We are not happy with the situation we are in. While one aspect of our dissatisfaction looks entirely at us, the other aspect stems entirely from the world we are exposed to. We understand and agree with a poet when he says that he ‘hates the world with its flesh and bones’. On the one hand, we find ourselves responsible, and on the other hand, we wonder what that responsibility entails. A long list could be made, just to get a picture of the discontent we are in. For example, in its most visible and simplest aspect, the existence of all kinds of oppression in the world continues to perpetuate itself like a malignant tumor that has spread to all areas of life. Moreover, we see that there are those who both feed this and are fed by it. Well, is there no coping with this, and moreover, no rebellion against what is happening? Yes, there have been examples of this throughout history, it is happening today and will happen in the future. Essentially, the world has a nature that we call the struggle between right and wrong.
What you read in the first paragraph will have meaning if you take it back thousands of years or to the future and express it to people, regardless of time and place. This means that our unrest is not due to today and what is happening today, it is partly the nature of being in the world. But most of the time our eyes are closed and we tend to take the current state of the world for granted. Some people’s eyes have always been open, some people’s eyes were opened by certain special events they encountered in their lives, and the majority perhaps still insist on closing their eyes. What is said is normal. What will be the benefit of declaring the obvious? So many words to remember and to acknowledge the state in which we are again and moreover, the state in which we wish to be…
A process that started in Gaza on October 7 has just opened the eyes of some of us, and for some of us it has the opportunity to present evidence to the eyes that are open, and continues to do so. I hope you will forgive me for writing like this, hoping for something good for ourselves from something bad. The fact that your eyes are already open is not a reason for superiority, but its value should not be ignored. At the same time, when the majority regain their eyesight, pure vision will have no special meaning. If there is and will be a special meaning, it will be by ‘responding’ to what is happening in a Muslim way, whether while seeing it or beforehand, ‘to the extent of our understanding and power’. Now, as much as I can, I will try to give a picture of Turkey, what is happening in Turkey and the world, with the Gaza incident and in the ongoing process, so that I can show what we can act with and what value criteria we can take into account when taking even one step, let alone taking action.
As of today, Israel’s massacre has been continuing in Gaza for more than 200 days. Since the first day, the UN and other global structures have not actually been about ‘human dignity and dignity’; We witnessed that they centered their own sovereignty. So much so that many countries, large and small, have taken many steps that will not pose a threat to global hegemony and will not actually contribute to the solution of the issue. In other words, ‘condemnation’ messages were published, which we know have no value in the simplest form. Or dozens of similar dysfunctional steps. The only reason I say dysfunctional is because ‘no steps taken are sufficient to stop Israel, and they provide psychological power to Israel with their dysfunctionality’. I mean, it is a functional step; it will either stop Israel or make it step back, punish those responsible, and ultimately hand over the rights of the Palestinian people to them. But it seems that international hegemony has achieved a consensus at the state level. In other words, no matter what is done, no matter what steps are taken, all states expect Israel to stop ‘with its own decision’ and end this massacre. Moreover, unfortunately, no one has any information about when and under what conditions Israel will stop. This roughly means: Will Israel stop when Gaza is leveled and the occupation army is firmly established there, or will it enter Egyptian territory all the way to the Red Sea in the next step? Maybe after this incident, it will haunt countries like Lebanon and Jordan… There is no answer to any of these questions. Every state seems to have submitted to the eschatological creed of Zionism, as if the existence of the present is inevitable. In short, today’s world has such an organized structure and institutions after World War II that what Israel does today; It both supports and maintains ideologically, militarily, politically, economically – and probably religiously – aspects.
No matter how dark and hopeless this world picture may seem, it is only meant to be determined. On the other hand, let me leave two notes that will reassure us: First of all, the verse that says ‘If they have an account, Allah also has an account on them’ is one of the branches that I hold on to. The sensitivity of ‘being His helpers, that is, being Ansarullah’ for the sake of Allah, is perhaps the underlying reason for all these sharings. Secondly, we have the belief that ‘life is not limited to this worldly life and there is an afterlife where everyone will be taken into account and given exactly what they deserve.’ Whether there is a reward or a punishment for what you have done here, that judgment will eventually come to pass.
***
We live in a country and this country we live in is not exempt from any of the issues mentioned above. We need to know that in the world picture, which seems like an international consensus to us, almost every country has its own dynamics. This means; While there is sensitivity among the civilian population for Palestine in almost the entire world, each country, with its own internal dynamics, is able to keep the ‘objection forms’ arising from this sensitivity under control, in a way that does not hinder Israel’s actions. While every action taken ‘within the framework of democratic rights or within its borders’ allows civilians to say ‘I did something’, on the other hand, ‘the oppression continues with all its violence’. In this respect, what happens in this country is essentially no different from other countries.
