What's new

Has Israel lost lone regional Muslim ally Turkey?

EjazR

SENIOR MEMBER
Joined
May 3, 2009
Messages
5,148
Reaction score
1
BBC News - Has Israel lost lone regional Muslim ally Turkey?

By Jonathan Head
BBC News, Istanbul

Less than three years ago Shimon Peres addressed the Turkish Grand National Assembly - Turkey's parliament - in Ankara.

It was the first time an Israeli president had addressed legislators in a Muslim country, a gesture which spoke volumes about the extraordinary relationship between Israel and Turkey, a relationship dating back to the early Turkish recognition of the Jewish state in 1949.

Uniquely among Muslim countries in the region, Turkey has strong trading ties with Israel.

The Turkish military buys weapons from Israel and trains with its armed forces, and in 2008 Turkey played host to more than half a million Israeli tourists, making it their favourite overseas holiday destination.

What has gone wrong?

Over the past 18 months the two countries have lurched from one diplomatic crisis to another, culminating in the furious Turkish response to Israel's botched blocking of a convoy from reaching Gaza.

All military co-operation has been frozen, and Israeli tourists are cancelling planned trips to Turkey.

And now thousands of Turks have furiously besieged the Israeli consulate in Istanbul with choruses of "Allahu Akbar", and carrying posters with venomous messages of hatred toward Israel.

"We should cancel all our agreements," a young man called Bunyamin told me. "Israel can never be our friend - it's our greatest enemy."

Events in Israel and the Palestinian territories are part of the explanation.

Sense of betrayal

The Israeli operation against Gaza at the end of 2008 provoked widespread anger around the world, but the reaction from Turkey was stronger than most.


Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan famously stormed off the stage at the World Economic Forum in Davos, accusing an astonished President Peres, who had been sharing the platform with him, of "knowing well how to kill".

It turned Mr Erdogan into an instant hero in many Arab cities, but also back home in Turkey.

Lashing out at Israeli injustice looked like a vote-winner.

As it happens, Mr Erdogan's outburst was partly driven by a sense of personal betrayal, say Turkish officials.

For weeks before the Gaza operation he had been patiently mediating between Israel and Syria, even at one point sending out an aide to buy a cigar at the request of the Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, despite being a passionate anti-smoker.

He felt he was earning the trust of both countries. But when Israeli forces launched Operation Cast Lead, Turkey got no advance warning, and Mr Erdogan felt badly let down.

The bigger picture, though, is the change in Turkish society, a change which has been going on for decades.

After the declaration of the Turkish republic by Mustafa Kemal Ataturk in 1923, displays of Islamic piety were strongly discouraged as inimical to Ataturk's modernising mission.

Turkey's secular state institutions, including the powerful military, have long had the upper hand.

But in recent years devout Muslims have felt a lot more comfortable showing their piety, most visibly in their clothing, like women's headscarves, and organising themselves with like-minded Muslims.

They have become a powerful constituency - around half the population considers itself devoutly religious.

They have helped win Mr Erdogan's Justice and Development Party a record two majorities in parliament.

And he considers himself one of them; a man who openly admits he feels far more comfortable mixing with Muslims than non-Muslims.

The Turkish charity IHH, which led the latest attempt to break the blockade of Gaza, has thrived on these changes in Turkish society.

Founded in the 1990s, it involved itself in the big Islamic causes of the day, like assisting Muslims caught in the conflicts in Bosnia and Chechnya.

At times its activities aroused the suspicion of the Turkish authorities, and it has been accused by Israel of openly supporting militant Islamic movements such as Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood.

But its energetic championing of the Palestinian cause, in particular the plight of people in Gaza, has struck a chord with many Turks.

A large crowd gathered beside the Bosphorus to see off the Mavi Marmara, the ship the IHH chartered to lead the convoy to Gaza, and it was widely covered by the Turkish media.

So when news of the violent confrontation with Israeli forces on board the ship came - a confrontation filmed by Turkish journalists - the shock was widely felt here.

The Turkish government gave no official support to the convoy, but made it clear it backed the IHH mission.

Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu said he had been trying through diplomatic pressure to get the convoy through to Gaza.

Many Turks believe the IHH gets plenty of unofficial support from sympathisers within the governing party.

The result is that Turkey finds itself embroiled in the most serious diplomatic rift with Israel in their shared history, with Turkish citizens believed to make up most of the dead and injured.

