: Turkey Censors Its TV History?
First
They Came for Mila Kunis
Ukraine's Anti-Semitism
by Oleksandr Feldman
February 4, 2013 at 5:00 am
February 4, 2013 at 5:00 am
|
Share:
 |
Be the first of your
friends to like this.
There is a
growing trend wherein an anti-Semitic collection of hate-mongers are abusing
the democratic Parliament of Ukraine to spew messages and incite violence in
ways that we had hoped were relegated to the distant past.
One of the most recognizable figures of Ukrainian Jewish descent, the
beautiful and talented actress Mila Kunis, recently was targeted by a member of
the Ukrainian Parliament from the far-right Svoboda Party – known for regularly
injecting anti-Semitism into its speeches and public pronouncements. He
sneeringly proclaimed that she was "not Ukrainian but a zhydovka." Zhydovka
is a hurtful slur for a Jew, and this was apparently a gutter effort to inject
Jew-hatred into the acceptable bounds of mainstream Ukrainian discourse.Despite the widely accepted notion that we live in an ever-more globalized world, too many people are skeptical that what happens in the halls of some far-off parliament on the other side of the world bears any impact on our way of life. On the contrary, events now developing here in Ukraine should oblige every person who dreams of a more tolerant and peaceful international community to sit up and take notice.
There is a growing trend wherein an anti-Semitic collection of hate-mongers are abusing the democratic Parliament of Ukraine to spew messages and incite violence in ways that we had hoped were relegated to the distant past. In our recent elections, it was horrifying to witness Svododa gain over 10% of the national vote. Like all ultra-nationalist parties, they campaigned and were elected on a message intended to inject fear into society. They shrilly warn that foreigners and minorities are positioned to take over the country. Idolizing some of the most virulently anti-freedom icons of generations past, including most prominently the architect of Nazi propaganda, Joseph Goebbels, Svoboda works hard to make hatred commonplace — and acceptable — throughout Ukrainian society.
Regrettably, Svoboda Party leaders realize that they have fertile ground on which to harvest such a dangerous agenda. While it has been on the decline in recent decades, there is no disputing that anti-Semitism, particularly among the less educated sectors of our society, remains ingrained in the minds of all too many. Svoboda has exploited the mistrust of Jews to gain popularity among some in the less-advantaged classes who welcomed the chance to be part of campaigns of hate.
If Svoboda's growing popularity goes unnoticed outside of the Ukraine's borders, we may quickly reach a point of no return. At that time, the idea of the party enjoying broad legislative powers to limit freedoms of expression amongst those who think unlike them would serve to reduce or completely prevent any immigration from nations they view as un-Ukrainian. All this could happen despite the decisive steps of the current government in Kiev to oppose the inroads made by Svoboda. One would have to be utterly ignorant of the history of this region to be unaware that campaigns begun ostensibly in the guise of populism and democracy can quickly decline into mass chaos, violence and, as before, genocide.
Thankfully, we are not near that point and there is no need yet to panic. The international institutions in place in the 21st century are strong enough to notice the rise of this devil at an early stage. Once, not long ago, the international community looked on in silence as Hitler and the Nazis deluded the world into thinking that their Jew-hatred was not worthy or "dangerous enough" to warrant global condemnation.
When the world finally did take notice, it was too late.
Anti-Semitism and xenophobia are the most insidiously contagious social diseases humanity has ever experienced. Civilized societies become infected with these sicknesses before they even pause to assess the damage that the illness is sure to impose.
This issue cries out for the immediate and sincere attention of the international community, most notably the leadership of the American Jewish community and the government of the United States of America. Ukraine and the USA have developed a strong alliance defined by economic partnerships and a diplomatic vision of how much there is that unites us in working together to address threats and cultivate opportunities. Should Svoboda continue to expand, it can only harm regional and international agreements and impose instability on our mutual markets.
Hatred never ends with speech; it soon escalates to more violent expressions. Nor can hatred be contained to any national borders, particularly in today's world of social media and instant communication.
I appeal to all peaceful and caring leaders around the world to join me in opposing everything that Svoboda represents. We all know that the stakes are far too high for the world to be able to say, "We did not know and therefore we did not act."
Oleksandr Feldman is a member of the Parliament of Ukraine and President of the Ukrainian Jewish Committee.
Air
Strike in Syria - The Opening Move?
by Yaakov Lappin
February 4, 2013 at 4:00 am
February 4, 2013 at 4:00 am
|
Share:
|
Be the first of your
friends to like this.
Proliferation
of strategic weapons will not be tolerated, no matter what the price.
If, as international media reports say, Israel was indeed behind last week's
air strikes in Syria, it can be assumed that the attack was the opening move in
a longer-term strategy to contain quickly-developing threats emerging from
Syria, as well as the broader Iran-Hezbollah axis.The ball is now in the court of Syrian president Bashar Assad and his allies in Beirut and Tehran. If they attempt further weapons transfers to Hezbollah, more air strikes can be expected - a development that will result in a wider conflict.
