November 5, 2010
This week marks the fifteenth anniversary of the assassination of Yitzhak Rabin. Israel has changed a great deal since then and I cannot help long for those times. The first years of Oslo were filled with excitement, optimism, and overall change. There clearly was an alternative to war and there was partner to speak with. In fact, the partner had always been there. I am not talking about Yasser Arafat but rather the Palestinian people. They were always there even if Israel did not want to see them.
A long 15 years have passed and when I watch the nightly Israeli news I am overcome by a feeling of déjà-vu. The stumbling blocks of the years before Rabin, then under Prime Minister Shamir, are back in place. Is the peace process today once again falling victim to the question of freezing the building of settlements? Is the Israeli government once again blocking the entrance of moderate Palestinian politicians into Jerusalem’s city limits? 20 years ago the controversy was over the Orient House and Faisal Husseini; today, it is over whether Prime Minister Fayyad can enter and be present at Palestinian ceremonial events.
A few months ago, in late August I wrote about why I was avoiding writing on the peace process, which once again was about to convene. Why waste my ink! Well, two months have passed and I am happy that I did not waste both my ink and my thoughts. What we see is that it is just more games and more stealing time. It is really hard to make sense out of the current Israeli government. How does a Prime Minister not punish a Foreign Minister that does and says as he wishes? How does a Prime Minister cave into a minority settlement movement? How does a whole generation of Israelis let petty politics of miniscule politicians ruin their future?
Now, the Palestinians have time on their side and let us hope that they will also be able to overcome their differences. The divide between the PLO and Hamas seems irreconcilable. While the West Bank culturally and economically is on the upbeat, Gaza remains under an Israeli blockade and culturally blockaded by Hamas. Of course, the former is much more critical; however, the latter also needs to be mentioned. If they are able to overcome these differences, the time would be right for a serious attempt at unilaterally declaring statehood. This has been done in the past however it seems that the world is more than ever ready to accept such a move. This move might even awaken the Israeli left who lays dormant somewhere in the beautiful upper class neighborhoods of Tel Aviv.
Lastly, the huge loss to the Democratic Party in the mid-term elections has left Barack Obama weaker than ever leaving even less hope for change. What more needs to said. So, once again I have painted a bleak picture. While I did not vote for the Labor party in 1992, it seems like no Israeli leader since Yitzhak Rabin has been willing to take the future in his/hers hands and set an ambitious agenda. As long as there is no real peace, with every passing year the memories of this period will become more painful. In other words, only when there really is peace will me and many others be able to leave Rabin’s memory to the past.
Friday, November 5, 2010
Thursday, October 21, 2010
A Mavi Marmara (Gaza Flotilla) Update
October 21, 2010
A Mavi Marmara Update
Today’s Haaretz has reported that information found on computers which were confiscated during the Mavi Marmara raid “indicates that the flotilla’s organizers received assistance from the highest levels of the Turkish government, including Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Edogan and other senior government officials.” This claim was denied by Turkish officials but nevertheless it is seriously claim, one that will continue to exacerbate the tensions between the once friendly states. Furthermore, the Israelis will need much more hard evidence than found on the Polish journalist’s laptop to prove such accusations. If true, it will confirm many Israelis’ belief that this was all pre-orchestrated by Prime Minister Erdogan himself, and will stand as a sign that the Turkish government extended much more than latent support, something I claimed at the beginning. We need to recognize that even if Turkey “supported” it or not, it was Israel who performed the botched seizure of the ship and did not foresee the tragic outcome, both in terms of human life and the price Israel has had to pay for this diplomatically. Following the publication of the Haaretz article it was reproduced in the Turkish newspaper, Hurriyet.
Since the incident, Israel and Turkey have not come to any understanding concerning the operation and it remains a diplomatic quagmire for Israel, as both Prime Minister Erdogan and President Abdullah Gul constantly remind Israel that they are waiting for an official apology and for compensation to be made to the families of the victims. This caused President Gul to cancel a planned tete-à-tete meeting with Israeli President Shimon Peres at the UN last September. Most recently, Prime Minister Erdogan has threatened that if Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu participates in a Greek climate summit which will take place tomorrow (22 October 2010) he will cancel. However, according to Hurriyet Daily News the “Israeli prime minister is not on the list of speakers, and Israel is not among the list of confirmed participants.” Therefore, this seems to be more of Erdogan’s season bashing of Israel.
While diplomatically things are cold, it seems that trade between the two countries was not affected at all, with past numbers even pointing to increased trade relations. Furthermore, while Israeli tourism to Turkey came to a screeching halt I have once again started hearing Hebrew on Istanbul’s Istiklal street, showing signs that perhaps time really does heal wounds.