It is the dramatic culmination of a steady downgrading of relations with Israel, as Turkey has sought warmer ties with its once estranged neighbours, Syria, Iraq and Iran.

But it is also the culmination of changing attitudes in Turkish society, a large part of which is now more overtly Islamic in its identity and its view of the world than at any time in the country's 87-year history.
 
Israel already lost its ally Turkey when Islamists took over the control of turkey. Entire flotilla drama is just an excuse for Turkish Islamists to cut off relation with Israel.
 
Israel already lost its ally Turkey when Islamists took over the control of turkey. Entire flotilla drama is just an excuse for Turkish Islamists to cut off relation with Israel.

innocent people died on that ship, and some pakistani when he said that terror attack on mumbai was a drama, and indians there were jumping and saying, he has no sympathetic feeling for the dead????
 
Turkey is a double-headed snake (play double).

Don't forget Turkey is a major of NATO.

lol pls try to understand a little bit more

Being in NATO doesn't have anything to do with problems with Israel

You should read a little bit about history before making such easy comment:
why Turkey is in NATO? Turkey was neutral during WWII and it was choicie between influence of Soviets or West. And... you should understand that Staline wanted an important part of Turkey !!! Constantinople ....

It is not easy for a so great country with a big history to be eaten like this. We know this in Iran too. But Turkey had to keep their territories and identity and NATO helped them to not loose any more part of the country and identity.
 
Israel already lost its ally Turkey when Islamists took over the control of turkey. Entire flotilla drama is just an excuse for Turkish Islamists to cut off relation with Israel.

The AKP are not Islamists as they have officially declared their policy to maintain Turkey as a secular state.

On the other hand Israel is ruled by a coalition of right wing and religious fanatic parties like Likud and Yisrael Beiteinu, it is their attitude that has cost Israel dearly.
 
Turkey and Israel: The broken alliance

DAMASCUS - Depending on who one listens to in the Middle East, Turkish-Israeli relations are either very much repairable or have reached a point of no return after the killing of nine Turkish citizens on board the Free Gaza flotilla off the shores of Gaza last month.

A best-case scenario would be for Israel to try and fix the mess resulting from the affair through a basket of political gestures, while a worst-case scenario would be war between the two countries.

War, though, is not on anybody's mind except for a few sensational journalists in the Arab world.

Some in Israel, like Alon Liel, who for many years served as his country's ambassador to Turkey, are nevertheless worried about where things might lead. After the flotilla affair Liel said, "They have already called the Turkish ambassador back to Ankara. I hope very much that this incident will not lead to breaking the diplomatic link. This link has existed for 61 years without interruption and it will be a very severe blow to Israel's international standing if this link will be broken."

Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman spoke with a very different tone, furious with his government for releasing the prisoners onboard the flotilla without bringing them before an Israeli court, and saying Israel was too "soft" on Turkey. His stance was challenged by Defense Minister Ehud Barak, who raised a red flag that common ground between two countries that had been allied since 1948 had disappeared.

Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan is definitely in no mood to reconcile. He cut short a visit to Chile, withdrew his ambassador from Israel and cancelled joint military drills with the Israel Defense Forces (IDF). In angry statements from the Turkish parliament, he accused Israel of "state terrorism", while bidding farewell during a speech in the Turkish city of Konya to the Turkish civilians killed onboard the Mavi Marmara. Erdogan said, "If the entire world has turned its back on the Palestinians, Turkey will never turn its back on Jerusalem and the Palestinians."

He said the two peoples were bound by destiny - "a destiny that binds Jerusalem, Ramallah, Hebron and Bethlehem to Ankara," saying "if the world becomes silent over Gaza, Turkey will never be silent."

As far as the Israelis are concerned, these are strong words that echo what has been said in the past, by Egyptian president Gamal Abdul Nasser in the 1950s and 1960s, and by Hasan Nasrallah of Hezbollah since the mid-1990s.

Annoyed as the Israelis are, two weeks into the crisis they have still not recalled their ambassador from Ankara, nor have they called off a military deal with the Turkish army worth US$180 million.