***
In April, an ‘action’ took place in Taksim with the statement ‘Stop trade with Israel’ and we encountered a picture on the occasion of the action. I can say that the official attitude towards all the actions carried out in this country since October 7 has changed with the action in question. I should unpack this statement a bit:
Yes, as in other countries, civilians in Turkey have demonstrated certain actions through NGOs or different organizations. Some of them were organized through NGOs known to be close to the government, some were carried out by person or persons who had no ideological agenda and were put forward only to support Palestine, and some were carried out by those who also had an ideological agenda. Throughout this process, we, as civilians, almost agreed that the only concrete step we could take against Israel, that is, that could touch the incident, was ‘boycott’. Because, apart from a step taken with the belief that ‘hundreds of thousands of people could gather as civilians and go to Gaza’, we did not know any way that we could physically touch the oppression there. With this ignorance, we took a step under the name of ‘March of the Free’. For this step to be functional, it only depended on the collection of hundreds of thousands of people, and by God’s will, we could not achieve this. Of course, we also have shortcomings, but shortcomings are not appreciated. However, when we finally returned from the march and wondered “what will we do now?”, we, as civilians, took another step by seeing that our biggest weapon was “boycott”. We designed and implemented the ‘Murder Scene’ action to make the boycott more widespread and more noticeable. However, although we were pleased to have carried out the action and contributed to the boycott to some extent, we had no idea other than that we could only affect the incident by boycotting within our own borders.
You must have noticed that I persistently used the phrase ‘civilian’. As I tried to explain above, if there is no authority in the world to stop Israel and our objections do not change the attitudes of our own countries and do not cause them to change, I prefer this word because what is done can only be done civilianly. And I persistently said, “We did not know a way that could concretely affect the incident in Gaza.” It was past tense, there is now an interval when a path we know appears clearly before us. And this is this: ‘Although the government stated that its heart was on the side of the Palestinians from the beginning and that it could not do anything in this world order, it continued to trade through certain state institutions, other than private companies, sometimes from the first moment this news became known.’ We naturally agreed to turn the word ‘cut off trade’, which is voiced weakly and sometimes loudly, into an action, that is, into a relationship of objection.
From now on, our only problem was to be clear about the justification and form of the action and to implement the action. There is only one basis for the action to be functional in this country, and that is that the government declares that it is ‘on the side of the Palestinians’ from the very beginning. So that promise had a binding force. Otherwise, there would be no reward for telling the government to ‘cut off trade’. For example, in America, instead of saying ‘cut off trade’, people say ‘do not send the war equipment and ammunition you have obtained with our taxes to Israel – free of charge’. Or you may hear a similar saying in a country in Europe. While their governments, let alone doing business, publicly side with Israel and declare their positions and maintain that position despite the public, the situation is different here.
Ultimately, while such an objection in other countries was absorbed by the governments in their own way, in Turkey, while we were still in the planning phase, the action in Taksim quickly found a response from the government and a circular was published by the Ministry of Commerce, ‘restricting trade’.
What else happened? First of all, the police intervened very violently against this group, which included Muslim people, and they put the organizers of this action in the same category and declared that it was the work of their political opponents, and they also took a step that would achieve and justify the action, and also deny them.
Basically, a few issues emerged: While NGOs known to be close to the government have been taking part in protests for a long time, their actions could not directly affect the incident, but the step taken by a group defined as opposition by the ‘government’ was productive. I want you to think about what kind of psychological impact this has on the NGOs in question. Not only were their trust in the government damaged, but almost all of their own actions were in vain, and they were faced with an area of activity opened by a group they saw as opposing them. Moreover, they will have to design their next steps ‘in order not to be seen as opposition’, and perhaps they will ‘refrain from taking many actions that can be taken regarding trade’. Because the government now has a trump card, which is this: Every action taken can easily be marginalized and removed from the agenda under the name of ‘anti-government’. Or another title: Similar to the expression ‘anti-government’, the label ‘Iranism/Shia’ is another possible trump card in the hands of the government.
Both of these approaches became visible after the protest in Taksim and changed the government’s attitude towards actions to be taken, especially on ‘trade and international relations’, both in terms of treatment and discourse.
***
To sum up the part so far: Just as the internal dynamics of other countries absorb the objections, actions and protests there and do not touch Israel’s actions; The internal dynamics of our country were working differently until the incident in Taksim, but now – and with these local election results – they started to work differently.