To read the Haaretz and Hurriyet article on Israeli claims of Turkish government involvement see here:
Haaretz: Turkey denies offering assistance to Gaza flotilla organizers
Article which appeared in Hurriyet (Turkish)
A Mavi Marmara Update
Today’s Haaretz has reported that information found on computers which were confiscated during the Mavi Marmara raid “indicates that the flotilla’s organizers received assistance from the highest levels of the Turkish government, including Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Edogan and other senior government officials.” This claim was denied by Turkish officials but nevertheless it is seriously claim, one that will continue to exacerbate the tensions between the once friendly states. Furthermore, the Israelis will need much more hard evidence than found on the Polish journalist’s laptop to prove such accusations. If true, it will confirm many Israelis’ belief that this was all pre-orchestrated by Prime Minister Erdogan himself, and will stand as a sign that the Turkish government extended much more than latent support, something I claimed at the beginning. We need to recognize that even if Turkey “supported” it or not, it was Israel who performed the botched seizure of the ship and did not foresee the tragic outcome, both in terms of human life and the price Israel has had to pay for this diplomatically. Following the publication of the Haaretz article it was reproduced in the Turkish newspaper, Hurriyet.
Since the incident, Israel and Turkey have not come to any understanding concerning the operation and it remains a diplomatic quagmire for Israel, as both Prime Minister Erdogan and President Abdullah Gul constantly remind Israel that they are waiting for an official apology and for compensation to be made to the families of the victims. This caused President Gul to cancel a planned tete-à-tete meeting with Israeli President Shimon Peres at the UN last September. Most recently, Prime Minister Erdogan has threatened that if Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu participates in a Greek climate summit which will take place tomorrow (22 October 2010) he will cancel. However, according to Hurriyet Daily News the “Israeli prime minister is not on the list of speakers, and Israel is not among the list of confirmed participants.” Therefore, this seems to be more of Erdogan’s season bashing of Israel.
While diplomatically things are cold, it seems that trade between the two countries was not affected at all, with past numbers even pointing to increased trade relations. Furthermore, while Israeli tourism to Turkey came to a screeching halt I have once again started hearing Hebrew on Istanbul’s Istiklal street, showing signs that perhaps time really does heal wounds.
To read the Haaretz and Hurriyet article on Israeli claims of Turkish government involvement see here:
Haaretz: Turkey denies offering assistance to Gaza flotilla organizers
Article which appeared in Hurriyet (Turkish)
Monday, October 11, 2010
Good News for Turkey: Towards the end of the Headscarf Ban
Oct 11, 2010
Every student of my modern Turkey class is shocked when they learn that in Turkish universities and in the government sector, the Islamic headscarf is banned and if a woman chooses to wear one she is barred from university classrooms and from working as a public servant. The irony is obvious: Turkey is a country where the [non-monolithic] Muslim population makes up about 99% of the general population.
The reasoning behind the ban is that the Turkish republic is an ideologically motivated secular state, in the spirit of French laicism, where in the public sphere no religious symbolism should be professed (an idea I myself have been sympathetic to in the past). However, with the rise of the conservative Islamic leaning AKP government during the last 8 years, the once taboo topic has been brought to question. Imagine a country where the President’s wife is not allowed in the parliament, or the Prime Minister’s daughters are not allowed to attend school in their own country. Of course, the topic is much more complicated than this and for now I will not expand; however, I will say that the overwhelming amount of the Turkish population, whether religious, secular, or between, when asked, really have no problem with the headscarf being worn in classes or in government offices. This conflict has been more about setting new precedents, and the secular establishment’s fear that they are quickly losing ground.
Following the recent Turkish referendum, with more leeway on their side, the government has once again began to raise their voices about the need to lift the ban. Showing responsibility,the opposition parties also have sent strong signals that the time has come to make the change. In fact, last week two universities alone announced that they will officially allow covered women in their classes. I stress “officially” since the truth be known that many universities and professors have been turning a blind-eye to the headscarf ban for some time now.
The soon-lifting of the headscarf ban in the universities is only the beginning. In fact, even if it is a huge step, the total lifting of the ban will not be solved by the Turkish education board (YÖK), or simply goodwill. It will take a unified approach with all the parties working together in order to ensure that the reforms are aimed at not making a political statement but are being done for the Turkish people as a whole; and equally important, to end the discrimination of a large constituency of Turkish women.
Let us not forget that the eventual integration of covered women will not change only the public-servant sector but also the private sector; in other words Turkey’s urban centers will eventually need to integrate covered women into their work force; whether this is at banks, supermarkets, and numerous other companies who see fit to hire only women without the headscarf.