The Turkish parliament has for its part, however, called for an overall review of political, economic, and military ties between Turkey and Israel. Turkish President Abdullah Gul, speaking to the Conference on Interaction and Confidence Building Measures in Asia on June 8, said, "Turkey will not let Israel escape its responsibilities," noting that the Israeli government must feel the pain of its mistake over the Gaza flotilla incident.

One creative way to solve the crisis would be to lift the two-year siege of Gaza, which Erdogan time and again has said is crucial for any improvement of relations with the Israelis.

Given the mood in Israel, that seems unlikely in the near future, despite pressure from the Quartet - the United Nations, the United States, the European Union and Russia - and international community to gradually reduce the siege with a view to ending and replacing it with international observers.

There are heavyweights in Israel like Ambassador Liel who are pushing strongly for jumpstarting peace talks between Syria and Israel, under Turkish supervision, which had been called off by Damascus in December 2008, during the IDF war on Gaza.

Since then, both the Syrians and Turks have said that they are ready for indirect talks, but Israel has repeatedly said no, claiming that the Turks are no longer honest brokers in the Middle East for having clearly taken sides with Hamas, Hezbollah and Syria.

If Israel accepts the Turkish mediation role - something that Ankara has strongly pushed for since 2008, then boiling tension would certainly soften. More importantly, Israel needs a major public relations campaign to help polish its image in the eyes of ordinary Turks, who whether Islamist or secular are appalled by what happened with the the Gaza flotilla.

Those who realize how important trade, for example, has been between both countries are pushing in this direction from within the Israeli business community. Bilateral trade between both countries reached US$2.5 billion in 2009, regardless of the political tension resulting from the war on Gaza and Erdogan's famous outburst against Israeli President Shimon Peres at Davos.
Sources in Turkey are now saying that their government is no longer interested in extending the Russian Blue Stream pipeline, a major trans-Black Sea pipeline that carries natural gas from Russia to Turkey.

Turkey and Israel have a long history of secretive military cooperation going back to the 1950s. Turkish commentators used to refer to it as "the ghostly alliance". In 1996, the two countries signed an agreement allowing Israeli pilots to train in Turkish airspace in return for which Israel refurbished Turkish military aircraft and provided hi-tech equipment. Since Erdogan's rise to power in 2002, the influence of the Turkish military over the country's civilian leadership has declined.

Simply put, although military relations have not been severed, political relations are damaged almost beyond repair at this stage. The Turks no longer trust Israel. It would be a mistake to trace the entire crisis to the flotilla incident, however, since signs of a confidence collapse between both countries have been evident for nearly two years.

In late 2008, when mediating indirect talks between Syria and Israel, for example, Erdogan was certain that a breakthrough was within reach but was worried by all talk of an upcoming confrontation in Gaza.

Israeli premier Ehud Olmert arrived in Turkey on December 22 and was asked by his Turkish counterpart if there was any merit to these "rumors". Olmert said that war would not break out in Gaza. Five days later it did, prompting Erdogan to snap in front of Peres in January 2009: "President Peres, you are old, and your voice is loud out of a guilty conscience. When it comes to killing, you know very well how to kill. I know well how you hit and kill children on beaches."

An easy argument would be that the Israelis no longer trust the Turks. The Israeli media have been filled with stories about how Erdogan received Hamas leader Khaled Meshaal in Turkey in 2004 and yet refused to meet then-prime minister Ariel Sharon. They point to all the statements fired off by senior Turkish officials and the Turkish media against Israel since mid-2008, arguing that Turkey needs to change before any real improvement takes place.

Erdogan has been in power for seven years. Anybody who expects him to change - or to pursue a path vis-a-vis Israel that looks like anything related to moves taken by predecessors like Jalal Bayar, for example, have no understanding either of the Turkish prime minister, his Justice and Development Party, or of the 80 million people he represents.

As long as Erdogan is in power, Turkish-Israeli relations as we know them are history. Particular gestures, like lifting the siege of Gaza or jumpstarting talks with Syria, could help heal some of the wounds, but the psychological and moral damage caused by the blood of nine Turkish civilians is not likely to heal while Benjamin Netanyahu is in power in Israel.

Sami Moubayed is editor-in-chief of Forward Magazine in Syria.
 
The AKP are not Islamists ..


