Daily Archives: June 19, 2017
Russia Devouring the Eastern Mediterranean? by Burak Bekdil
-
Turkey shot down a Russian jet. No gain, but plenty of damage to its economy. Russia gave up one jet to Turkey and has made its military presence in Syria and the strategic eastern Mediterranean permanent.
-
-
Turkey can no longer speak to Russia about the possibility of ousting Assad.
-
Putin seems to be making sure that NATO will do nothing.
At this year’s G-20 summit in Antalya, Turkey, Russian President, Vladimir Putin, said that the radical jihadist Islamic State (IS) was being financed by donors from at least 40 countries, including some G-20 member states — clearly pointing his finger, without naming names, at Saudi Arabia and Turkey. A few days later, two Turkish F-16 jets shot down a Russian SU-24 warplane, and claimed that the Russian jet had violated Turkish airspace for 17 seconds on the country’s Syrian border — a violation Russia denies. This was the first time a Soviet or Russian military aircraft was shot down by a NATO air force since the end of WWII.
Turkey and Russia have long been in a proxy war in Syria: Russia, together with its quieter partner, China, supports the Shi’ite Iran-backed Syrian regime of President Bashar al-Assad; and Turkey explicitly supports Assad’s Sunni opponents [“moderate” jihadists] — apparently in the hope of building a Muslim Brotherhood/Hamas-type of regime in Damascus that would be friendly to its own Islamist government. After the downing of the Russian jet, the Turco-Russian proxy war has become less proxy.
No more Mr. Nice Guy. |
An angry Putin called the incident “a stab in the back.” He declined Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s requests to discuss the issue. He twice refused to meet Erdogan on the sidelines of the Paris Climate Summit.
Russia’s foreign minister, Sergei Lavrov, quickly cancelled his official visit to Turkey — a visit that had been scheduled for the day after the downing of the Russian jet. At the outset, NATO member Turkey had taught Russia a good lesson. In reality, judging from the consequences, it all looks like a Russian gambit, with Turkey shooting itself in the foot and risking a new NATO-Russia conflict.
Russia’s ire seemingly is being expressed in economic terms:
- Moscow said it will introduce visa restrictions for Turkish citizens, beginning Jan. 1, 2016.
- Russian authorities detained a group of Turkish businessmen on charges of “false statements about their trip to the country.”
- Press reports noted that Russia was considering limiting or excluding Turkish construction companies from the country, a potentially multi-billion dollar loss for the Turkish economy.
- Moscow warned its citizens against visiting Turkey — a ban that could deal a big blow to Turkey’s lucrative tourism industry. Last year 4.5 million Russians visited Turkey, mostly its Mediterranean coast. Russian tour operators were warned to suspend business with Turkey.
- The fate of two huge Turco-Russian energy projects remains unknown, as Russia’s energy minister, Alexei Ulyukayev, did not rule out sanctions hitting the Turkish Stream gas pipeline and a planned Russian nuclear energy plant in Turkey. Turkey buys about 55% of its natural gas from Russia. Its second largest gas supplier is Iran, Russia’s ally — and Turkey’s rival — in Syria.
- Russia’s Minister of Agriculture, Alexander Tkachev, said that Russia would be replacing Turkish food imports with goods from Iran, Israel and Morocco.
- Shipments of wheat to Turkey from key Russian ports were put on hold.
- The Kremlin officially announced a wide range of sanctions on Turkey, including a ban on Turkish workers (with estimates that 90,000 will be fired by Jan. 1, 2016), restrictions on imported goods and services from Turkey and calls for “strengthening of port control and monitoring to ensure transport safety.”
- Around 1,250 trucks carrying Turkish exports were blocked from entering Russia on Nov. 30 and were stranded at border posts, awaiting clearance.
- Russian soccer clubs will be banned from signing Turkish players during the upcoming winter break.
All of that is commercially punitive. There is a more serious side of the Turco-Russian conflict that concerns NATO and western interests in the Middle East.
Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu announced on Nov. 25 that Russia would deploy S-400 surface-to-air missile systems in its Hmeymim air base in Syria.
Turkey shot down a Russian jet. No gain, but plenty of damage to its economy. Russia gave up one jet and has made its military presence in Syria and the strategic eastern Mediterranean permanent. It has reinforced its bases in Syria and intends to build a new military base there. Turkey can no longer speak to Russia about the possibility of ousting Assad.
