Russia as the New Power Broker in the Mideast - C. Hart

by C. Hart

The Israelis are concerned that in Obama’s last days as president, after U.S. elections in November, and before the next American president enters the White House, he will align himself with those pushing the French Initiative

The massive ten-year U.S. military aid package successfully negotiated between the White House and Israel, proves America’s continued commitment to Israel’s security. It ensures Israel’s QME (Qualitative Military Edge) over its enemies. And, provides U.S President Barack Obama with an incentive that Israeli leaders are worried about… a way of leveling the Middle East playing field.

The Israelis are concerned that in Obama’s last days as president, after U.S. elections in November, and before the next American president enters the White House, he will align himself with those pushing the French Initiative -- a peace plan proposed this week that would require Israel to retreat to its pre-1967 borders. Another possibility is that Obama could decide to formulate an American paper, or come alongside a European country formulating such a paper, that would be presented to the UN Security Council setting definitive borders for a two-state solution. Adding a specific demand that Israel cease settlement expansion, in line with UN Secretary Ban Ki-Moon’s rebuke of Israel recently, could result in limited maneuverability for the Jewish State within diplomatic circles.  

Weighing options of how to move the peace process forward, without having to submit to American or European expectations, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu recently agreed, in principle, to meet with Palestinian Authority Mahmoud Abbas in Moscow. If it actually happens, it will be the first direct meeting between the two leaders in six years. 

Netanyahu has spent the past year developing a relationship with Russian President Vladimir Putin, mainly because of his military intervention in Syria, but also because of Russia’s overall increased presence and influence in the Middle East. Russia has filled a void resulting from America’s diminished authority in the region. Many observers have already noticed that Putin has sought to replace America’s superpower status, taking up the position of the new Middle East powerbroker. He seems more interested in that role than the results of future peace negotiations. 

 According to Dan Diker, a Project Director and Fellow at the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, Netanyahu would prefer to have Putin as a mediating host because the vital issues for Israel may be easier to secure with the Russians.

“I think that Moscow provides a more comfortable address for Netanyahu because the Russians appear to be less concerned with the issue of final borders between Israel and the Palestinian Authority than the current U.S. Administration.”

Putin may not insist that Israel provide refuge to thousands, perhaps millions, of Palestinians that want to live in Israel as part of their “right of return”. He may not expect Israel to withdraw to the pre-1967 line as the Palestinians have demanded. And, he may not try and pressure Israel into dividing its capital city, Jerusalem. It seems that Putin’s greater interest is in playing a strong and active role in Syria, as well as along the Lebanese border.

Furthermore, Diker sees Israel’s diplomatic ties with Moscow as a way of countering whatever plans may emanate from the White House.

“It can create leverage for Israel because Russia sits as a permanent member of the UN Security Council. They could influence other permanent and non-permanent members away from an American paper that would recognize the Palestinian pre-state authority as a member state. Perhaps, the U.S. would lay out American parameters for some sort of final status. There are indications that this could happen in the next few months, beginning this month when the UN General Assembly meets. It would not be good for Israel or the Palestinian Authority.”

Diker explains that Obama has indicated by his statements and actions on the Palestinian-Israeli issue over the past eight years that he believes he can establish a viable Palestinian state. “And, he has in that context, favored Palestinian sovereignty, even at a time when the Palestinian Authority and the Palestinian leadership are in complete chaos and disarray.” 

All this points to a strategic decision by Israel to accept a new principle, the idea of talking to Abbas under Russian stewardship and mediation. “We already had the America mediation two years ago with Kerry, and it fell flat on its face,” says Diker. 

He adds that the French approach is dangerous and unworkable. “The French want a place of leadership in the Middle East. Europe has been shunned by both sides, recently, and they want to play a lead role. It is completely outside Israel’s interest.” 

Netanyahu had to find another way forward.

“He has several options: perhaps, an Egyptian-sponsored initiative, or a Jordanian-sponsored initiative. Or, he can go to Russia because Russia would place much less pressure on Israel to accept indefensible borders.”

At this point, the idea of a Moscow summit between Israel and the Palestinians is only speculative. It is not clear that either side really wants to meet. Diker’s perception is that, “This is only to create other options aside from the American approach. Or, perhaps deter the Americans from bringing their own peace initiative to the UN.”

This writer asked Diker how meeting face-to-face with Netanyahu benefits Abbas or the Palestinians.

“I don’t think that entering into negotiations with Netanyahu will benefit Abbas. He is at the end of his career, and well into his 80’s. He wants to leave a legacy as a Palestinian leader who gave up nothing. However, there is so much pressure on him from the West, he is going to have to accept something.”

There are still conditions being placed on the Israelis, apparently coming from the Palestinian side, about a settlement freeze, as well as demands for releasing Palestinian prisoners from Israeli jails. But, Netanyahu has only agreed to meet Abbas if there are no preconditions.

“I would be unsurprised if these are conditions that were supported by the American side; including the cessation of settlement building, which basically has happened anyway.” Diker is referring to what has seemed to be Netanyahu’s placid willingness to sidestep construction approval for new settlement building in the West Bank (Judea and Samaria). 

Meanwhile, the process of inviting Russia in, as a possible new Middle East powerbroker to replace the role of the U.S., is significant. This advancement comes on the heels of a meeting between Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi and Putin. Egypt and Russia have been forging closer ties, while Israel is also improving ties with Egypt.

Diker cited reasons for these new alliances, one of which is that, “The Egyptians are profoundly concerned and unhappy with the Obama administration. It seems clear to the Egyptians that Obama actively encouraged Mubarak’s ouster, and then supported the term and the rule of former Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi.” 

When the Egyptian military helped overthrow Morsi, the U.S. government held up military assistance to Egypt. So, in a time of uncertainty, Egypt looked to Russia to fill in the gap. 

Putin is making other significant advances in the Middle East, militarily and diplomatically. America’s failure to go through with a no-fly zone in Syria hurt its credibility, especially with neighboring Arab states. Today, America’s freedom of action in Syria is constrained, and its influence over the Assad government minimal. Instead, U.S. forces have to pay attention to Russia’s advanced weapons capabilities in Syria, and avoid confrontation. 

Due to a major military intervention in Syria on President Assad’s behalf, Russia secured a military footprint in the country. This advantageous move by Putin has forced America to reckon with his demand that Assad stay in power in a transitional government under a future peace agreement between Assad and Syrian opposition groups. While America’s influence wanes in the region, Egypt, Israel, Turkey, and Saudi Arabia are looking to Russia as a new formidable regional power. 

Netanyahu recognizes the shift, and it is in Israel’s current strategic interest to maintain a relationship with Putin, even though Russia has the capability of striking military targets in Israel at some future time. For now, however, Netanyahu has been looking for a new peace path. 

Diker recognizes that, currently, Russia is the winning horse. Putin has a warm feeling for Israel because of the over 1.2 million Russians in Israel, which is the largest ex-pat community outside of Russia. 

A main interest for Israel is keeping the Iranians and their Shiite proxy forces away from Israel’s northern border, and Russia has influence there.

“This is an Israeli attempt to reshuffle the cards; and, to continue maintaining a much closer relationship with Russia, because of its interest in the north. Remember Russia will affect, in a very serious way, what happens with Hezbollah, and what happens on the Israel-Syrian border, all of which is connected to Iran.”

Diker says that Russian mediation would give breathing space to Israel in the context of diplomatic conversations with the Palestinian Authority.

But, there are obstacles in the road for any kind of progress in peace between the two sides, such as:  Palestinian infighting in Gaza and the West Bank over future Palestinian elections; Abbas cast as a servant of Israel and the West by radical elements in Palestinian circles; and, a peace process that has wide gaps which have not been resolved over the years, causing cynicism on both sides.

Diker, himself, thinks it is unlikely that Russia will successfully do what past U.S. administrations could not. He does not believe that there will be serious progress with Russian mediation. “This is all pyrotechnics. It has nothing to do with serious peace making. It has nothing to do with real Palestinian-Israeli diplomacy. It all has to do with smoke and mirrors.”

In the meantime, all eyes are on Russia in the region, as Putin looks to assert himself as a major Middle East power player and negotiator. He will continue to find opportunities to advance Russia’s interests, while reaching out his hand to Israel and Arab states. At the same time, he will not hesitate to use Russian military and political power on terrorist organizations or state entities that get in the way of his strategic plans.


C. Hart

Source: http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2016/09/russia_as_the_new_power_broker_in_the_mideast.html

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

Good Walls Make Good Neighbors - Daniel Greenfield

by Daniel Greenfield

Instead of bringing countries together, open borders create conflicts.

The UK is building a wall to keep the denizens of the Calais "Jungle" migrant camp from invading cars and trucks after some 22,000 breaches of the port road. The “Jungle” is a nightmare for the local population which has been terrorized by the mob of migrants aspiring to invade the UK.

The French have blamed the British and the British have blamed the French. But the migrant invasion is not the fault of either alone. In a sense it is the fault of everyone in the European Union.

Merkel’s open invitation to a migrant invasion occasioned the same round of finger-pointing, often, as with the Calais crisis, not at those countries that let the migrants in, but those who did not wish to take them in. Eastern European countries were most frequently blamed for not doing their “share” to maintain the wonderful open borders which required accepting anyone wandering through them.

Instead of bringing countries together, open borders create conflicts.

The Schengen Area didn’t unite Europe. Even before the mob of Muslim migrants arrived, the ability of foreign workers to just show up in the UK was generating some of the tensions that led to Brexit.

The biggest source of tension between America and Mexico remains the open border. Not only is the open border bad for America, but it’s bad for Mexico. As profitable as the remittances might be, the cost of the cartels and migrants drawn to that border end up offsetting it.

What globalists fail to understand is that good walls really do make for better neighbors. Countries with walls may occasionally invade each other, but a lack of walls means that the invasion never stops. Walls are torn down in the name of peace, but the lack of walls is what makes peace impossible.

In war, a bunch of foreigners show up to take your entire way of life. The citizens of countless countries are asking whether this is really any different than the peace offered by the borderless world.

When countries control their own borders, they can negotiate an end to conflicts. But when they don’t, all they can do is assign blame. In the absence of the state, borders and nations are recreated by mass migration. The millions of Muslims invading Europe are but one example. There has been a similar mass movement out of Africa along the Middle East for some time. The end result isn’t integration, but tribalism. The borderless world was meant to banish tribalism, but instead it’s stronger than ever.

Tribalism does not go away when you eliminate borders. The ability to limit tribal conflicts does.

Think of Muslim terror as a tribal conflict. Migration transports the tribal violence that convulses Syria, Afghanistan and Iraq into our societies. The inevitable outcome is that tribalism is met with tribalism.

Republics can rise above tribalism only when they keep hostile tribes at bay. Enough empty idealism, enough lost jobs and enough bodies in the street and the republic falls and the tribe rises. Instead of transcending the nation state, open borders are more likely to revive it on new and different terms.

Current political developments in America and Europe have conclusively disproven the notion that eliminating borders also eliminates conflict. Obama likes to preach about the inevitable victory of his “right side of history”. Do Brexit and Trump look anything like his right side of history?

History has cycles rather than sides. Instead of coming to the end of history with a world government, the left has resurrected the old conflict between nomadic migrants and settled farmers. The farmer works the land. He learns skills and eventually produces a settled civilization. The nomad is barely literate. He has few skills, except those of crude violence, he overruns civilizations and sucks dry their resources and then goes on his way. This is what much of our clash of civilizations really looks like.

The grand effort at world peace has led to our civilization fighting marauding nomads in the street.

That is what happens when you make the mistake of thinking that borders keep you from making friends with the people on the other side, when they actually help prevent you from becoming enemies.

Fences and border markers among farmers avert land disputes. They keep squatters off your land. They embody the function of the law which is to prevent conflicts by making everyone’s responsibilities clear.

Eliminate them and you also eliminate rights and responsibilities and invite conflict.

A borderless world is not an ideal. You wouldn’t want anyone to be able stroll through your kitchen at any given moment. That would be most people’s idea of a nightmare.

A country that anyone can wander into at any given moment is a nightmare. It just takes us longer to realize that because usually it’s not our kitchen that they’re wandering through. And by the time they are wandering through our kitchen, it can often be too late. The troubles begin at the margins. They start in border towns and port cities, in working class neighborhoods that are already blighted.

And it’s easy to dismiss them and pay no attention.

Then suddenly, a decade or two later, 1,400 children have been abused by Muslim sex grooming gangs in Rotherham or ISIS is based in a neighborhood in Brussels. But it’s not suddenly at all. It’s that too many people who wouldn’t let strangers wander through their kitchens weren’t too concerned about who was wandering into border towns in Texas or troubled neighborhoods in Marseille or South Tel Aviv.
It didn’t affect them. Until it did. Or until it will. 

Talk of building walls on the southern border is sneered at. Israel’s separation barrier is a target for hipsters from around the looking to fill their Instagram with theatrical protest pictures. Even Pope Francis made a point of praying at a concrete wall smeared with “Free Palestine” graffiti.

But walls are good things. Walls around our homes don’t just protect property, they protect our identity. It’s having walls that makes living in a house dignified. Dignity comes from having private spaces. Identity depends on our ability to choose who we are and who we are not, as individuals, as communities and as nations.

The European Union is collapsing because it tried to break down too many borders. Many living in the EU feel a loss of control, of identity and even of dignity at the individual and the national levels. Collectivism can make for a temporary heady rush, but it is ultimately demoralizing.

The right side of history is not collectivism, but individualism. To be an individual is to build walls. With walls the individual determines the terms on which he will interact with the wider world. It is these walls which protect him from collectivist impulses. It is these good walls which he can enter or exit on his own terms that set him free.


Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is a New York writer focusing on radical Islam.

Source: http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/264168/good-walls-make-good-neighbors-daniel-greenfield

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

Impervious Hubris: How U.S. Intelligence Failures Led to ISIS - Raymond Ibrahim

by Raymond Ibrahim

The disastrous consequences of Michael Scheuer’s claims that Islamic terror is a product of “grievances."

Originally published by PJ Media.
Raymond Ibrahim is a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center.

A decade after U.S. leadership declared a “war on terror,” all it has to show for it is the creation of the Islamic State—an Islamic body that has taken terror and atrocities to a whole new level.

How did this happen?

A key factor often overlooked is the intelligence community’s failures concerning what fuels the jihadis.

Consider Michael Scheuer, author of the 2004 national bestseller Imperial Hubris: Why the West Is Losing the War on Terror.   Scheuer’s credentials as described in that book are impressive:  “For the past seventeen years, my career has focused exclusively on terrorism, Islamic insurgencies, militant Islam… I have earned my keep and am able to speak with some authority and confidence about Osama bin Laden, al-Qaeda, [and] the dangers they pose and symbolize for the Unites States…”  Indeed, Scheuer also served as Senior Adviser for the Osama Bin Laden Department and Chief of the Sunni Militant Unit.

The fundamental thesis of his book was that al-Qaeda’s terrorism is a reaction to U.S. foreign policies: “Bin Laden has been precise in telling America the reasons he is waging war on us. None of the reasons have anything to do with our freedom, liberty, and democracy, but everything to do with U.S. policies and actions in the Muslim world,” wrote Scheuer.

As proof, he regularly quoted bin Laden’s messages to the West, which did in fact validate Scheuer’s assessment.  He went on to compare bin Laden, that jihadi terrorist, to heroes like Robin Hood and even Saint Francis of Assisi, and concluded that al-Qaeda’s war revolves around “love”:

Bin Laden and most militant Islamists, therefore, can be said to be motivated by their love for Allah and their hatred for a few, specific, U.S. policies and actions they believe are damaging—and threatening to destroy—the things they love. Theirs is a war against a specific target, and for specific, limited purposes. While they will use whatever weapon comes to hand—including weapons of mass destruction—their goal is not to wipe out our secular democracy, but to deter us by military means from attacking the things they love. Bin Laden et al are not eternal warriors.

American liberals, academics, politically correct media, politicians, and government—in a word, the establishment—willingly embraced and regurgitated this Muslim grievance thesis which, while not original to Scheuer, certainly received a boost thanks to his book.

It was in this context that I sought to translate al-Qaeda’s Arabic writings that I discovered in 2004 while working at the Library of Congress.  As opposed to the carefully crafted communiques al-Qaeda was sending to the West—which were presented without context and accepted hook, line, and sinker by many so-called “experts”—these arcane writings were directed to fellow Muslims.  They made perfectly clear al-Qaeda’s ultimate motive in attacking the West: Islam’s commands for Muslims to hate and subjugate the non-Muslim, or “infidel.”

Here’s a sampling of what bin Laden was writing to fellow Muslims, even as he was duping Western analysts with talk of “grievances”:

As to the relationship between Muslims and infidels, this is summarized by the Most High’s Word: “We renounce you. Enmity and hate shall forever reign between us—till you believe in Allah alone.” So there is an enmity, evidenced by fierce hostility from the heart. And this fierce hostility—that is, battle—ceases only if the infidel submits to the authority of Islam, or if his blood is forbidden from being shed [i.e., a dhimmi], or if Muslims are at that point in time weak and incapable [in which case, bin Laden later clarifies, they should dissemble (taqiyya) before the infidels by, say, portraying their violence as a product of “grievances”]. But if the hate at any time extinguishes from the heart, this is great apostasy!… Such, then, is the basis and foundation of the relationship between the infidel and the Muslim. Battle, animosity, and hatred—directed from the Muslim to the infidel—is the foundation of our religion (The Al Qaeda Reader, p. 43).

Bin Laden also asked and answered the pivotal question:

Does Islam, or does it not, force people by the power of the sword to submit to its authority corporeally if not spiritually? Yes. There are only three choices in Islam: either willing submission; or payment of the jizya [tribute], through physical though not spiritual submission to the authority of Islam; or the sword—for it is not right to let him [an infidel] live.

How does one square such clear assertions with Scheuer’s claims that “None of the reasons [for al-Qaeda’s antipathy] have anything to do with our freedom, liberty, and democracy”?  I raised this question in a 2008 article criticizing Scheuer’s claims about al-Qaeda’s motivations.

In response, Scheuer lashed out in the comments section of my article (see my full response to him here).   Instead of acknowledging that al-Qaeda’s own words damned his thesis, the man who insisted Islamic terrorism was a product of “imperial hubris” exhibited a sort of impervious hubris—impervious to facts and reality, that is.  He sarcastically wrote:

Mr. Ibrahim’s Al Qaeda Reader is an excellent example of what passes for solid analysis and intellectual honesty among Neo-conservatives….  In this highly selective collection, Mr. Ibrahim picks and chooses from the enormous corpus of writings, statements, and interviews by bin Laden and al-Zawahiri to produce a slim volume which he claims will once and for all prove that Al Qaeda and its allies are bent on imposing a worldwide Caliphate to be governed by what the Necons are pleased to call Islamo-fascism…  [T]he book deliberately misleads an America public…

For the record, my “slim volume” is 320 pages long.  As for it being a “highly selective collection,” the book is actually the most balanced of its kind, as it presented al-Qaeda’s releases to the West and its exhortations to its Muslim followers.  For example, whereas Bruce Lawrence’s Messages to the World: The Statements of Osama Bin Laden (2005), complemented Scheuer’s grievance paradigm by only presenting al-Qaeda’s propaganda communiques to the West, The Al Qaeda Reader juxtaposes both the terrorist group’s doctrinal writings to fellow Muslims (as quoted above) and its grievance claims to the West, giving the reader a more complete picture.

At any rate, now, a decade later, the “why do they hate us” question has been settled by those best positioned to settle it: the Islamic State, or al-Qaeda 2.0.  In a recent article titled “Why We Hate You & Why We Fight You,” the Islamic State gives six reasons.   Reason number one says it all:

We hate you, first and foremost, because you are disbelievers; you reject the oneness of Allah – whether you realize it or not – by making partners for Him in worship, you blaspheme against Him, claiming that He has a son [Christ], you fabricate lies against His prophets and messengers, and you indulge in all manner of devilish practices. It is for this reason that we were commanded to openly declare our hatred for you and our enmity towards you. “There has already been for you an excellent example in Abraham and those with him, when they said to their people, ‘Indeed, we are disassociated from you and from whatever you worship other than Allah. We have rejected you, and there has arisen, between us and you, enmity and hatred forever until you believe in Allah alone’” (Al-Mumtahanah 4 [i.e., Koran 60:4, the same verse bin Laden quoted above]). Furthermore, just as your disbelief is the primary reason we hate you, your disbelief is the primary reason we fight you, as we have been commanded to fight the disbelievers until they submit to the authority of Islam, either by becoming Muslims, or by paying jizyah – for those afforded this option [“People of the Book”] – and living in humiliation under the rule of the Muslims [per Koran 9:29].

It is only in reasons five and six that ISIS finally mentions “grievances” against Western foreign policies—only to quickly clarify:

What’s important to understand here is that although some might argue that your foreign policies are the extent of what drives our hatred, this particular reason for hating you is secondary, hence the reason we addressed it at the end of the above list. […]  The fact is, even if you were to stop bombing us, imprisoning us, torturing us, vilifying us, and usurping our lands, we would continue to hate you because our primary reason for hating you will not cease to exist until you embrace Islam. Even if you were to pay jizyah and live under the authority of Islam in humiliation, we would continue to hate you [emphasis added].

It is this unrelenting hatred that many Westerners cannot comprehend; a hate that compels Muslim husbands to hate their non-Muslim wives and America’s “friends and allies,” such as Saudi Arabia and Qatar, to publish government sanctioned decrees openly proclaiming their hate for America, because it is not Islamic.

And it was always this hate that fueled al-Qaeda’s jihad—not grievances.

Incidentally, it’s worth noting that in Scheuer’s response to me, he mocked the idea that the caliphate would be resurrected—which I had predicted—claiming that “the Islamists know that it is as unlikely to appear in their or their grandsons’ lifetimes as Christians know that a uniform world of turning-of-the-cheek or loving-thy-neighbor is at best light years over the horizon.”  Likewise in Imperial Hubris he wrote: “At this point in history, we need worry little about the threat of an offensive and expansionist jihad meant to conquer new lands for Islam and convert new peoples to the faith” (page 7).

Really?  Tell that to the many non-Muslims and non-Sunnis—Christians, Yazidis, Druze, Shia—who have been enslaved, raped, slaughtered, burned and buried alive, as the caliphate expanded into their territories over the last couple of years.

All of this was enabled by the West’s embrace of the “grievance” theory, championed not created by the likes of Scheuer.  It ran its course and was behind abysmal policies meant to pacify aggrieved Muslims—such as wholesale support for the “Arab Spring,” which saw the Obama administration turn its back on 30-year-long allies such as Egypt’s secular Mubarak in favor of the Muslim Brotherhood.  The grievance theory is partially responsible for why, a decade after the U.S. started bringing “freedom and democracy” to this and that Muslim nation—Iraq, Egypt, Libya, ongoing in Syria—specifically by ousting secular dictators long experienced at suppressing jihadis, all that the most powerful and freedom loving nation in the world has to show for it is the creation of the Islamic State.

Even so, the impervious hubris continues.  Instead of accepting the hard facts—Islamic hostility is a product of Islamic teachings—the Obama administration, including the CIA, continue invoking the “grievance” and related memes concerning ISIS.  Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton said that it’s important to be “showing respect even for one’s enemies, trying to understand and insofar as psychologically possible, empathize with their perspective and point of view,” that is, empathize with their grievances?

Clinton said this at Georgetown University, which is fitting.  For, you may ask, where is Michael Scheuer now—this man who did not have to wait for our “grandsons’ lifetimes” to see just how much he got wrong?  He’s where all who excel at denying Islam has any connection to violence for the other: teaching a future generation of “terrorism experts” at Georgetown University.

Raymond Ibrahim is a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center, a Judith Friedman Rosen Writing Fellow at the Middle East Forum and a CBN News contributor. He is the author of Crucified Again: Exposing Islam’s New War on Christians (2013) and The Al Qaeda Reader (2007).

Source: http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/264192/impervious-hubris-how-us-intelligence-failures-led-raymond-ibrahim

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

Will Jordan’s Muslim Brotherhood celebrate a historic success? - Aaron Magid

by Aaron Magid

The Hashemite Kingdom is set to hold parliamentary elections this week. Does the new, more modern face of the Brotherhood in Jordan signify a real change of philosophy or is it simply "taqiyya"?

Candidates of the Islamic Front Action party, the Muslim Brotherhood’s political wing, announce their candidacy for the upcoming elections in Amman earlier this month. (photo credit:REUTERS)

AMMAN – Jordan’s Muslim Brotherhood has faced a harsh crackdown this year. In April, Jordanian security forces shut down the offices of the 70-year-old Islamist movement throughout the country and Amman has orchestrated a relentless delegitimization campaign against the Brotherhood, highlighted by King Abdullah II calling the Islamist movement in 2013 a “masonic cult... run by wolves in sheep’s clothing.”

Despite this, amid substantial regime pressure, the Brotherhood is gearing up to participate in the September 20 parliamentary elections. Nominating 19 women, the Brotherhood’s political wing, Islamic Action Front, is joining forces with outside candidates and includes prominent Christian and Circassian nominees, something that would have seemed highly unlikely not long ago.

Mohammad Ersan, editor-in-chief of Balad Radio, explained in an interview that by forming coalitions with Christians and other non-Islamists, the Brotherhood is sending a message to the government that it is interested in cooperating and not dominating the parliament.

Sean Yom, professor of political science at Temple University and Jordan expert, called the Brotherhood’s more inclusive approach very significant.

“It reflects the Islamic Action Front’s realization that they need to be more pragmatic and less ideological in order to maintain their political influence in Jordan,” Yom noted.

In addition to presenting a more moderating image, incorporating minorities and a relatively large number of women is beneficial due to the quota system. Fifteen women along with 10 Christian and Circassians are guaranteed seats in the next legislature (of 130 seats).

The Islamic Action Front has also shifted its campaign strategy in other respects. During previous elections, the party’s main slogans included “Islam is the solution” and “the Koran is our constitution.” But in a recent interview, spokesman Murad Adaileh acknowledged that these slogans would disappear now. Instead, the Brotherhood intends to emphasize issues that appeal to all elements of Jordanian society, such as political reform and restoring citizens’ trust in parliament.

The Brotherhood’s engagement can also be interpreted as a sign of plain pragmatism.

During the previous two parliamentary elections in 2013 and 2010, the Islamic Action Front boycotted the process, due to the absence of genuine political reform.

Given that the government has intensified its repression of the Brotherhood, with the jailing of Brotherhood- affiliated and other journalists continuing, political freedoms have hardly improved in recent years.

In the 2010 elections, prime minister Samir Rifai attempted unsuccessfully to persuade the Islamist party to participate in elections. The party’s participation is significant because by competing on September 20, it lends legitimacy to the Jordanian elections, important for a country so heavily dependent on Western, and particularly American, aid.

EVEN BEFORE the electoral race, the Islamic Action Front demonstrated signs of moderation. Jordan’s Muslim Brotherhood cut its ties with the Egyptian branch in February, showing that the group is principally devoted to the Jordanian state, despite the group’s ideological connections.

Founded in 1945, Jordan’s Muslim Brotherhood has played a critical role in Jordanian society and politics throughout its 70-year existence. As an Islamist party, the Brotherhood has consistently called for an increase in the implementation of Shari’a (Islamic law). The movement is a strong backer of the Palestinian cause in its struggle against Israel. However, during the 1970 uprising led by Palestinians against the Hashemite regime, the Islamic group did not join in the fighting against King Hussein.

The Brotherhood has a long history of working with the regime. In the important 1989 elections, the Islamist party and its allies won approximately one-third of the seats. For decades, Jordan’s Muslim Brotherhood maintained ties with the larger Egyptian branch, which was established in 1928. At the same time, the Islamist group insisted that the Brotherhood sets its own priorities and policies based on the unique situation in Jordan.

Oraib Rantawi, director of the Amman-based Quds Center for Political Studies, explained that for the Islamic Action Front, the elections are an excellent opportunity to “show that it is still the sole legitimate representative of the Islamist movement [in Jordan].”

Last year, a small group from within the Brotherhood split off from the mother organization and received official licensing from the Ministry of Social Development. Adaileh called the move a “coup sponsored by the regime.”

Labib Kamhawi, a Jordanian opposition activist, noted that the new splinter organization is not trusted or supported by the country’s Islamists. A strong performance at the polls for the IAF, in contrast to the anticipated lackluster results for the regime-favored breakaway faction, would highlight the Brotherhood’s popular legitimacy, he said.

LEADING JORDANIAN analysts believe that the Brotherhood will perform relatively well in next week’s race.

Rantawi estimates that the Islamic Action Front will win 18 to 20 seats, three times the number it received in its poor 2007 performance, when the Islamist party secured only six parliamentary representatives.

Veteran Al-Quds Al-Arabi bureau chief Bassam Badarin is expecting even better results for the Brotherhood party in the September 21 competition, with 25 to 30 seats for the Islamic Action Front and its allies.

Given the weakness of other parties, Rantawi asserts that the Islamic Action Front will be the largest opposition bloc in the upcoming legislative session. Because of the government’s crackdown on the Brotherhood, sympathy with the Islamist movement has increased, which has boosted the Islamist party’s popularity, Ersan added.

Due to the long-standing friction between the Brotherhood and Hashemite leadership, Badarin emphasized that the Jordanian regime is worried by the trends indicating a strong Islamist performance. The Brotherhood’s 25-year-long criticism of the country’s ties with Israel, widely shared by most Jordanians, along with its unified oppositional stance in parliament consistently irritate the government, he said.

At the same time, even if the Islamic Action Front and its allies were to win more than 20 seats, their impact on policy would be somewhat limited. The legislature mainly concentrates on domestic issues, while the Royal Court and intelligence services handle sensitive foreign policy and security dilemmas, stressed Rantawi.

But a more organized Brotherhood, speaking from the dome of parliament, would provide them with increased media attention that would intensify public pressure against some of the king’s controversial decisions.

Nonetheless, Badarin cautioned that despite the relatively high hopes for the Brotherhood’s performance in the upcoming race, there is one important caveat. The former intelligence chief admitted to falsifying the 2007 election results in favor of pro-regime candidates, and charges of fraud plagued the last contest in 2013.

In the current race, European Union monitors will spread across Jordan to verify the voting, given the previous accusations of corruption, and the Independent Election Commission has promised transparency.

If the Brotherhood appears to strengthen its parliamentary power, the question remains whether the Jordanian intelligence apparatus will refrain from interfering, given the sides’ long-standing tensions.


Aaron Magid is an Amman-based journalist. @AaronMagid

Source: http://www.jpost.com/Magazine/Ahead-of-elections-in-Jordan-467889

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

A joyous holiday and a sad world - Dr. Mordechai Kedar

by Dr. Mordechai Kedar

Editor's note: The Hajj has already passed - it was celebrated from Sept. 9 to Sept. 14. Perhaps this is why we have been seeing an uptick in seemingly religiously motivated violence in the U.S. recently? (Arutz 7 published this article yesterday, after the Hajj was finished)

Two million Muslims will be making the obligatory pilgrimage to Mecca, known as the Hajj, this month, as mandated by the Islamic calendar. The Hajj is one of the five basic pillars of Islam, a commandment that every Muslim must fulfill at least once in his lifetime.  Muslims from all over the Islamic world come to the Hajj, differing in appearance, skin color, language, dress, culture and customs, but all take part in rituals performed according to the stringent dictates originating in the Hannibal code of law as interpreted by the Wahhabi Saudi regime.

The Hajj symbolizes the ingathering of all Muslims to "The House of Allah," as well as the love and affection that are expected to reign between Muslims and the happiness that unites them in their joint dedication to the service of Allah. The robe worn by the pilgrims - the "ihram" - a white sheath without pockets – signifies the modesty that man must show when coming to the home of his Lord and the absence of pockets proves that all belongs to Allah, that man's property is worth nothing,  is temporary and perishable at best. The fact that the robes are identical and worn by all symbolizes that all are equal before Allah, rich and poor, king and servant, honored and despised. The pristine color of the ihram expresses the forgiveness for transgressions that takes place at the Hajj where every man who repents is cleansed of his sins.

The Hajj is an [sic] wrenching emotional experience, the most massive assembly in the world.  The intensive and crowded meeting with Muslims from a myriad of different cultures, the religious rituals, the speeches and prayers, all turn the Hajj into an ecstatic experience that creates a feeling that believers cannot achieve in other places or occasions. Pilgrims return from the Hajj with glowing eyes, veins suffused with religious adrenaline, heightened religious fervor and renewed and intense loyalty to Allah.

For most of those who return from the Hajj, heightened religious fervor is expressed in adherence to the behaviors that are central to Islam: five prayers a day, fasting during Ramadan charity to the poor, modest dress, proper behavior and speech, avoidance of sins and transgressions and better relations with family and surroundings. Some of those returning from the Hajj interpret their heightened religious intensity as a reason to turn to Jihad, not only against the evil inclination within man's soul but against infidels as well. And thus, not a small number of the Jihadists fighting in various areas were drawn in by representatives of terror groups who come to the Hajj in order to meet those most vulnerable to their efforts.

A massive gathering in an average-sized city like Mecca causes acute safety dangers because of the extreme crowding due to the fact that everyone has to perform the same rites at the same time and on the same day. The Saudi royal household invests enormous sums to build an infrastructure that will allow the crowds to perform the rituals safely, and builds bridges, lanes, passages, sidewalks and roads that create a secure environment for the millions who come to the Hajj.

The Saudi king calls himself "Guardian of the Holy Sites" in order to bestow religious sanctity on himself and his regime. This is the reason he feels responsible for arranging the Hajj so that it is safe. The Saudis builds thousands of air conditioned tents for the pilgrims, and provides them with tens of thousands of sheep so that they can celebrate "Id Al Adha" - the "festival of the offering" that follows the Hajj. Sometimes, however, there are slip-ups and misunderstandings, and when two groups, each consisting of tens of thousands of people march towards each other by mistake, the tragic result is that many of them lie trampled underfoot and that many lives are lost in the resulting stampede.

Last year a crane fell over and killed tens of people, but the worst part of the accident was the altercation between the Saudi police and the Iranian pilgrims which left many of the Iranians dead.  The pilgrims from Iran are Shiites and the Saudis suspect them of attempting to perform rituals according to Shiite tradition, in direct opposition to Sunni Islamic principles - and certainly to the Wahhabi version of those rites. In past years there were other altercations between Iranian pilgrims and Saudi police, so that this is nothing new.

This year the dispute between Iran and the Saudis started anew as they rehashed the arguments over the accidents that occurred in previous years until the anger of both sides reached such a frenzy that the Mufti of Saudi Arabia declared Khamenei - the Supreme Ayatollah of Shiite Iran -  an Amgushi, that is, not a Muslim, a heretic, a follower of the pre-Islamic Persian religion disguised as a Muslim. There is no more insulting epithet in the Muslim dictionary than the word Amgushi. As a result, Khamenei decided to move the Hajj this year from Mecca to Karbala, the Iraqi city closest to Mecca. In the yar 680 C.E., Hussein Ibn Ali the leader of the Shiite rebels, was murdered and beheaded there by a military unit of the Sunni Umayyad Caliph Yazid ibn Muawiyah.

The Iranian and Shiite response to the Saudi "Amgushi" was expressed by insulting and derogatory drawings that appeared on social media, such as the one below:

The  Tree Cursed in the Koran: a Shiite anti-Saudi drawing Source: Shiite websites

This drawing is based on a quote from the Koran that talks about a cursed tree and shows the tree with the words "The Family of Saud" on its trunk while towards the bottom of the tree the following words appear: "Let the entire world know that the Family of Saud are the reason for the Arab and Islamic catastrophe ("Naqba"). The root of destruction and ruin in this world."

To the right of the tree are the words: "The Family of Saud – the tails of the Jews," expressing the Shiite rumor that claims that the Saud family are actually descendants of the Jews who lived in the Khyber Oasis until the 7th century and who pretend to be Muslims to this day but are really Jews in secret despite the Hadith that declares that "there are no two religions in the Arab Peninsula." 

The leaves on the "cursed tree" are Wahhabism, explosive-filled vehicles, crime, slaughter, destruction, incitement, ethnicity, terror, explosions, "takhfir" (declaring Muslims to be heretics), Jabhat al Nusra, division, ISIS, al Qaeda, Boko Haram. On the left of the tree there is a green Saudi flag with a sword, but instead of the Shahada (the testimony – the Islamic creed that declares that there is no G-d but Allah and that Mohammed is his prophet) that is on the flag, it says "May Allah curse the House of Saud."

This rift over the Hajj is just another aspect of the war between the Saudis and the Iranians in Yemen, Iraq, Syria and Lebanon, and in my estimation we are approaching the day when rockets are going to be flying through the air from Iran to Saudi Arabia and vice versa. This will be a disastrous development for the entire world because these two powers have both called on the ultimate player to help them, Allah, and both sides claim they are fighting for him and in his name. This kind of situation leads to a frenzy with which the world cannot cope, because no earthly or human considerations can put an end to a war that Allah wages against the infidel.

Economic considerations, oil infrastructure, loss of lives and damage to other countries do not have the slightest effect on Allah and his armies, and if – Heaven forfend – a real war breaks out between Saudi Arabia and Iran it will be a war to the bitter end using  chemical and biological weapons. If one of the sides has atomic weapons, it is quite possible that they will be employed. I am stressing this point because both Saudi Arabia and Iran can get their hands on nuclear weapons, Iran has developed its own and the Saudis have acquired them from Pakistan.

World leaders, especially those who gave their support to easing the sanctions on Iran and allowed that country to advance its military nuclear projects and continue to develop its missile arsenal will have to answer for the decisions they made that may bring the Middle East and possibly other parts of the world to the point of no return on the road leading straight to hell.

And that is how the Hajj, the holiday that is meant to bring humankind closer to God and to a life spent under his protective shadow may bring the Saudis, Iranians and perhaps other countries to their deaths under the shadow  of a horrendous mushroom cloud. A culture whose concepts range from "cursed tree" to "amgushi"  and which incorporates all-powerful Allah in its ranks, might find it perfectly acceptable to destroy a world that was built by mankind and for mankind, using concepts taken from the world of mankind.

Don't say you haven't been warned.


Dr. Mordechai Kedar is a senior lecturer in the Department of Arabic at Bar-Ilan University. He served in IDF Military Intelligence for 25 years, specializing in Arab political discourse, Arab mass media, Islamic groups and the Syrian domestic arena.

Source: http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/19499

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

Iran refuses to roll back rogue policy - Yoram Ettinger

by Yoram Ettinger

[The ayatollahs] consider the agreement a reaffirmation of Western vacillation and retreat, allowing them to intensify their rogue conduct, as documented in their domestic, regional and global track record and school textbooks.

The July 2015 nuclear agreement with Iran is perceived by the United States as a binding, strategic agreement for peaceful coexistence. In contrast, Iran's ayatollahs view it as a tenuous, tactical agreement that advances their offensive strategy against "the arrogant, infidel American Great Satan" that, like other agreements with "infidels," can be abrogated according to the Quran and the legacy of the Prophet Muhammad.

The ayatollahs consider the agreement to be a phase in the removal of the infidel "crUSader" from the Persian Gulf and the Indian Ocean, so as to advance Iran's 2,500-year-old goal of dominating the Persian Gulf, the Middle East and the globe. 

Moreover, they consider the agreement a reaffirmation of Western vacillation and retreat, allowing them to intensify their rogue conduct, as documented in their domestic, regional and global track record and school textbooks. These clearly reflect their strategies, tactics, character, worldviews and general direction, and effectively produce cadres of "martyrs" -- namely, terrorists and suicide bombers.

A constructive agreement with the ayatollahs would require a dramatic transformation of their school textbooks, strategies and tactics. An agreement with the ayatollahs without such changes could start the countdown to the first nuclear war. 

Bolstered by billions of dollars in cash transfers, the reclaimed $150 billion of frozen assets, and the suspension of U.S. and global sanctions, the Iranian regime has expanded its subversive and terrorist involvement in every pro-U.S. Arab country in the Persian Gulf and the Arabian Peninsula. 

Moreover, while the U.S. has rolled back its sanctions against Iran, Iran has rolled back most of its inhibitions in its strategic ties with Russia. Pro-U.S. Arab regimes such as Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Morocco have also softened their positions on Russia, in response to the dramatic erosion of the U.S. posture of deterrence since the signing of the Iran deal, which the pro-U.S. Arab regimes perceive as a machete at their throats.

The ayatollahs have intensified their involvement in the civil war in Yemen and are striving to control the critical oil and military waterways in the Bab el-Mandab Strait, which connects the Indian Ocean to the Red Sea and the Mediterranean, and the Strait of Hormuz, which connects the Indian Ocean to the Persian Gulf. Meddling in Yemen also advances the ayatollahs' goal of regime change in Saudi Arabia, which borders Yemen.

The ayatollahs' long reach stretches to Latin America, where they have bolstered strategic and cultural ties with Cuba, Venezuela, Ecuador and Bolivia, and deepened their presence -- directly and via Hezbollah and other Islamic terror organizations -- in the tri-border region of Brazil, Argentina and Paraguay.

Reflecting Iran's determination to become a nuclear power, the ayatollahs have tightened their nuclear and ballistic cooperation with North Korea, which enables them to circumvent the monitoring of the nuclear program in Iran. They have exceeded their quota for heavy-water production, acquired illegal technology and have test-fired ballistic missiles that are capable of delivering nuclear weapons, in violation of the July 2016 U.N. Security Council Resolution 2231, which calls for Iran to desist from such testing for eight years. 

Relying on Western eagerness to sustain the July 2015 agreement at any price, they have repeatedly harassed U.S. military forces in the Persian Gulf.

Taught to hate

 

The rolled-back sanctions have not rolled back the Iranian regime's hate-education, as recently documented by Professor Eldad Pardo, of the Hebrew University and the Institute of Monitoring Peace and Tolerance in School Education, who has researched Iran's school textbooks for the last 11 years.

Pardo wrote that "child martyrdom is revered" in a sixth-grade textbook ("The Little Leader," pp. 58-64), and that "the martyrdom of girls has recently been introduced into the curriculum" in a 10th-grade book ("Defense Readiness," pp. 59-63). In 12th grade, "students are instructed to join a frenzy of training and preparation, constant emergency, blind obedience and actual participation in conflicts, at home and abroad" ("Religion and Life," p. 124).

Iranian students, he found, "study about dissimulation and misleading the enemy. They learn that in times of need, dissimulation and temporary pacts -- even with 'ungodly, idolatrous governments' -- are proper, but only until such time as the balance of power should change. We know from [Ayatollah Ali] Khamenei's own words, that the recent nuclear negotiations followed the pattern of a historical treaty with an 'illegitimate' government … which was concluded in 661 BCE between Imam Hassan and Mu'awiyah -- intending to gain time, build power and gradually undermine the rival dynasty, but never genuinely reconciling, leading to the fateful battle of Karbala two decades later ('Religion and Life,' grade 12, pp. 103-104)."

Iran's curriculum stipulates "the need for jihad, child martyrdom and inevitable sacrifices are intensively and vividly inculcated into young minds. ... [Iranian students] know that a jihadi war -- requiring their possible martyrdom, for which they practice from first grade -- could be launched as part of an attack on countries ruled by 'oppressive regimes.' ... Education for child martyrdom continues, beginning with the first grade, all the way to grade 12. ... Iranian girls and boys are educated to go to war at any moment, taught to see the world as overflowing with enemies of the Revolution, who resist the 'true program of God.' ... The students receive much instruction about the martyrs from the 1980-1988 Iran-Iraq War. ... Children are instructed not to obey their parents in matters regarding martyrdom (Religious Rulings, grade 11, p. 14)."

According to Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif, the U.S. is the chief target for the ayatollahs' wrath, because it constitutes the most effective obstacle on their megalomaniacal road to Islamize the global order and subjugate humanity to their agenda: "We have a fundamental problem with the West and especially with America. ... This is because we are claimants of a mission, with a global dimension."

The link between the ayatollahs' curriculum and their overall supremacist, global strategy behooves the U.S. Congress -- the co-equal and co-determining branch of government -- to conduct a series of hearings on the merits of adhering to the July 2015 nuclear agreement as long as Iran does not roll back its millenarian, anti-U.S. curriculum.

Yoram Ettinger

Source: http://www.israelhayom.com/site/newsletter_opinion.php?id=17211

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

A tale of two fronts - Yoav Limor

by Yoav Limor

-- each terrorist learned of his predecessor's actions and sought to emulate them -- the goal is now to break the chain.

The security incidents that occurred over the weekend in the West Bank and the north have nothing to do with the one another, aside from occurring on the same day. While the chances of an escalation in the north are slim, Judea and Samaria will be the focus of a special effort to prevent a renewed wave of terror on the eve of the holiday season.

In recent months, the IDF and Shin Bet security agency have been able to stunt the Palestinian terror wave through a variety of measures (offensive, defensive, intelligence gathering and dissemination, together with increased action from the Palestinian Authority's security apparatus), and recent months have been relatively calm. With that, it was always believed that this calm was tentative and that combustible factors on the ground could still reignite a conflagration, such as local elections in the PA, the speech PA President Mahmoud Abbas intends to deliver at the U.N. General Assembly, and of course the large number of worshippers expected to visit the Temple Mount over the holidays.

Against this backdrop, the decision was made to deploy two additional IDF battalions to Judea and Samaria over the upcoming holidays. The string of terrorist attacks over the weekend, however, expedited the planned reinforcement, and one of these battalions was already dispatched on Saturday in an effort to help ease the tense situation. Due to assessments that the recent wave of terror has consisted of "inspired" attacks -- in other words each terrorist learned of his predecessor's actions and sought to emulate them -- the goal is now to break the chain. As such, the IDF is amplifying pressure in the Hebron sector, primarily around the village of Bani Naim, the home of the terrorists who perpetrated the car-ramming attack at Elias Junction on Friday. 

We must hope these steps can calm matters, but there is room for skepticism. Throughout the ebb and flow of this terror wave, the fundamental facts have not changed, particularly in relation to the poor economic situation in the West Bank, diplomatic stagnation and ongoing incitement on the Palestinian street. Along with these factors, the ever-combustible holiday season already brings considerable potential for an escalation -- in which Israeli and PA officials do not have an interest.

In the north, meanwhile, chances of an escalation are far smaller, if any. While Israel is concerned over the ongoing errant fire from Syria and is sending the message that it will not be tolerated, the concern stems more from the possibility of random Israeli civilian casualties and less from the possibility of becoming entangled in an unplanned tailspin. No one on the Israeli side doubts that despite the Syrian army's involvement in the shooting, it has occurred within the framework of its efforts to regain territory seized by the rebels, not to establish a new balance of deterrence with Israel.

While the firing of anti-aircraft missiles at Israeli jets last week was meant as a signal to Israel, it was done carefully and measuredly so as to avoid sparking an escalation. At this time, Syria recognizes Israel's military superiority and is taking pains not to provoke it. This balance will shift only if President Bashar Assad's forces succeed in regaining effective control over most of Syria. Until that happens (and it might not), the regime will continue flinging wild accusations at Israel, as it did Saturday after an attack that killed dozens of Syrian soldiers in the country's east. In this particular case, Israel was able to easily disprove the false claims, but it must remain cautious into the future to avoid any unwanted involvement in that country's bloody war.

Yoav Limor

Source: http://www.israelhayom.com/site/newsletter_opinion.php?id=17209

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

The "Great Turkish Purge": Guilty Without Trial - Burak Bekdil

by Burak Bekdil

During the month and a half after July 15, the Turkish government aggressively purged more than 100,000 civil servants and arrested tens of thousands.

• Anyone can be the target: journalists, academics, teachers, pilots, doctors, businessmen -- even the owner of the small grocery store on the corner, if its owner kept his savings at a bank that the government claims financed Gulen's illegal activities.
• Prominent journalist Ahmet Altan and his brother, academic and columnist Professor Mehmet Altan, were detained for questioning. A prosecutor claims that during a recent TV debate, the suspects had given "subliminal messages suggesting a military coup."
• "A total witch hunt has been launched..." — Kemal Kilicdaroglu, leader of the main opposition Social Democrat Party.

In the twelve days ending on July 2, 1934 Germany saw the "Röhm Putsch," a purge in which the Nazi regime carried out political executions in order to consolidate Hitler's absolute hold on power. Hitler moved against the Sturmabteilung (SA), the Nazis' own paramilitary group; hundreds were killed. The regime did not limit itself to a purge of the SA.

Having already imprisoned social democrats and communists, Hitler used the "Röhm Putsch" to move against conservatives. More killings followed, including Kurt von Schleicher, Hitler's predecessor as Chancellor, and von Schleicher's wife. The Gestapo also murdered several leaders of the disbanded Catholic Center Party.

Just a few years later, the Soviets' own purge would be called Yezhovshchina ("Times of Yezhov"), after Nikolai Yezhov, head of the Soviet secret police. From 1936 until 1953, Yezhovshchina not only meant being expelled from the party; it came to mean almost certain arrest, imprisonment, and often execution.

The purge, in general, was Stalin's effort to eliminate past and potential opposition groups. Hundreds of thousands of victims faced charges of political crimes such as espionage, sabotage, anti-Soviet agitation, and conspiracies to prepare uprisings and coups. Most victims were quickly executed by gunfire or sent to the Gulag labor camps, where many died of starvation, disease, exposure and overwork.

Several decades later, the Turks are luckier: no Gestapo, no executions, no summary killings and no labor camps. But the "Great Turkish Purge" brings tragic misfortunes to millions of Turks who are suspected of having allied with Fethullah Gulen, once President Recep Tayyip Erdogan's best political ally, now his worst enemy and the prime suspect behind the failed coup of July 15. Gulen, in self-exile in the United States since 1999, is an Islamic preacher believed to have millions of loyalists in Turkey and more than 150 other countries, where he runs schools and charity work.

During the month and a half after July 15, the Turkish government aggressively purged more than 100,000 civil servants and military personnel, and arrested tens of thousands, including nearly half of Turkey's active-duty admirals and generals. Anyone can be the target: journalists, academics, teachers, pilots, doctors, businessmen -- even the owner of the small grocery store on the corner, if its owner kept his savings at a bank that the government claims financed Gulen's illegal activities.

Turkish police escort dozens of handcuffed soldiers, who are accused of participating in the failed July 15 coup d'état. (Image source: Reuters video screenshot)

Some of Turkey's biggest companies are also under the spotlight. In August, a court appointed trustees to Boydak Holding, on charges of the multibillion-dollar group's alleged ties with Gulen. The family-based group's 42 companies have interests in furniture, textiles, chemicals, marketing, logistics and energy. The group employs a staff of more than 14,000.

In September, 18 companies operating under Koza-Ipek Holding, worth $10 billion, were brought under the control of a state fund. According to a cabinet minister, the Turkish state has so far seized more than $4 billion worth of assets belonging to suspected Gulenists.

On a single day, September 8, Turkey arrested 27 businessmen and 50 military officers. Two days later, prominent journalist Ahmet Altan and his brother, academic and columnist Professor Mehmet Altan, were detained for questioning. A prosecutor claims that during a recent TV debate, the suspects had given "subliminal messages suggesting a military coup."

During the purge, even the simplest universal legal norms are being systematically ignored. In one instance, the wife of the former editor-in-chief of the daily Cumhuriyet was banned from flying to Germany, and her passport was seized. Dilek Dundar's husband, Can Dundar, is on trial on charges of "revealing state secrets," after he ran front-page stories showing arms shipments from the Turkish government to radical fighters in Syria. In another case, a file photo shows 64-year-old Hatice Yildirim in a wheelchair, with police officers around her. The elderly woman was detained because she is the mother-in-law of one of the coup suspects, Adil Oksuz.

As in Germany and the Soviet Union in the 1930s Turkey's purge is spreading to another group of usual suspects: Kurds. On September 8, Turkey suspended more than 11,000 schoolteachers for suspected links with the militant Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK), a group that is on the list of terror organizations of Turkey, the U.S. and the EU. The mass suspension came without a court ruling to determine that all of these people were tried on charges of terror and all were found guilty, with their appeals rejected. No, the schoolteachers were not even on trial when they were informed that they had been suspended. Guilty without trial.

On September 11, Turkey's Interior Ministry appointed trustees to 28 local municipalities across the country's predominantly Kurdish southeast, on the grounds that they allegedly provided support to the PKK and Gulen's network. Elected mayors, too, were suspended without a court ruling that proves they have links with terror groups.

There are warnings, mostly going unnoticed by the ruling party, that the Turkish purge violates basic civil liberties. "If you try to run the country with the feelings of revenge and hatred, then you will cause suffering for many innocent people. This is the point we have reached now. A total witch hunt has been launched in many fields," said Kemal Kilicdaroglu, leader of the main opposition Social Democrat party.

According to Thorbjorn Jagland, secretary general of the Council of Europe (which enforces human rights in the European Court of Human Rights), Turkey must produce clear evidence in pursuing participants in a failed coup, and avoid targeting teachers and journalists simply because they worked for firms run by the Muslim cleric Ankara portrays as its mastermind. Otherwise, Jagland said, Turkey may be challenged in the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg.

Times after attempted coups are always turbulent. With the excesses of a witch-hunt, Erdogan is now adding millions to an already long list of Turks who deeply dislike him. Meanwhile, Turkey is getting more and more distant from the utopia of becoming a country of peace and order.

Burak Bekdil, based in Ankara, is a Turkish columnist for the Hürriyet Daily and a Fellow at the Middle East Forum.

Source: https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/8957/turkey-purge

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

Police stumped over motive of mall attacker who spoke of ‘Allah’ and asked victims if they were Muslim before attacking them - Thomas Lifson

by Thomas Lifson

Stop treating us like idiots!

OK, I get it. Police don’t want to jump to conclusions in high profile cases. But can police authorities please stop insulting the public when a Muslim starts attacking random strangers while yelling about Allah? The latest example of studied ignorance comes from St. Cloud, Minnesota, the thriving metropolis of Central Minnesota. From the St. Cloud Times

Eight people were injured and the suspect died at Crossroads Center on Saturday after an attack reported about 8:15 p.m.

St. Cloud Police Chief Blair Anderson said the victims were stabbed by a man dressed in a private security uniform.
An off-duty police officer from another jurisdiction shot and killed the attacker, Anderson said. Anderson did not say where that officer serves during the news conference that started after midnight.

According to St. Cloud Mayor Dave Kleis, the shooting happened inside Macy's.

Just before 11 p.m., St. Cloud Hospital Communications Specialist Chris Nelson told the Times that eight patients were taken to the hospital. Seven had injuries that were not life-threatening; one was admitted.
Anderson said the attacker, who was armed with a knife, reportedly made references to Allah during the attack and asked at least one person whether they were Muslim. But Anderson pointedly declined to call the attacks an act of terrorism, saying the motive isn't yet ;known. [emphasis added]

Stop treating us like idiots!

Can’t police acknowledge that there is an identifiable pattern of jihad terrorism, which the current incident mirrors? It’s fine to say that police are still collecting evidence and no conclusions have been reached. But don’t deny the obvious pattern, the obvious hypothesis!

Eight Minnesotans suffered stab wounds, some of them serious. The State of Minnesota has been subjected to the resettlement of tens of thousands of Somali Muslims, at tremendous costs in welfare, crime, and yes, Islamic terrorism.

Stop pretending that this isn’t an issue! Don’t jump to conclusions. But don’t deny the obvious, either.


Thomas Lifson

Source: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2016/09/police_stumped_over_motive_of_mall_attacker_who_spoke_of_allah_and_asked_victims_if_they_were_muslim_before_attacking_them.html

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.