The AKP’s Islamist Roots

Why should U.S. or European officials worry about Turkey’s future under the AKP? The AKP eschews the Islamist label and describes itself as a conservative or center-right party. Its roots, however, are religious. On November 21, 1994, while mayor of Istanbul, Erdoğan said ,“Thank God almighty, I am a servant of Shari‘a [Islamic law].” He later described himself as “the imam of Istanbul.”[2]

The AKP grew out of Necmettin Erbakan’s Welfare Party (Refah Partisi), an Islamist party founded in 1993. On June 28, 1996, Erbakan became Turkey’s first Islamist prime minister, but because his party held just 158 of a total 550 seats in parliament, he had only limited power to implement his agenda. Still, he pushed too far. Pressured by a military establishment upset with both his outreach to Libya and Iran and also by his support for religious schools, Erbakan resigned after just less than a year. There would be no Refah comeback. On January 16, 1998, Turkey’s Constitutional Court (Anayasa Mahkemesi) banned the party, a decision subsequently upheld by the European Court of Human Rights.[3]

Refah members, including Erdoğan, regrouped under the Virtue Party (Fazilet Partisi) banner. Many retained their jobs, but judicial action soon forced Erdoğan to resign the mayoralty. On April 21, 1998, a security court in the city of Diyarbakir sentenced Erdoğan to ten months’ imprisonment for inciting religious hatred at a December 5, 1997, rally. After he exhausted his appeals, he served four months in prison.

Fazilet fared no better than Refah. Its platform and operations contravened the constitution. On June 22, 2001, the Constitutional Court banned the party, citing its antisecular activities. Its members went in two directions: on July 20, 2001, Erbakan founded the Felicity Party (Saadet Partisi) to provide a haven for trenchant Islamists willing to compete within the political system but unwilling to compromise their public platform. Erdoğan founded the AKP on August 14, 2001, to provide a base for more flexible alumni of the Refah and Fazilet.

It proved an astute move. While many Turks did not share the religious agenda of Refah or Fazilet, they still sought alternatives untainted by the corruption scandals plaguing mainstream parties. Erdoğan’s toned-down rhetoric was attractive. The AKP dominated the November 3, 2002, parliamentary elections. Against a backdrop of economic malaise, the electorate punished the five incumbent parties, none of which surpassed the 10 percent threshold necessary to take seats in parliament. The AKP won 34.3 percent of the vote, and the center-left Republican People’s Party (Cumhuriyet Halk Partisi, also known as CHP), Turkey’s oldest political party which had not been represented in the previous parliament, won 19.4 percent. Because no other party surpassed the 10 percent threshold necessary to enter parliament, the AKP took two-thirds of the seats, enough to overcome presidential vetoes, and the largest bloc in parliament since the inauguration of multiparty democracy in Turkey.[4]

Erdoğan could not initially share in his party’s success. Because his 1998 conviction made him ineligible for a seat, his close aide Abdullah Gül assumed the premiership. The AKP used its supermajority both to amend the Law on the Election of Deputies and to overturn a subsequent presidential veto in order to enable Erdoğan to run in a March 9, 2003, by-election in the southeastern town of Siirt--ironically the site of the 1997 rally which led to his imprisonment. He won a landslide victory and five days later became prime minister.

Did the AKP Mortgage Turkey’s Economic Future?

The AKP had a lengthy honeymoon. While in the five years prior to the AKP’s inauguration Turkey’s currency depreciated from 200,000 to 1.7 million Turkish lira to the dollar, under Erdoğan’s administration the currency stabilized and even appreciated a bit. Stabilization enabled the government to reissue its currency, dropping six zeros and boosting the economic psyche of a country long beset by runaway inflation. Whereas the AKP might claim 25 percent of Turkey’s population as ideological constituents, it won 42 percent of the vote in the March 28, 2004, municipal elections.[5] Four of Turkey’s five largest cities--Istanbul, Ankara, Konya, and Bursa--now have AKP mayors.

AKP financial stewardship may be less than meets the eye. Rather than base reform on sound, long-term policies, the Erdoğan administration has turned more toward short-term sleight of hand. Turkish businessmen are worried.[6] Two problems underlie the AKP’s management of the economy: debt and an opaque influx of Islamist capital.