In a further move to escalate tensions, the Russian General Staff deployed one of its largest air defense ships at the edge of Turkish territorial waters in the Mediterranean. Russian military spokesman General Sergei Rudskoi said that Russian bomber aircraft would be “supported by chasers, and any kinds of threats will be responded to instantly.” Accordingly, The Moscow, one of the Russian Navy’s two largest warships and the flagship of Russia’s Black Sea Fleet, will be deployed where Turkey-Syria territorial waters connect.
In addition, Putin issued orders to deploy nearly 7,000 troops, plus anti-aircraft missiles, rocket launchers, and artillery to the Turkish border, and asked them to be in readiness for full combat.
There have been other military repercussions, too. Since the shooting down of the Russian jet, the Russian military has been regularly pounding the Syrian villages near the Turkish border that populated by the Turkmen, a Turkish ethnicity that supports jihadists in Syria — and is supported by Ankara. The Russians also have been hitting Turkish aid convoys bound for Turkmen villages. More than 500 Turks and Turkmen have been killed in Russian airstrikes. Meanwhile, the U.S.-led allied air strikes against IS have come to a halt. Neither Washington nor Ankara is keen for another conflict with Russia. So, IS and Russia keep on flourishing.
The Russian military has scrapped all contacts with the Turkish military, possibly waiting for the first Turkish military aircraft that violates foreign airspace to shoot.
Turkey has every liberty to challenge Russia and, inevitably, become the victim. But with its geostrategic, Islamist ambitions, it is exposing NATO allies to the risk of a fresh conflict with Russia — and at a time when the wounds of previous conflicts remain unhealed.
Putin has accused Turkey’s leaders of encouraging the Islamization of the Turkish society, which he said was a “problem.” He was not wrong. In fact, Islamism and neo-Ottoman ambitions are the source of Turkey’s (not-so) proxy war with Russia in the Syrian theater. Although Turkey, officially, is a NATO member and part of the allied campaign against IS, its Sunni Islamist ambitions over Syria hinder the global fight against jihadists. A Turco-Russian conflict is weakening the fight.
Putin seems to be making sure that NATO will do nothing.
Burak Bekdil, based in Ankara, is a Turkish columnist for the Hürriyet Daily and a Fellow at the Middle East Forum.
Ruracyageretse hagati y’Umuryango w’Ubumwe bwa Afurika na ICC
Umuryango w’Ubumwe bwa Afurika wahamagariye abanyamuryango bawo kuvuga rumwe ku kuba Urukiko Mpuzamahanga Mpanabyaha rukomeje kwibasira abayobozi bari ku butegetsi muri Afurika.
Uyu muryango ugizwe n’ibihugu 54 utangaza ko watunguwe no kuba Akanama ka Loni gashinzwe umutekano kataraha agaciro icyifuzo cyawo cyo gusubika urubanza rw’abakuru b’igihugu ba Kenya cyangwa ngo gatange igisubizo kiboneye.
Al Jazeera ivuga ko Botswana ari yo yonyine itavuga rumwe n’icyemezo cy’Umuryango w’Ubumwe bwa Afurika mu nama iheruka kuwa Gatandatu yabereye muri Etiyopiya ikitabirwa n’abakuru b’ibihugu 34.
Perezida wa Kenya, Uhuru Kenyatta n’umwungirije, William Ruto bakurikiranwe n’Urukiko Mpuzamahanga Mpanabyaha (ICC), ibyaha byibasiye muntu aho bivugwa ko ari bo bari bihishe inyuma y’imvururu zabaye nyuma y’amatora yo mu 2007, zigahitana abarenga 1,000. Aba bagabo bombi bahakana ibyaha baregwa.
Mu kwezi k’Ugushyingo umwaka ushize, Akanama ka Loni gashinzwe umutekano kateye utwatsi icyifuzo cya AU cyo gusubika uru rubanza rw’aba bayobozi ba Kenya. Uhagarariye Guatemala muri Loni, Gert Rosenthal avuga ko kugerageza gusubika urubanza ari “ugusuzugura” ibihugu byashatse gufasha Afurika mu gutanga ingabo zo kubungabunga amahoro n’imbaraga zigamije guteza imbere ubutabera ku mugabane.
Ibihugu umunani byo mu kanama ka Loni gashinzwe umutekano, byashyize umukono ku masezerano ashyiraho ICC cyangwa biyishyigikiye, birimo u Bwongereza, u Bufaransa na Leta Zunze Ubumwe za Amerika byarifashe bitinya ko umwanzuro ushobora kutazagira icyo ugeraho.
Umwanzuro watowe ku majwi arindwi gusa bityo ubura amajwi abiri ngo ushyirwe mu bikorwa kuko aka kanama kagizwe n’ibihugu 15.
