Turkey appears to be in Benghazi's bad books
Erdogan: his star is waning in Benghazi
Pointing out to the government that accepting a visit from Gaddafi’s envoy last Monday was a strategic error because it sent out the wrong message to the right people felt like shouting into the wind.
The government’s (and the Opposition’s) ‘why not?’ attitude left me gobsmacked. I can think of several reasons why not and no reasons why. Perception is a hugely important factor, and once a bad impression has been created, it’s pointless going on about the facts. Just don’t create the bad impression in the first place, especially when there’s no compensation to be had.
What did the government of Malta gain by meeting Abd El Ati Obeidi on Monday night? Nothing. What did it lose for Malta? A lot, in terms of negative perception.
That’s the way I look at it, and when I see what’s being said online among Libyan dissidents and those who support the Benghazi Transitional Council, I know that I’m not wrong.
Resentment against Greece and Turkey, already simmering before the visit, has now begun to bubble. That resentment might be entirely misplaced and based on erroneous interpretation of the facts, but there you go. It’s happening. Why create that kind of situation in the first place, by making it unclear where you stand on the matter of Gaddafi?
Rebel leader Abd El Fattah Younes has been very cross over the last couple of days because the coalition forces, now led by NATO, are taking hours to respond to emergencies on the battlefield. This is happening because NATO, unlike the coalition when led by the United States and Britain, is bureaucratic. It has a civil service approach to attack.
“Nato is moving very slowly, allowing Gaddafi forces to advance. Nato has become our problem,” Younes said.
On the social networking sites, among Libyan Opposition groups, the NATO slowdown – which isn’t really a slowdown at all, given the number of missions flown since Monday – is being linked to Gaddafi’s envoy’s visit to Turkey on Monday. Now Turkey is being blamed for obstructing NATO action.
There is nothing to verify anything of this, but from the perception standpoint, that is almost irrelevant. It is very clearly a case of atrocious public affairs management on Turkey’s part, and to some extent, NATO’s too.
This is a typical comment on a Facebook Group which gathers opponents of the Gaddafi regime:
Turkey is blocking NATO and NATO is blocking the revolutionary forces. by preventing them from using their aircraft and artillery, but refraining from preventing gaddafi’s forces from using theirs, turkey is quietly turning the implementation of security resolution 1973 into a stalling maneuver to buy time for gaddafi, to impose a de facto cease fire, in the hope of creating such desperate conditions that a conciliatory deal must be reached under turkish auspices, thus saving all previous deals made between the turkish government and the gaddafi regime. the best of all possible worlds, at least for the turkish government.
In a crisis like this, anger can turn so quickly and so irrationally that even Turkey’s evacuation of more than 200 seriously wounded people from Misurata, under armed guard, is not enough to put minds at rest.
There is talk of an aid ship from Turkey being told ‘thanks but no thanks’ – I can’t find anything to bear this out, but the talk alone is indicative of sentiment and perception – because the gesture was seen as hypocritical. “First they shoot us, then they give us a bandage”, somebody wrote on the internet.
Of course it isn’t Turkey doing the shooting, but minds under pressure cease to be rational and greater care must be taken with the messages given out. The thinking becomes: Turkey is a friend of Gaddafi. Gaddafi is shooting at us. Turkey is part of that (even though it is not).
10 Comments Comment
Leave a Comment
“Turkey is blocking NATO and NATO is blocking the revolutionary forces. by preventing them from using their aircraft and artillery, but refraining from preventing gaddafi’s forces from using theirs, turkey is quietly turning the implementation of security resolution 1973 into a stalling maneuver to buy time for gaddafi,”
I’m quite sure there is at least an element of truth in that. It is exceedingly easily to screw up things in NATO thanks to its over-democratic way of running things, which is totally inappropriate for what is meant to be a military organisation.
There are surely elements in the Turkish government that love Gaddafi just as much as KMB does and if they happen to be in the right places they will find it all too easy to throw a spanner in the works. Keep in mind that in such an operation even a small delay is enough to render it ineffective. It is surprising that NATO action actually works at all in the best of times, let alone when being undermined from within.
Turkey has always been an uncomfortable member, for the other members that is. The only reason it was admitted was to deny it to the Soviet Union. Since that dissolved it has become no more than a liability to NATO.
Turkey has been an uncomfortable member of any Western organisation it was ever part of. Its only comfortable role was that of conqueror, oppressor and ethnic cleanser in the Ottoman Empire. If you think it’s uncomfortable now as a NATO member, just wait until it joins the EU. If we Eurowussies ever want to be cured of our decades-long colonial guilt-trip, we only have to look at the Turkish army’s annual parade in Istanbul (sorry, Constantinople), complete with Janissaries and Spahis in costume.
But tish and piddle. Re. NATO being slow in Libya: 1) It’s a bit rich of the rebels to start blaming NATO for their troubles when they cannot bring themselves to suffer even a small number of casualties in their advance to Tripoli, and 2) NATO cannot bring its high-tech power to bear if Gaddafi’s tanks are surrounded by civilians. In any case, NATO has chosen a very restrictive interpretation of UNSCR 1973, and it’s the individual members under national command who are doing any of the shooting.
If I were one of the rebels I would point my anger at those countries which provided armaments to Gaddafi. Interestingly, the US was not one of them and France was, and yet we saw the French flag being waved in Benghazi during the first coalition strikes.
People’s perception changes from “hosanna” to “crucify him” within days.
So please leave the PR out of this. Governments which run on public perception and PR are bound to crash in a wall.
[Daphne – On the contrary, it is governments which do not do so that crash into that wall, John. I’m not talking here of perception without substance, but of substance with the right perception. Unfortunately, what Malta has on its hands in this crisis is no substance badly portrayed. A double negative.]
http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/World-News/Video-Colonel-Gaddafi-Sends-Message-To-Barack-Obama-As-Nato-Rebukes-Criticism-From-Rebels/Article/201104115967221?f=rss
http://www.todayszaman.com/news-240294-no-breakthrough-on-horizon-yet-for-libya-cease-fire.html
Gaddafi’s men try to obliterate traces of massacre in Zawiyah.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/africa/gaddafis-men-try-to-obliterate-traces-of-massacre-in-zawiya-2263670.html
Turkey says Gaddafi should go.
http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/131391/20110406/libya-turkey.htm
http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20110406/local/libya-we-are-stepping-up-strikes-nato
http://www.africanaonline.com/2011/04/libyan-rebels-want-to-install-a-democracy/
To however dreams of a change in the arab world ,read the following taken fron CNN news
“A popular uprising in Tunisia led to the ouster of its president, Zine al-Abedine Ben Ali, in January. While protesters succeeded in spurring a regime change there, many Tunisians are not seeing the kind of transformation they were imagining.
“I come from Tunisia, everyone you see here comes from Tunisia, we are all afraid after the revolution that has taken place because nothing has changed up until now,” said one migrant who made it to Lampedusa. “From the date of January 14 (when Ben Ali left), nothing has changed. All of us here, we are not asking for anything, we only ask for a possibility to find work in Europe.”