Islamist investment has grown concurrent with the AKP’s rise. On November 7, 2005, Kürşad Tüzmen, the state minister for foreign trade, announced that Sheikh Khalifa bin Zayid al-Nuhayyan, ruler of the United Arab Emirates, would invest $100 billion in Turkish companies.[7] On October 9, 2006, Muhammad al-Hussaini, the Saudi ambassador in Ankara, said that trade between Saudi Arabia and Turkey would double, and might even triple, over the coming year.[8]

Islamizing Education and the Judiciary

While Erdoğan has said his views have evolved from his days in Refah,[23] his tactics have changed more than his agenda. He has used the AKP supermajority to erode the institutions and mechanisms at the heart of Turkish secularism.

His actions often contradict his rhetoric. He has endorsed, for example, the dream of Turkey’s secular elite to enter the European Union,[24] but only so far as to enact reforms demanded by Brussels to dilute the role of the military, which traditionally serves as guardian of the Turkish constitution.

Erdoğan is less tolerant of European influence when it counters attempts to forward an Islamist social agenda. After the European Court of Human Rights upheld a decision backing the ban on headscarves in public schools, he complained, “It is wrong that those who have no connection to this field [of religion] make such a decision . . . without consulting Islamic scholars.”[25] In May 2006, his chief negotiator for European Union accession talks ordered state officials to remove a position paper reference defining Turkey’s educational system as secular.[26]

Education is a hot-button issue. Traditionally, Turkish students had three choices for their secondary education: they could enroll at so-called Imam Hatip religious schools and enter the clergy; they could enter vocational schools to study a trade; or they could matriculate at secular high schools, enter university, and then move into either the public or private sectors. Erdoğan changed the system: by equating Imam Hatip degrees with high school degrees, he enabled Islamist students to enter university and qualify for government jobs, despite never having mastered Western fundamentals.[27]

Whereas Turkey once regulated supplemental Koranic schools--where students can augment their study of Islam beyond what is taught in public schools--to avoid indoctrination of young children by Saudi-funded scholars, the AKP-dominated parliament has not only loosened limits on age and permissible hours of attendance, but also eviscerated the penalties.[28] One Turkish newspaper even ran an exposé showing illegal Koran schools advertising openly in local newspapers.[29] The number of Koran schools in Turkey now exceeds 60,000, ten times the number in 1995.[30]

Erdoğan has undermined the system in other ways. After the Higher Education Board, composed of university rectors, rejected attempts to make Turkish universities more welcoming of political Islam, Turkish police twice arrested his chief opponent, the rector of Yüzüncü Yıl University in the eastern city of Van, on spurious grounds. The courts dismissed him in both cases. Then, over the objections of Turkey’s president, the AKP-dominated parliament proposed a bill to found fifteen new universities, a move which would allow Erdoğan to handpick new rectors.[31]

An equally great a threat to Turkish secularism has been Erdoğan’s interference in the judiciary. Just as U.S. president Franklin Delano Roosevelt once tried to stack the Supreme Court by augmenting his power of appointment, so too has the prime minister. At Erdoğan’s insistence and over the objections of many Turkish liberals, the AKP passed legislation to lower the mandatory retirement age of technocrats, enabling the prime minister, in theory, to replace nearly 4,000 out of 9,000 judges.[32]

The AKP’s willingness to run roughshod over the judiciary is real. In May 2005, parliamentary speaker Bülent Arinç warned that the AKP might abolish the Constitutional Court if its judges continued to hamper his legislation.[33] More than a year later, Nuri Ok, the Supreme Court of Appeals chief prosecutor, chided the AKP for its attempts to interfere in the judiciary.[34] Erdoğan’s refusal to implement Supreme Court decisions levied against the government underlines his contempt for rule-of-law.[35]

In the past year, the AKP has moved more boldly to impose an anti-Western agenda. AKP-run municipalities have begun to ban alcohol in conformity with Islamic precepts.[36] The Ministry of Health surveyed employees about their religious beliefs,[37] and Turkish Airlines recently surveyed employees about their attitudes toward the Koran.[38]

Investment is healthy and should be welcome. The problem, which Turkish commentators refer to as Yeşil Sermaye (“Green Money”), is the opacity of Islamic investment. While Turkish politicians, journalists, and even banking officials acknowledge the influx of capital, it remains largely in the informal economy, subsidizing party coffers, slush funds, and perhaps political allies. The opacity--and the fact that the money appears linked to AKP stewardship--also raises questions about conditionality: is investment in Turkey contingent upon AKP efforts to draw the country away from its Western orientation and more into the Islamic sphere?