Ni ubwa mbere Akanama ka Loni gashinzwe umutekano kadatanze umwanzuro ku buryo nk’ubu hatitabajwe kimwe mu bihugu bifite umwanya uhoraho muri aka kanama (veto).
RPRK INYABUTATU IKANGURIRA ABANYARWANDA UBWAMI BW’ABEGA:
Uyu muryango wa za maneko wiheshe mu mutaka utacyiyitirira guharanira ubwami bw’urwanda,ubu bakaba bareruye ko baharanira ubwami bw’Abega bavuga ko bwo buzaba bugendera ku itegeko nshinga,naho UMwami Kigeli V Ndahindurwa bakavuga ko atigeze arahirira ubwami bugendera ku itegeko nshinga.
Nonese byashoboka gute ko RPRK inyabutatu yaba yaratangiye yamamaza Umwami w’Urwanda ko baharanira gutaha kwe,ndetse ko batanemera repubulika ya lll kuko iriho kuburyo butemewe namategeko bagiye bagaragaza za gihamya zijyanye ni myanzuro ya loni yasinyanye n’Umwami w’Urwanda Kigeli V Ndahindurwa aha twavuga nk’umwanzuro wa 1579,1580,1605,iyi myanzuro yose niko igaragaza ko repubulika y’Urwanda iriho kuburyo butemewe namategeko.
Biratangaje rero ukuntu ubu ngubu RPRK inyabutatu itangiye kwemera ko leta y’Urwanda noneho yemewe n’amategeko,ibyo babikora bazi neza yuko ngo ikinyoms cyo guhindura amazina yishyaka rirwanira ubwami bw’Abega ko bitazamenyekana nyamara abanyarwanda ibyo bamaze kubimenya ndetse nibitangaza makuru byaranditse bibavugaho byinshi bijyanye namabanga y’ikuzimu abega barimo gutegura ngo babone uko bazayobora Urwanda mu minsi iri mbere.
Abagize umutwe wa RPRK,inyabutatu bari muri wa mutwe wabantu 400,bateguwe bazakubita kudeta perezida kagame bagahita bashyiraho ubwami bw’Abega arinabwo ubu batangiye kujyenda bakangurira abnyarwanda babereka ko ubwami bwariho mbere butari bwemewe nabanyarwanda,ukagirango har’ubundi bwabayeho mbere y’uko habaho ubwomavuga ko butemewe.
Ahubwo se ubwemewe n’ubuhe?ngo barashaka guhimba ubwami modern bwa kiga na kagara!ahhhh,nzaba numva n’umwana w’umunyarwanda,birabe ibyuya ntibibe amaraso,kuko ndabona kega na kagara baza kudukuramo umwuka,ariko se muri millioni z’abanayarwanda barumva aribo bafite imbaraga kurusha abandi?nibagerageze ahari ntawamenya bazabigeraho.
Ariko se babigeraho bate?kandi numva inyambo zitangiye kuvumera n’ingoma karinga itangiye kuririmba no kwikubitaho imirishyo,ndetse n’intebe yabukunzi ikaba itangiye kubyinagira ubwo se baraherahe ? ko namarebe atangiye kuririmba ibyansi kuruhibi bikaba bitangiye guhehera byitegura kubuganiza amata kugirango amata aterekwe mugisabo cyamaze kwitirwa kugirango bacunde amata haboneka akamuri twari tumaze imyaka n’imyaniko tutumva urukarango.
IMPUNZI Z’ABANYARWANDA NIZABARUNDI MU GIHUGU CYA MALAWI,BAMWE BAGIYE KUJYANWA MU BIHUGU BYO HANZE ABANDI BASUBIZWE MU BIHUGU BYABO.
Amakuru aturuka mu gihugu cya Malawi mu kigo kimpunzi zibamo Abanyarwanda n’Abarundi,aravuga ko ubu impunzi zitacyizuye umutekano wazo nk’uko bikwiriye,amakuru avuga ko ngo iyo nkambi y’impunzi yaba igiye gufungwa ngo kubera ko umuryango wabibumbye ntabushobozi ugifite bwogukomeza gufasha izo mpunzi zibarizwa muri icyo gihugu cya Malawi.
Ubu zimwe mu mpunzi zaba zitarabona ibyangombwa zitangiye kwimuka zerekeza mu gihugu cya Zambia,aho zitekereza yuko zishobora kubona ubuhungiro,amakuru agera kukinyamakuru inyangenewss aremeza ko leta ya perezida Peter Nkurunziza niya Paul kagame aribo bashobora bari inyuma yiryo fungwa ry’iyo nkambi.