Iran is also releasing threats of serious retaliation against Israel, a threat which, if realized, could easily lead to a regional escalation. Days before the airstrikes, Iran warned that it would view any attack on Syria as an attack on itself.
For months, Israel has said that it would not allow strategic, advanced Syrian weapons - be they game-changing missiles or chemical weapons - to fall into the hands of Hezbollah or Al-Qaeda-affiliated elements.
As Gatestone Institute readers learned a week before the strike, Israel has no intention of relying on defense only to deal with a transfer of such weapons to the wrong hands.
Israel has remained mum over the strike, and little reliable information has surfaced over what targets were struck, but reports citing Western intelligence officials said a convoy carrying advanced SA-17 Syrian anti-aircraft missiles were the target.
The SA-17 system in Hezbollah's possession would limit the IAF's ability to carry out vital sorties over Lebanon, whether for reconnaissance, or to attack Hezbollah targets in a future conflict.
Within days of the air strikes, Syrian state media said the target was a military research center near Damascus that carried out work aimed at "raising the level of resistance and self-defence."
It is entirely possible that both a "research center" and an arms convoy were struck.
Syria's vague description of the center fits well with a weapons proliferation organization known as the Scientific Studies and Research Center (better known by its French acronym, CERS).
CERS is a Syrian state organization responsible for developing biological and chemical weapons, missiles, and transferring weapons to Hezbollah and Hamas.
In the past, Israel's former head of the National Security Council's Counter-Terrorism Bureau, Brig.-Gen. (res.) Nitzan Nuriel called on the international community to warn Syria that CERS "will be demolished" if it continues arming terrorist organizations.
According to open source intelligence reports, CERS developed ricin-based chemical weapons. The center was designated as an illegal weapons proliferator by former President George Bush and the US Treasury.
On Saturday, Syrian state TV released footage showing wreckage from the air strikes.
The images appear to have inadvertently verified reports of an arms convoy being the target, as they showed large military trucks that were destroyed in the attack – vehicles that resemble trucks designed to transport anti-aircraft systems.
Since the attack, Iran has led the way in issuing threats to respond. Senior Iranian defense and regime officials have said that the attack will "have consequences for Tel Aviv," and that a Syrian counterattack will "send Israel into a coma."
Assad limited himself to condemning Israel as a destabilizer of Syria, and a vague statement saying that Damascus can "confront current threats and aggression against it."
All parties concerned are aware of the fact that the Assad regime is fighting for its life, and will seek to avoid opening a second front against Israel. Any direct attack on Israel by Syria endangers Assad's immediate survivability.
On the other hand, Iran's threats cannot be ignored, and the possibility of retribution was factored in before taking the decision to launch the air strikes.
Iran and Hezbollah could activate terrorist cells abroad to attack overseas Israeli interests. Alternatively, terrorists acting on their behalf could fire missiles at Israel from Syrian or Lebanese territory.
It would be safe to assume that the IDF is on its highest alert for such developments.
Despite the escalated tensions, Jerusalem is projecting a business-as-usual message. Defense Minister Ehud Barak travelled to Germany for an international security conference two days after the air strikes, and IDF Chief of Staff, Lt.-Gen. Benny Gantz, landed in Washington on Sunday for talks with the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Martin Dempsey.
Whatever happens next in the region, last Wednesday's air strikes mark a watershed in the gradual breakdown of the Syrian state, and send an unmistakable signal: That strategic weapons proliferation will not be tolerated, whatever the price.
Related Topics: Yaakov Lappin
Turkey
Censors Its TV History?
by Veli Sirin
February 4, 2013 at 3:00 am
February 4, 2013 at 3:00 am
|
Share:
|
Be the first of your
friends to like this.
While the
Turkish public prosecutor has yet to initiate a legal case, the broadcaster has
rushed into self-censorship, announcing that the production of its episodes
will be shortened, and the series will come to an earlier conclusion than
intended.
In the last three years Western media have described Turkish foreign policy
as "neo-Ottoman." Prime minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan and his
allegedly "moderate Islamist" Justice and Development Party or AKP
are perceived as seeking to revive the historic influence – if not the
once-extensive territorial borders – of the Ottoman empire. The Ottomans ruled
most of the Middle East from the end of the 13th century CE to 1923,
when the Turkish republic was established.During the latest controversies over "neo-Ottoman" ambitions, Turkish foreign minister Ahmet Davutoglu has denounced tirelessly, as nonsense, all claims of wishing to restore the empire. According to Davutoglu, a new "opening to the East," directed to the former Turkish provinces in the Arab lands, as well as Armenian, Kurdish, and other cultural zones, represents mere normality. Turkey has, it is said, legitimate interests in common with its neighbors. This view seems intended to give Erdogan's policy a less expansionist and aggressive flavor, making it appear rational and pragmatic.
Erdogan's "Eastern strategy" may also be defined, however, as "rejection of the West." Turkey's bid to join the European Union appears to have been discarded or forgotten.