With these reforms, there is no doubt that Turkey as we once knew it will change dramatically. The mirage of the sole “modern republican (uncovered) woman” will dissipate with the emergence of the “modern covered woman” side by side, competing on issues of merit and not one’s worldview or dress. In my opinion, the lifting of the ban could also be used as a jumping board for women to have their voice heard in a country where women are almost obsolete form the political system. Further it could be an opportunity for Turkish lawmakers to rethink anti-discrimination laws in general, offering a solution to the problem of companies which profile their employees based on dress, ethnicity, or gender.
In the end, the test will be whether the current Turkish government (and future ones) will be able to balance between the two camps and not create a situation where secular people feel that they no longer can express themselves freely as they wish. Turkey’s large secular population also has legitimate claims that need to be taken seriously. With alcohol being taxed at such rates that only middle and upper classes can drink, with the mosque call to prayer reaching volumes that were once unheard of, and with polygamy existing among circles close to the government (to name a few examples), the current government needs to draw clear lines and ensure that all will benefit from Turkey’s new face; importantly, the fact that the AKP has taken this long to begin to lift the headscarf ban shows that at least on this front they have demonstrated a great amount of sensitivity and have worked hard not to divide the country in two. Let us hope they continue to work in this spirit.
Every student of my modern Turkey class is shocked when they learn that in Turkish universities and in the government sector, the Islamic headscarf is banned and if a woman chooses to wear one she is barred from university classrooms and from working as a public servant. The irony is obvious: Turkey is a country where the [non-monolithic] Muslim population makes up about 99% of the general population.
The reasoning behind the ban is that the Turkish republic is an ideologically motivated secular state, in the spirit of French laicism, where in the public sphere no religious symbolism should be professed (an idea I myself have been sympathetic to in the past). However, with the rise of the conservative Islamic leaning AKP government during the last 8 years, the once taboo topic has been brought to question. Imagine a country where the President’s wife is not allowed in the parliament, or the Prime Minister’s daughters are not allowed to attend school in their own country. Of course, the topic is much more complicated than this and for now I will not expand; however, I will say that the overwhelming amount of the Turkish population, whether religious, secular, or between, when asked, really have no problem with the headscarf being worn in classes or in government offices. This conflict has been more about setting new precedents, and the secular establishment’s fear that they are quickly losing ground.
Following the recent Turkish referendum, with more leeway on their side, the government has once again began to raise their voices about the need to lift the ban. Showing responsibility,the opposition parties also have sent strong signals that the time has come to make the change. In fact, last week two universities alone announced that they will officially allow covered women in their classes. I stress “officially” since the truth be known that many universities and professors have been turning a blind-eye to the headscarf ban for some time now.
The soon-lifting of the headscarf ban in the universities is only the beginning. In fact, even if it is a huge step, the total lifting of the ban will not be solved by the Turkish education board (YÖK), or simply goodwill. It will take a unified approach with all the parties working together in order to ensure that the reforms are aimed at not making a political statement but are being done for the Turkish people as a whole; and equally important, to end the discrimination of a large constituency of Turkish women.
Let us not forget that the eventual integration of covered women will not change only the public-servant sector but also the private sector; in other words Turkey’s urban centers will eventually need to integrate covered women into their work force; whether this is at banks, supermarkets, and numerous other companies who see fit to hire only women without the headscarf.
With these reforms, there is no doubt that Turkey as we once knew it will change dramatically. The mirage of the sole “modern republican (uncovered) woman” will dissipate with the emergence of the “modern covered woman” side by side, competing on issues of merit and not one’s worldview or dress. In my opinion, the lifting of the ban could also be used as a jumping board for women to have their voice heard in a country where women are almost obsolete form the political system. Further it could be an opportunity for Turkish lawmakers to rethink anti-discrimination laws in general, offering a solution to the problem of companies which profile their employees based on dress, ethnicity, or gender.
In the end, the test will be whether the current Turkish government (and future ones) will be able to balance between the two camps and not create a situation where secular people feel that they no longer can express themselves freely as they wish. Turkey’s large secular population also has legitimate claims that need to be taken seriously. With alcohol being taxed at such rates that only middle and upper classes can drink, with the mosque call to prayer reaching volumes that were once unheard of, and with polygamy existing among circles close to the government (to name a few examples), the current government needs to draw clear lines and ensure that all will benefit from Turkey’s new face; importantly, the fact that the AKP has taken this long to begin to lift the headscarf ban shows that at least on this front they have demonstrated a great amount of sensitivity and have worked hard not to divide the country in two. Let us hope they continue to work in this spirit.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)