Kuko impunzi azabwiwe yuko ibihugu zikomokamo bivuze Urwanda n’Uburundi ko aramahoro nta ntambara ikirangwa mur’ibyo bihugu,kugeza ubu rero izo mpunzi zikaba zikomeje kuba mu gihirahiro kuko zitazi neza abazemererwa gutwarwa hanze nabatazemererwa,wenda kubatarabona impapuro z’ubuhunzi kuri bo birumvikana ariko ikibazo ni kubamaze kubona ibyangombwa kandi ntibazatwarwe hanze mubindi bihugu hanyuma kandi bakazisanga bashujwe Irwanda cyangwa Iburundi.
Ariko ntibyari bikwiriye gusubiza impunzi mubihugu zikomokamo igihe cyose ziba zitaragirira ikizere ibihugu zikomokamo,kuko nizo zizi ingorane zihura nazo mu bihugu zabyo,kuba basubizwa iwabo kungufu nyamara batizeye umutekano wabo,biragoye,dore nkubu mu Burundi hatangiye gututumba intambara nyuma y’igihe gito cyane hari habonetse agahengwe.
Mu Rwanda ni uko naho abaturage barara imitima iri hejuru ibisasu biterwa na leta kugirango ibone uko ishinja abo itavuga rumwe nayo abantu bamaze kubiomerekeramo ntibagira uko bangana,kandi igitangaje leta ikihutira guhita ibavunza wagirango hari cyo iba ibiziho kuko iyo ukoze ubushakashatsi usanga abantu bemera ko batera ibyo bisasu usanga akenshi arabasirikare ba RDF,bigira abasivile kugirango haboneke ibirego bajyana murukiko barega Kayumba na Ingabire.
Kuba impunzi zikiri mubihugu byo hanze igihugu cyumva nta mutekano gifite,nyamara aho kugirango bakore ibisabwa n’amategeko abene gihugu bose bibone ko igihugu bagifiteho uruhare ahubwo bagahimba imitwe yokwirukanisha izo mpunzi bakoresheje ruswa nandi mayeri za leta zikoresha biciye mu bijyanye n’ububanyi namahanga.
YAZITSE INZIGO MUNSI YISHYIGA:
Amakuru agera kukinyamakuru inyangenewss ahamya ko abarwanira ubutegetsi bo mu bwoko bwabarepubulike, barakataje mu gushyira ku mukono kumasezerano ajyanye n’ubufatanye mubyapolitiki yamashyaka mu mpindura matwara yabatavuga rumwe n’ubutegetsi bwa perezida Paul kagame na FPR.
Nyuma yuko repubulika ya lll baboneye ibateye utwatsi murwego rwo kwanga amashyaka yabo,ko yemerwa mu Rwanda kugirango batazbatesha umutwe murwego rwogusangira umugati w’igihugu,abatavugaga rumwe”abakiga n’Abanyenduga noneho bagezeho bemera gushyira umukono kumasezerano y’ubufatanye mubyapolitiki yokurwanya ubutegetsi bwa FPR.
Nyuma yuko abanyapolitiki bakomoka mu nduga, bisanze ko ntambaraga bafite mubyagisirikare,kuko politiki y’Urwanda buri gihe bimaze kumenyerwa yuko udafite ingabo zirwanya leta iriho ntimushobora kumvikana bitewe ni uko ar’igihugu kitemera demokarasi bayemera mu magambo ariko mubikorwa ntibishiboka iyo ndetse ahanini ikaba ariba arinayo ntandaro y’intambara zihora ziba buri gihe zigahitana ubuzima bw’abantu kubera inyungu z’abantu kugiti cyabo.
Ni muri urwo rwego Twagiramungu Faustin yagiranye amasezerano n’umutwe wa fdlr,kugirango bumve ko nabo bakomeye bereke namahanga ko ishyaka ryabo rifite umutwe w’ingabo bityo bagirire ikizere ishayaka bahagarariye babone imfashanyo ndetse nabaturage babagirire ikizere yuko bashobora gukuraho ubutegetsi bwa fpr bumaze imyaka 20,wagirango abategetsi bo mu Rwanda n’uwabaroze imyaka 20,ntawujya ayirenza kandi avaho aruko rishwe.
Ni ryari mu Rwanda tuzabona abanyepolitiki bashobora kuva kubutegetsi neza badakuweho nurupfu? Demokarasi iracyari kure nk’ukwezi, nabo barwanya fpr wasanga nabo bagiyeho ariko bavuga ibyo barwanya ubu ugasanga aribyo bakora, ese uratekereza ko nka rukokoma uwamuha intebe yo mrugwiro wagirango yapfa kuyirekura dore amaze no kugera muzabukuru yazakurwaho nurupfu nka Robert Mugabe wazimbabwe.
