The bomb attack on the mosque in Egypt’s Sinai region (in a village predominantly resided by a branch of the Badawiyya religious movement) killed 305 people and injured more than hundreds. Last week I had mentioned the “destructive hope” aspect of revolt movements and drew attention to the political and social foundations on which these are based. I had said the revolt will very soon emerge in Sinai. Unfortunately, this prediction came true. I did not receive any intelligence or diplomatic hearsay. I simply sensed this as a result of the sociology of the “uprising readings” I have been doing for a long time.
The Sinai state is a special region. It has a land surface of about 60,000 kilometers. It is a social structure composed of tribes and big families. It has a population of 500,000. It has a 208-kilometer border with Israel and a 13-kilometer border with Palestine. Hence, it closely concerns both Palestine and Israel. But that’s not all. It is an international strategic region. The Suez Canal passes through here, which means that it is an important trade corridor, a corridor of the Eastern wealth going to the West. The commercial, international and regional significance of the Sinai region draws the attention of insurgents as well. This is why they have long been carrying out operations here.
Ansar Bait al-Maqdis carried out many operations here. The terrorist operations that started since the two-year rule of Mohammed Morsi, further expanded with Abdel-Fattah el-Sisi’s coup. Daesh and the Egyptian movement Suwaidi are also among the perpetrators of these operations. They conduct raids on police stations, military structures, strategic points and civilian locations in the region. These are uprisings that continue with pillaging, raids and massacres. The Sisi regime’s security forces conduct violent operations in this region. They know no rule nor justice. They try to suppress insurgency with counter-revolt methods. They are aiming to eliminate terrorism with counter-terrorism. “Civilian terrorism” and “official terrorism” are feeding one another.
The destructive orders are trying to eliminate the revolts based on the sociology of destructive hope. The orders are receiving weapons and support from foreign states, and the insurgents are doing the same. Hence, both the orders and the insurgents are obtaining these from the illegal structures of foreign states. Therefore, both the orders and insurgents are using the same brand of weapons. They are exploding bombs manufactured at the same factories. Both the terrorists and states are working with the actors of the global order. States are working legally, while terrorists work illegally. Factories continue to produce weapons such as bombs, guns, Kalashnikovs, anti-aircraft weapons for both sides. Where the state and insurgents are so similar, destructive hope does not end. Constructive hope cannot rise.
As long as the social and economic sources giving rise to the insurgents are not taken into consideration, it is not possible to deal with terrorism with arms and intelligence and international accusations. A presentation of theology that will fight against the takfir (declaring someone a disbeliever) ideology is not a solution either. Because takfirism, khwarijism and jihadi salafism are more sociology, politics and economy than theology. It is not possible to solve this through readings on sectarian history. Therefore, “destructive hope” must be countered by “constructive hope.” Turkey is the sole country in the Middle East capable of doing this. Turkey, through democracy culture and the sociological historic practice of the ahlus-sunnah, has prevented Islamic movements from turning into revolt. This is why the radical opposition has both renewed itself and the system by joining the system via the Justice and Development Party (AK). Hence, AK Party politics are a representation of constructive hope for the opposition and for the excluded and oppressed Muslim masses.
Turkey’s constructive politics may still develop as an important alternative for the entire Islamic geography. The conformist and capitalist attitude of Saudi Arabia and Iran’s sectarian approaches will do nothing but trigger the existing insurgencies. The Middle East drowning in revolts is of no concern for global imperialism. Its only concern is to continue its hegemony over Israel and energy sources. In this context, President Erdoğan is a “revolt moral” against the world order’s imperial structure. This is what the “world is bigger than five” theory means. It is an alternative politic for constructive hope.
Note: The exciting and sincere activities of the mayor of Akhisar, where I spent the weekend, and the members of Ulucami Education and Culture Foundation reminded us of Anatolia’s constructive hope again.