AEI - Will Turkey Have an Islamist President?
 
@sraja

Are you here to read and understand or just copy and paste articles.

Can you define to me what you mean by "Islamist"?

As I said before AKP has said that it will strive and maintain the secular nature of Turkey.

Allowing women to wear headscarves is a welcome step towards a secular state that provides freedom and equality to all religions. In India this is how secularism is practiced. The French style secularism of oppressing religious freedom or of banning headscarves and the like is contrary to secular values of equality to religion.

An the article published by some policy group is biased and I can give similar examples of Bush and other American president emphaiszing their Chrisitian belief and belief in God as well as leaders of other countries including India. Belief in God does not mean that you are moving away from the secular foundation of the country.

So look at the actions of AKP, it has only finally given equal rights for practicing muslims, something that has been suppressed in Turkey for the last 70-80 years in the guise of secularism. Muslims in Turkey did'nt have the rights that muslims in the US, UK and India has, for example wearing headscarves to university. Just because they finally corrected this anomaly does not make them "Islamist" --i.e. some advocating formation of an Islamic state where sharia rules will be enforced top down. Not one action of AKP shows that.
 
EjazR, I am not saying AKP or Erdogen is Islamist just because they allowed women to wear headscarves. Did you read AKP's islamist roots, his governments attempt to Islamizing Education, Judiciary and ergogen's pro-islamic rants ? He even received ten months’ imprisonment for inciting religious hatred. Some of his rants,

“Mosques are our barracks, domes our helmets, minarets our bayonets, believers our soldiers.” – RTE, 6 December 1997
“Democracy is not an aim but a means to an end.” – RTE
“We will turn all our schools into İmam Hatips [religious schools]” — RTE, Sept. 9, 1994
“Thank God Almighty, I am a servant of the Shari‘a.”— RTE, Nov. 21, 1994
“I am the imam of Istanbul.” — RTE, Jan. 8, 1995
Erdogan AKP Watch

Don't tell me his party is secular. His actions doesn't support that. Turkey has changed lot since Imam of Istanbul took over.
 
First of all you need to learn arabic/turkish and an understanding of turkish culture.

Did you know that Imam means leader? He is saying that he is the leader of Istabul. Do you know what Imam Hatips are? They are faith based schools where even science and maths are taught.
And please clarify what is RTE? Is that a Turkish newspaper? OR something like MEMRI, that does selective translations to propagandize against arabs and muslims. What are the contexts of these quotes, what did he say before what did he say after.

I have followed AKP for a long time so I know their history.

As I said before American presidents, UK prime ministers and even Indian prime ministers invoke religion as personal values. Just a quotation of Bush invoking God and his religion should be enough to show how US presidents "rants" are far me more religious oriented than Erdogan.

List me the actions that have changed the secular status of Turkey which would be any different to say the US or Indian secular status.

Like I said before Turkish government before OPPRESSED practicing muslims. His going to jail is part of that phenomenon. Will you condemn the Turkish practice of banning women wearing headscarves from university? He amended that law and allowed thousands of women a chance to go to university free from religious discrimination.Erdogan has done nothing different from other secular countries like US or India. List me any amendment in law or institution that would indicate he wanted Islam to be state religion.

Anyways, the topic is more to do with Israeli-Turkish relations than wether AKP is Islamist or not. Read their manifesto and that should be the final word on what they stand for.
 
Why do you guys think that Turkey is changing sides? Israeli Soldiers killed 9 Turks in a turkish Ship. You want us to be silent? Why is EU wondering about this "Change" ? If they don't even want us in the EU..
 
lol pls try to understand a little bit more

Being in NATO doesn't have anything to do with problems with Israel

You should read a little bit about history before making such easy comment:
why Turkey is in NATO? Turkey was neutral during WWII and it was choicie between influence of Soviets or West. And... you should understand that Staline wanted an important part of Turkey !!! Constantinople ....

It is not easy for a so great country with a big history to be eaten like this. We know this in Iran too. But Turkey had to keep their territories and identity and NATO helped them to not loose any more part of the country and identity.


Unless Turkey withdraw NATO

I don't see Turkey will terminate alliance with Israel.
 
@EjazR,
You arguments are some of the best, logical arguments I have seen by you. I will respond later about this topic.
Kudos.
 
Back
Top Bottom