Ibyo byose Twagiramungu arabikora agirango agarure igitekerezo cy’ubuhemu cyatangiwe nasebukwe Kayibanda,ndatekereza ko ahubwo akwiye kwifatanya na Padiri Thomas kuko nawe arahanira abanyarwanda bakomoka mukarere ka nduga,dore ko by’umwihariko padiri Thomas we anizihiza umunsi wokwibuka Kayibanda aho nshatse kuvuga umunsi wakamarampaka ariwo munsi wabahutu mubutegetsi bwa repubulika ya lll ya FPR.
Ikindi kiyongereyeho bose bakaba arabanyacyangugu bakomoka mukarere kamwe,icyo abanyarwanda bakomeje kwibaza n’uburyo abanyarwanda bo mu bwoko bwarepubulike bakomeje kwigira injiji kubijyanye n’ubwami bw’Urwanda bagambaniye,ese ubwami nubugaruka bazabyifatamo gute?bazongera bakore ibishoboka kugirango babusenye?cyangwa bazemera kubuyoka!
Romania: Lawsuit Launched to Stop Bucharest Mega-Mosque “Romania is not a Turkish province.” by Soeren Kern
- The original deal called for a “mutual exchange” in which Romania would build a new Orthodox Church in Istanbul, while Turkey would build the mosque in Bucharest. In July 2015, however, Prime Minister Victor Ponta revealed that the Romanian government had abandoned the Istanbul church project because it is “not allowed under Turkish law.” Ponta approved the Bucharest mosque project anyway, saying it was a multicultural symbol of Romania’s acceptance of the Muslim community.
-
- Ponta’s decision to approve the mosque, which will mimic Ottoman-era architecture, was greeted with outrage in a country that was under Ottoman Turkish domination for nearly five centuries until 1877.
- “This plan is not about worship, it is about marking the territory of their authority through a monument.” – Ozgur Kazim Kivanc, a Turkish activist opposed to Erdoğan’s destruction of public commons to build mosques.
- “Once Islam enters a land, that land becomes Islamic and Muslims have the duty to liberate it someday. Spain, for example, is Islamic land, and so is Eastern Europe: Romania, Albania, Macedonia, Serbia, Kosovo and Bosnia…” – Omar Bakri Muhammad, a prominent Sunni Islamist cleric.
- “We consider the disposal of free land which, ironically, belonged to the family of Prince Constantin Brâncoveanu, who was beheaded by the Turks on August 15, 1714, to be a betrayal of the Romanian people.” – Pending lawsuit calling on the court to annul the government’s grant of free city land for the mosque project.
Opponents of a proposed Turkish mega-mosque in Romania’s capital, Bucharest, have filed a lawsuit against the government in an effort to halt the project. The court is set to begin hearing the case on October 14.
The lawsuit seeks to reverse a June 2015 decision by the Romanian prime minister at the time, Victor Ponta, to approve construction of what could become the largest mosque in Eastern Europe — second only to the Blue Mosque in Istanbul — on a large tract of city-owned land in northern Bucharest.
The property, valued at more than four million euros ($4.4 million), is being provided for free by the Romanian government, while the construction costs, estimated at three million euros ($3.3 million), are being paid for by Turkey.
Ponta said the mosque will reap economic benefits for Romania because Turkey is the country’s leading non-EU trading partner. The mosque’s critics, including an array of Romanian academics, historians, politicians, anti-immigration groups and even some Muslims, counter that not only will it increase Turkish influence over Romania, it will also encourage Muslim immigration to the country.
The Bucharest mosque is the result of more than a decade of talks between the Romanian and Turkish governments. The original deal called for a “mutual exchange” in which Romania would build a new Orthodox Church in Istanbul, while Turkey would build the mosque in Bucharest.
In July 2015, however, Ponta revealed that the Romanian government had abandoned the Istanbul church project because it is “not allowed under Turkish law.” Ponta approved the Bucharest mosque project anyway, saying it was a multicultural symbol of Romania’s acceptance of the Muslim community.
Ponta’s decision to approve the mosque, which will mimic Ottoman-era architecture, was greeted with outrage in a country that was under Ottoman Turkish domination for nearly five centuries until 1877.
“Turkey attempts a symbolic conquest of Europe through these mosques,” said Tudor Ionescu, leader of the anti-immigration Noua Dreaptă (New Right) party. “I don’t know why we are the recipients of such a ‘blessing.'” Noua Dreaptă has organized protests against the project where people have chanted, “Romania is not a Turkish province.”
Romanians protest against a proposed Turkish mega-mosque in Bucharest, April 10, 2016. (Image source: RT video screenshot) |
Critics say the large size of the mosque is out of proportion to the small size of Bucharest’s Muslim population. The 13,000 square meter (140,000 square foot) project, to be situated near the Romexpo trade fair grounds, includes a mosque for 2,000 worshippers, a Koran school, a library and a recreational center.
Bucharest is home to around 9,000 Muslims who are being served by ten mosques scattered throughout the city. The Muslim population of Romania is 65,000, or less than one percent of the country’s population of 19.5 million. Most are ethnic Turks and Tatars living in the Dobrogea region of eastern Romania.
In an interview with Balkan Insight, historian Ionut Cojocaru said:
“It is a bit surprising, building such a big mosque in a country where the number of Muslims is very small. This is just a sign of Turkey’s neo-Ottoman policy, which is designed to promote its economic and political interests all around the Balkans.”
Turkey has been on a mega-mosque building spree across the Balkans and Eastern Europe as part of an effort by Ankara to expand its influence — and its brand of Islam — in the region.
In interviews with Balkan specialist Michael Bird, several observers said that Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s international mosque-building program is part of a plan to project Turkey as the pre-eminent Muslim nation.
“Ultimately every mosque abroad with a Turkish brand name seems to contribute to the discourse of Turkey as a leading Islamic power,” said Kerem Oktem, Professor of Modern Turkey at the University of Graz.
Ozgur Kazim Kivanc, an activist opposed to Erdoğan’s destruction of public commons to build mosques, added:
“The Roman Empire used to build temples on the places they took over to remind people of their conquest. We believe the instinct is the same. Places of worship are not compulsory for a belief system to spread — especially in Islam. This plan is not about worship, it is about marking the territory of their authority through a monument.”
Former Romanian President Traian Basescu worries that the Bucharest mosque could fuel Islamic extremism in the country. He has said the mosque project is “irresponsible” and a threat to national security. On Facebook he wrote:
“Perhaps you cannot imagine a subway station in Bucharest, during rush hour, where a young man would blow himself up in the name of Allah. Or perhaps your intelligence cannot help you imagine young Romanians who have failed in life being sent off to training camps in Syria, Iraq or Afghanistan and brought back to Europe in order to bring us the benefits of the Islamic State.”
Islamic State has repeatedly stated that Romania and other parts of Eastern Europe and the Balkans are part of its “pan-Islamic Caliphate.” Omar Bakri Muhammad, a prominent Sunni Islamist cleric who has recruited British jihadis for Islamic State, has alleged that Romania is Islamic territory. In an interview with the Bulgarian daily 24 Chasa (24 Hours), he said:
“Once Islam enters a land, that land becomes Islamic and Muslims have the duty to liberate it someday. Spain, for example, is Islamic land, and so is Eastern Europe: Romania, Albania, Macedonia, Serbia, Kosovo and Bosnia…”
Basescu has also said he believes the mosque — the first purpose-built mosque in the Romanian capital (the existing places of Muslim worship in the city are buildings converted into mosques or prayer rooms) — is not actually meant for Bucharest’s Muslim population, but for Muslim migrants who will arrive in the years ahead.
During a visit to Romania in April 2015, President Erdoğan said the mosque will be the “the most beautiful expression of dialogue and solidarity between the two countries.”
A Romanian Muslim leader, however, expressed skepticism about Turkey’s intentions. “We heard about it on TV, like everyone else,” he said. “We are Romanian Muslims, but now the Turkish are coming and they get the land. When they complete the building, they won’t even allow us there. So we are sold, thrown out.”
During an official visit to Turkey in March 2016, Romanian President Klaus Iohannis tried to reassure Erdoğan that the mosque project is moving forward, despite mounting opposition at home. Commenting on the trip, the daily România Liberă wrote:
“Apparently Iohannis demanded nothing but a measly Orthodox chapel that will probably be built somewhere on the outskirts of Istanbul in exchange for the construction of the mosque…. Erdoğan has inherited from the Ottomans the skill of making his guests feel more important than they are. … Iohannis was welcomed with a military ceremony including the firing of 21 cannon salvoes which only sultans offer their guests. … In the end, however, Erdoğan will despise him for letting himself be tricked and making it so easy for him to turn the president of an EU state into a vassal of his court.”
Some Romanian politicians are now calling for a referendum on the mosque. More than 90% of the public is opposed to the project, according to an online survey conducted by the mainstream newspaper Gândul.
Meanwhile, the pending lawsuit calls on the court to annul the government’s grant of free city land for the mosque project. The lawsuit states:
“We consider the disposal of free land which, ironically, belonged to the family of Prince Constantin Brâncoveanu, who was beheaded by the Turks on August 15, 1714, to be a betrayal of the Romanian people. In the current context in which all of Europe is being brought to its knees by terrorist attacks by Muslim extremists, we are entitled to fear the establishment of Islamic learning schools. We believe the Romanian state is unable to ensure the security of its citizens, and approving a mega-mosque in Romania could set a precedent with unintended catastrophic consequences.”
rojan Horses in Women’s Movement by Khadija Khan
It must be so convenient, while marching in the safe confines of Washington DC, to advocate that other women — far away — be genitally mutilated, married off in childhood, and beaten and violated in their own homes. These women in hijabs marching on Washington do not have to live in this “Utopia.” They are comfortably living in the “infidel West,” protected from such barbarity.
The Western culture that allows women to shout into microphones is not even necessarily the culture these women believe in; it is often just a tool they use to promote totalitarian ideas such as anti-Semitism, religious intolerance and imposition of theocratic beliefs.
Does Linda Sarsour really think that people have gone so mad that they will give up the civil liberties that their ancestors earned through the centuries, merely for interest-free loans?
The hypocrisy is that Sarsour’s bold lifestyle in the US portrays that deep down she herself loathes the suppressing conditions that she promotes for the poor women of the Muslim world, who actually have to live with them. Coming from a conservative Muslim society, I know the culture she yearns for would never allow her to launch such activism without permission from her “guardian” men.
The dissenting voices of the oppressed are fighting on two fronts. They are being crushed by their own totalitarian regimes and at the same time by Western apologists for these tyrants.
Why do women who believe in equal rights for women, pick as their spokesperson someone who one minute boasts of her supposed dissent as “patriotism,” while the next minute advocating chopping off other womens’ genitals? It is like choosing a hangman to campaign against the death penalty, or the head of ISIS to campaign for same sex marriages.
The principles of “dissent,” of which they claim to be so proud, and to have borrowed from religious sources, are actually the modern world’s liberal values and human rights — just those rights values they seem to be trying to destroy.
From the other side of their mouths, however, they are trying to impose Islamic sharia law on the West. Unfortunately, sharia is openly antagonistic to Western values and human rights.
How can cults that believe in dominating others call themselves progressive, when their entire message runs counter to the spirit of tolerance and social coexistence?
The champions of sharia have always said they wish to establish a “righteous” form of government, made by divine law, and presumably to that end, they implant their set of rules — such as allowing no debate or criticism on their beliefs, or such as segregating sexes — to destroy modern democracies.
It must be so convenient, while marching on Washington DC, to advocate that other women — far away — be genitally mutilated, married off in childhood, and domestically beaten and violated — and all the while, in the safe confines of Washington, to stay silent on issues of truly massive abuse: floggings; acid burnings; chopping off limbs or heads, or burning, drowning or burying people alive.
These women in hijabs marching on Washington DC do not have to live in this “Utopia.” They are comfortably living in the “infidel West’, protected from such barbarity.
The values they are enjoying here are the values of the enlightened world and have nothing to do with the culture they are trying to impose on others.
The culture that is allowing women such as Linda Sarsour to shout into microphones is not even necessarily the culture these women believe in; it is often just the culture they are using to promote totalitarian ideas such as anti-Semitism, religious intolerance and the imposition of theocratic beliefs through infiltration or force.
The culture to which Sarsour says she aspires, allows mutilating women but does not allow women to speak in a loud tone, let alone speaking through microphones. Hence, she owes her current privileges to her American identity.
Muslim activist Linda Sarsour one minute boasts of her supposed dissent as “patriotism,” while the next minute advocates chopping off other womens’ genitals. (Image source: Seriously.TV video screenshot)
Sarsour stated in a tweet on May 13, 2015: “You’ll know when you’re living under Sharia Law if suddenly all your loans & credit cards become interest free. Sound nice, doesn’t it?”
Then she wrote on an April 29, 2014 tweet: “@RobertWildiris I don’t drink alcohol, don’t eat pork, I follow Islamic way of living. That’s all Sharia law is.”
It would be nice if the only requirements of sharia were avoiding alcohol or pork were; there happens, however, to be an ocean of dos and don’ts that fall into the category of “I follow Islamic way of living.”
The ocean Sarsour never bothered to mention, but that the world witnesses every day, exists from the Saudi palaces to the caves of Afghanistan and Raqqa.
The culture that Sarsour desires to impose on the world — along with promises to waive interest on loans — does not allow women to interact with unrelated men, drive cars, ride bicycles, attend sports events, leave the house without permission, or wear makeup and clothes that reveal their body parts, let alone address a crowd.
Women would also need four male witnesses to prove a rape, or risk being stoned to death for “adultery.”
Does Sarsour really think that people have gone so mad that they will give up all of their civil liberties and freedom that their ancestors earned through the centuries, merely for interest free loans?
The hypocrisy is that her bold lifestyle in the US portrays that deep down, she herself loathes the suppressing conditions that she likes promoting for the poor women of the Muslim world who actually have to live with them.
How would these women in hijabs like to spend a few weeks under the totalitarian regimes about which they love to brag?
Three British girls who followed the call of ISIS leader Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi slipped into Syria to join the jihad, only to be desperate over the mistake they had made; one is believed dead.
Kadiza Sultana, Shamima Begum and Amira Abase, intoxicated by ISIS propaganda, entered Syria to join the holy mission and be ISIS brides.
Sultana reportedly was killed in a Russian airstrike while too scared to try an escape from ISIS, fearing extreme torture and public execution if caught.
The whereabouts of the other two are still unknown, apart from rare contact reported between them and their families.
Sophie Kasiki, a French girl who also managed to break away from the ISIS stronghold in Raqqa with her four-year-old son, said she risked death if caught to try to save her son. She defined the ordeal of being with ISIS as “a journey into a hell from which there seemed no return.”
Samra Kesinovic, a 17 year old Austrian girl, was reportedly beaten to death by ISIS fighters when she was caught trying to flee, after being “gifted” by her partner to another ISIS fighter as a sex slave.
The irony is that Linda Sarsour and her followers say they love Hamas and caliphates like the one established by Abu Bakar al-Baghdadi, or Saudi and Iranian regimes — but of course they do not live in them.
Sarsour has doubtless been put forward by men to promote their soft image as they themselves cannot boast about the rights they are giving to their women.
Coming from a conservative Muslim society, I know the culture she yearns for would never allow her to launch such activism without permission from her “guardian” men.
How come she forgot to mention that in Saudi Arabia and many other Muslim states, her kind of activism would cost a woman her family, her honour and probably her life.
A court in the state of Washington suspended the ban on travelers from seven mainly Muslim countries imposed by the President Trump last week.
Would any judge or influential person dare refute the order of, say, the Saudi King, a sharia council of Iran, a member of a royal family from a Middle Eastern country, a military dictator or the Hamas leaders Sarsour apparently so admires?
You cannot even imagine in your worst nightmares dissenting in those sharia-compliant territories, but yes, dissent is allowed in the US and the West, where people are freely allowed to speak their thoughts.
These are not the values of the alien land she professes to admire; these were fought for and earned by the people of the West with their blood.
The progressives’ one-sided love affair with extremists will never serve the purpose of promoting equality.
In fact, it could be counterproductive. In Egypt, the conservative men used women as protestors to overthrow Husni Mubarak’s regime, but once the Muslim Brotherhood, which spearheaded the Morsi regime, took control, the whole world watched in shock as they imposed sharia on everyone — most of all on those women. The Morsi regime later punished women who protested the Iranian-style sharia that it was imposing.
The same imams who were the moving spirits behind Egypt’s revolution were then delivering fatwas [religious opinions] to rape the same women who had been marching in the streets for their rights. According to al Arabiyya:
“An Egyptian Salafi preacher, said raping and sexually harassing women protesters in Cairo’s Tahrir Square is justified, calling them “crusaders” who “have no shame, no fear and not even feminism…. Abu Islam added that these women activists are going to Tahrir Square not to protest but to be sexually abused because they had wanted to be raped…And by the way, 90 percent of them are crusaders and the remaining 10 percent are widows who have no one to control them.. ”
Around 80 women were molested in one night alone, when the Morsi government was ousted and people came out to celebrate his departure.
Those are the views Sarsour is trying to sell.
The same men these liberals and progressives are trying to empower, once enthroned, would declare them apostates and inflict the worst imaginable punishments on them for the “crimes” they are committing by promoting the set of values they think bring harmony in the world.
The dissenting voices of the oppressed are fighting on two fronts. They are being crushed by their own totalitarian regimes and at the same time by apologists for these tyrants whom the marchers are empowering — probably without even realizing what massive harm they are doing.
Khadija Khan is a Pakistan-based journalist and commentator.
