Qatar’s disintegration

Ever since the Qatar crisis broke out, we have been reading various comments, conspiracy theories and war scenarios in the media. Each column brings forth a different actor; they do it in such a chic cause-effect relationship that the reader says, okay, this is just the right approach to the matter. But then they turn to another article and the logic presented by it also sounds strong and the reader believes that this one too may have points that are right.

Fundamentally, on one side of the approaches there is the opinion that Qatar should be provided unconditional support. Accordingly, the U.S.-Saudi Arabia-Egypt and Israel, which is considered to indirectly agree with this trio with the statements of pleasure it made immediately after the incidents, form the square of evil. Based on this opinion, supporting Qatar rather than siding with that quartet can be considered the lesser evil. On the other hand, there is the thought that Saudi Arabia should be supported instead of Qatar. Accordingly, no agreement/reconciliation with Iran and Russia has ever brought good to the Muslim world.

It is through Turkey’s bravely standing out and breaking the sanctions against Iran, which was surrounded by the sanctions of the entire world, that it was able to take a breath and, as soon as the ropes of the Western siege were loosened, it first betrayed Turkey in Syria and with its attitude in relation to the People’s Protection Units (YPG). Hence, Turkey, which should take a lesson from its experiences, should no longer participate in any platform in which Iran is present, it should never turn its back on Iran and it should take no political steps in the name of Iran in any international arena.

In addition to these two primary views, there are also comments claiming to present a different perspective. There are those who remind us that the princes of the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and Saudi Arabia are supposedly putting on an act in the Gulf crisis, that these actors are making efforts for the continuation of the old order in the region. There are also those who claim that U.S. President Donald Trump, Saudi King Salman and the leaders of many other countries in the region are manipulated by the said princes and that the Gulf crisis broke out as a result of this manipulation. Meanwhile, there are approaches that think the world consists of their own atmosphere and that Turkey is the sole target of this operation. In addition to these, there are also those who insist that Turkey needs to continue its relations with both Qatar and Saudi Arabia and that we shouldn’t become involved in this conflict. These are all approaches that have aspects you may both find very absurd and take very seriously.

Even the main opposition Republican People’s Party (CHP) leader Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu  starting to support the Saudis upon comprehending that the Saudis are against the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and Hamas in Palestine, making comments that Turkey should not support “terrorists” like the Muslim Brotherhood, can be considered consistent within itself. Thus, Kılıçdaroğlu’s sole criterion is opposition to the President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan and, for this cause, he can even align with the Saudis and nobody will ask him whether this is a contradiction. Because, based on the single criterion that has been determining his political life ever since, this is not a contradiction.

However, there was a comment on the Qatar crisis, which I heard on the radio yesterday – and I know the person making the comment is only an academic – I couldn’t decide whether to laugh or cry. The presenter asks the academic who joined the morning program as a guest his opinions on the Qatar crisis. The academic, making an effort to almost avoid even mentioning Qatar, answers the question in a way that means, “We need to fix our relations with the European Union.” When the presenter brings the topic to Qatar again, he says the reason Turkey is obliged to even trade with Gulf countries, including Qatar, is because its trade agreements with Europe have deteriorated. The academic has no interest in the burning world agenda, in Qatar, the Saudis, Egypt or Iran; each time he is asked a question, he simply comments along the lines of, “Let’s turn our focus to Europe,” or somehow brings the topic to Europe.

We immediately understand that this person is a purely Kemalist intellectual. An ignorant intellectual raised with the “Arabs stabbed us in the back” mindset, who is deeply attached to the “Let Arabs have the Kaaba, Çankaya is sufficient for us” motto and considers even knowing what is going on beneath our southern border humiliation. He does not know and does not want to know how Turkey is shaking because of what is happening in Egypt, how it destabilized the Iraq region – which also includes Turkey – after Saddam Hussein, the importance of the Syria issue.

He does not care about being concerned over the matter, he just wants to skip it. If that were not the case, he could have had the chance to somewhat evaluate the crisis in the Gulf, but because he did not care about anything other than the EU, he does not pay attention to what is happening in Qatar, Saudi Arabia or the region. Because, looking at our south, he thinks he is going to see the Muslim history of Turkey, which he hopes will be completely over. As for the West, it is the level of contemporary civilization. He is still there and is evaluating the world from there.

I guess this was the most short-sighted approach I came across on the Qatar crisis.

+