Nonetheless, Foreign Minister Davutoglu has lately been undermined by his chief in his efforts to repudiate "neo-Ottomanism." Erdogan proclaimed in a speech on November 25, 2012, as reported by the leading Istanbul daily Hurriyet, "We move with the spirit that founded the Ottoman empire."
Erdogan was questioned about this rhetoric by opposition politicians, who demanded that he explain more clearly his government's involvement in the 2010 Gaza coast clash, as well as in Tunisia, Syria, Egypt, and Libya. Erdogan even become involved in Sudan. There Ankara had pretensions to mediating the local crisis between Khartoum's Islamist dictator Omar Hassan al-Bashir, whom Erdogan favored, and the victims of infamous human rights violations in Darfur. Al-Bashir was welcomed to Turkey in 2009 while the Sudanese leader was the first serving head of state indicted for genocide at the International Criminal Court.
Prime Minister Erdogan declared, "We must go everywhere our ancestors have been." Does this mean that Turkey has designs on Hungary, Yemen, and Algeria, to say nothing of its original homelands from the Caspian Sea eastward in Central Asia?
The precedents of Turkish domination in the Balkans, and a campaign by Erdogan's government to reestablish Turkey's importance in the former Ottoman possessions there, have been overlooked. The AKP administration pursues such an agenda through economic investment, no less than the growth of the teaching system run by AKP ally Fethullah Gulen throughout the world. Gulen schools operate in nearly every country, including a system of institutions in the U.S., outwardly promoting secular education and especially science but also advancing Turkish cultural and political penetration. Earlier on, foreign minister Davutoglu, in a 2009 speech in Sarajevo, Bosnia-Hercegovina, stated, "We will make the Balkans, the Caucasus and the Middle East, together with Turkey, the center of world politics in the future."
Meanwhile, in an apparent expression of this "neo-Ottoman" fantasy, the Turkish public has been enchanted for two years with a television serial, "The Miraculous Century" ("Muhtesem Yüzyil," in Turkish), which has also been notably popular in the Balkans.
The program, which runs for three hours every Wednesday, portrays the period from 1520 to the close of the 16th century, when Sultan Suleyman the Magnificent commanded the Turkish empire and achieved its greatest extent. The show glorifies the Ottomans and should fit perfectly with the AKP propaganda about the past, reinforcing widespread commentary on "neo-Ottomanism" as the theme of the moment. In the television production, the sultan is benevolent and his advisory grand viziers are intelligent, while competitors including wives and lovers vie for his favor.
"The Miraculous Century" is broadcast by the Star television channel, owned by Turkish billionaire Ferit Sahenk. Conservative and religious elements, however, have criticized the production. Their main complaint is that the central figure in the series is not Suleyman the Magnificent himself, but his main concubine, later his wife, Hürrem Sultan (1506-58), a Christian captive known in the West as Roxelana. To the critics of the television production, Ottoman power in "The Miraculous Century," rather than reflecting the personality of a successful military leader, exhibits the outlook, intrigues, and supremacy of the harem.
Religious attacks on "The Miraculous Century" have diminished because of its popularity, but in the same November 25 discourse in which he promoted unabashedly his "neo-Ottoman" conception, Erdogan condemned the show. Then, on December 6, according to Hurriyet, the Prime Minister blasted the series in detail, mainly for its focus on women and harem life: "Some people claim that our history is nothing but wars, swords, machinations, strife and, unfortunately, harems." Erdogan went on to describe the series as an intentional distortion of Ottoman history, backed by unnamed foreign interests.
Referring to the television series, Erdogan threatened on November 25, "Those who toy with these values should be taught a lesson." Hurriyet reported that the AKP is preparing a law to ban the serial. The newspaper quoted AKP Istanbul deputy Oktay Saral, arguing, "The new law aims to forbid humiliation of historical figures or perversion of real facts." The proposed censorship would also deal with fictional works; a parliamentary vote on it is promised soon.
Saral denied that the projected suppression was motivated by Erdogan's comments, and told other Turkish media that "the matter has been on [AKP's] agenda for a long time." Some opposition politicians have also questioned "The Miraculous Century" for purportedly deceiving Turkish youths about their history. Turkish Airlines, which is 49.1% state-owned, has removed the series from its domestic in-flight entertainment.
Erdogan, who views himself apparently as more a sultan than an elected political leader whose term in office may end, refuses to accept that Sultan Suleyman the Magnificent, whom Erdogan considers his model, should be shown by "The Miraculous Century" in a manner the prime minister considers "absolutely incorrect." By this he means, above all, depiction of a ruler manipulated by a woman. Turkey will suffer, however, if this seemingly absurd squabble does not stimulate an authentic and new examination of the epoch of Suleyman the Magnificent, which also included court murders and other atrocities.
While the Turkish public prosecutor has yet to initiate a legal case against the producers of the series, and aside from its disappearance from Turkish Airlines flights, the broadcaster of "The Miraculous Century" has rushed into self-censorship, announcing that the production of its episodes will be shortened, and the series will come to an earlier conclusion than intended.
Related Topics: Turkey
| Veli
Sirin
To subscribe to the this mailing list, go to http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/list_subscribe.php
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment