It is a very sharp bone in my throat that Turkish Kurds, who have endured by far the worst treatment over all of any other group of Kurds, are portrayed as vicious, hateful terrorists while Iraqi Kurds are always the innocent and gentle poster children for ethnic victimization. Unlike Iraqi Kurds, Turkish Kurds have been forbidden from teaching their language in schools, and could even be arrested for daring to speak Kurdish. Iraqi Kurds had the right to teach Kurdish language and history and culture in state schools, and were well integrated into Iraqi society. Baghdad had one of the largest Kurdish populations of any city in the world, and the rate of intermarriage with Arabs was high. In fact, as I recall, Arab-Kurdish intermarriage was the second most common, after Sunni-Shi`a intermarriage. Without minimizing the abuses suffered by Iraqi Kurds during periods of Iraq’s history as a state, over all Turkish Kurds have had it much worse than Iraqi Kurds, so why are Iraqi Kurds the victims, and Turkish Kurds the villains?

So, Kurds and other contemporary human rights abuses by Turkey first. Also, Turkey’s close alliance with Israel really is spitting in the face of the Arab world, particularly the Palestinians. Having said that, I think Turkey’s refusal to confront its history, the Armenian genocide centrally, is connected to its tendency for human rights abuses today. It’s all about being able to look in the mirror.

For Turkey to evolve and come to terms with its modern self, reckoning with the Armenian genocide must happen. Anything less is unacceptable. Of course, it doesn’t help that the Israel lobby goes to such efforts to discourage U.S. leaders from confronting Turkey on this issue. No competing genocides, after all, we don’t want to dilute the narrative.–

The drive of right-wing Zionists to completely Judaize Jerusalem is a serious act of aggression against Palestinians, Muslim, Christian and non-religious, and it demonstrates how averse many Zionists are to any narratives of home and belonging other than their own. But, before the cultural and social ramifications of this, the immediate locus of concern must be the immediate awful impact on the people being evicted from their homes.

Agree with David that Turkey has a better case for EU membership than Israel, but it is still currently a long shot, or a long way off. I think Turkey should not even be seriously considered for the European Union until there is official, governmental recognition of the Armenian genocide. Since this is not going to happen anytime soon in Turkey, I’m against Turkey being part of the EU (at least until such a recognition and Turkey better cleans up its human rights record).

In fact Obama is worse than Bush in some respects on these issues since he has more credibility to sell essentially the same Israel-first warmongering polices.

Obama Bows to Israel Over Settlements, Iran
Deal to Be Finalized Tomorrow in London
by Jason Ditz, August 25, 2009
Email This | Print This | Share This | Comment | Antiwar Forum
In a deal scheduled to be finalized tomorrow during Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s visit to London, Israel will accept a resumption of peace talks with the Palestinian Authority. The deal came as a result of President Obama caving to virtually every demand made by Israel.

In essence, the Israeli government will freeze new construction in the West Bank, potentially for as much as a year, while continuing ongoing construction projects. East Jerusalem will reportedly not be part of this freeze. In return, the United States will reportedly back massive new sanctions against the Iranian government and will stop criticizing the growth of the settlements.

The State Department had confirmed yesterday that they were “close” to reaching a deal with Israel, but said that “the Arabs are more difficult to pin down.” Since all the Palestinians have really asked for is a permanent halt to settlement constructions and the US has apparently abandoned that request, its going to be a difficult road to a deal.

The ability to get those sanctions, which would in essence cut Iran entirely out of the international oil and gas market and cripple their economy, passed in the United Nations is likewise in serious doubt. Both Russia and China have previously objected to the most harsh sanctions, and this push is likely to be no different.

That was also my initial gut reaction to this relatively new idea that we invite them to join the EU (Nato? Not such a good idea – think of what the IOF might do in Afghanistan).

It would force them to adhere to countless UN resolutions, but also give them access to a huge market (not that they haven’t already achieved this, with various trade agreements).

In short, at second sight, a good idea.

Maybe, with a bit more consideration, I’ll go back to the idea that a shitty little Levantine country doesn’t deserve this, so let them stew in their self-imposed local problems.

Does anyone seriously think these other NATO countries would go to war with their allies in Egypt, Jordan and Saudi Arabia merely because some scrap of paper (Israel’s joining NATO) obliges them to do so?

As usual you’ve missed the pt. A NATO member thinks once, twice & 100 times before going to war because the stakes are much higher than if an individual country were to make such a decision. If Israel were to contemplate going to war & it was a member, all of NATO’s member nations would exert huge pressure not to unless it were a truly existential threat (as opposed to the supposed existential threats Israel goes to war over on a regular basis these latter days). And Iran would NOT be considered an existential threat.

But if Israel truly were under existential threat it would be reassured that all of NATO would stand behind it & come to its aid. It would be like an insurance policy ensuring Israel’s ultimate security & survival.