Since we want something we do to concretely touch Israel, we need to give serious thought to every action and every step we take, along with other variables that I cannot think of but that you may think of.
Because it is a fact that there are ‘NGOs close to the government that are confused about what to do’ in the face of what is happening, as well as ‘groups that are trying to become an instrument of the daily political discussions of this country with all their actions’. Yet another fact is that, despite everything, in the country we live in, there are various tendencies that support Israel, both individually, on a corporate basis, and by the state. In other words, society was not a single entity from the beginning. That’s why not a single store has been closed due to boycott.
***
In the final analysis: Whatever we do, we have only one intention: to gain God’s consent with what we do. Since this is the case, some events have occurred and continue to occur that we need to take into consideration. While society has already begun to transform mentally, the attitude towards people who are ‘opposed’ to the government’s discourse in Taksim and the new atmosphere created after the elections and every step to be taken should be carefully considered.
After determining our intention correctly, the most important thing is that the action to be taken reflects that intention as much as possible. Our intention is indeed to concretely touch the massacre in Gaza and, if possible, to stop Israel’s massacre. If we cannot achieve this, we must put pressure on the institutions that can afford this and ensure that they take steps. Ultimately, when we cannot do these things, all we have left is a boycott.
It seems that, in this period of time that This Country is going through, certain actions to be taken for Palestine (not as a form, but as a discourse) are doomed to be just an appetizer of daily political language. This has nothing to do with us only because of our intention. In other words, even if our intentions are listed as I stated at the beginning, if they are turned into an apparatus of everyday political language, our action will not be enough to signal our intention. Moreover, it is a fact that every step taken is binding for the description and definition of those who take the step. This is a phenomenon that is almost completely beyond our control, but will come back to us.
We can say that we clearly stated our intention and organized an action, but they misunderstood us and used us as a tool for their political discourse, what could happen? In fact, of course, this is a matter of choice, but let’s also accept that encountering this situation means that the action will not reach its ultimate goal.
First of all, we were preoccupied with form and space rather than an action we would take in front of companies to stop trade. Now, I don’t think we necessarily intended to take this action and we should do it. We can also consciously adopt inertia as an action for a while.
So, what do I suggest? First of all, I assume that everyone has a sensitivity to ‘not being an instrument of political language’ in the sense I mentioned in this process we are going through. (I suggest you seriously consider this in your own inner world.) If we agree on this issue, in the second step, I would like you to consider what and what kind of action can be taken or not to take action for a certain period of time, including the statement ‘cut off trade’, with this sensitivity. .
What I’m really looking for is the search for ‘building a third way or language’. How do I briefly describe the two paths available? 1) Taking advantage of the current situation and using ‘Palestine’ as a tool of political discourse against the government. 2) The ambivalent attitude of the government and NGOs known to be close to it.
But apart from these two, can we have an idea and implement a third discourse as an action? It is such an idea and discourse that when it shows itself in action, it is a step that will be abandoned by saying ‘Muslims did this’ and, as a friend said, ‘the action itself will be the result’. Yes, maybe the government, certain companies and institutions will not benefit from it, but the ‘Kemalist’-minded media team will not be able to stand behind it and use it as a tool.
In fact, it is cruel to talk about these things during this period of time that we are going through, while the massacre in Gaza continues, but in my opinion, the reality of the country we live in and the functionality of the action to be taken can only be achieved through the construction of this third way-language. What could this third way be? What kind of idea, discourse and action can it be?
For example, as a suggestion and idea: A ‘short sentence’ to express this third way could be painted on walls in every corner of the country. That sentence can be printed on t-shirts, worn and disseminated. Videos consisting of just one sentence can be disseminated on all social media, including YouTube and Instagram. For example, the image of a Palestinian child with his back turned, drawn by Hanzala, alone tells us many things, and this discourse can be disseminated in a similar way. To popularize this, silent walks with only this word can be held. One day in Istanbul with a small group, the other day in another city. What could this saying be? Ideas are needed. If we take this step without building the intellectual infrastructure I mentioned, we may become action-aholic. We may even ‘rejoice with every flourishing’, but we also know that ‘the one who gets excited with every flourishing will ultimately be informed that the war is over by the command of the flourishing, and will be in the same winter quarters with all the defeated ones.’ Because it was not his own war, it was the war of the flourishing. His mistake was that he did not have his own idea and started his love with the love of others.
“It could be an interesting allegory or fiction, if it weren’t real: Steinmeir shakes the killer’s hand. Then he goes and shakes hands with the literary figures, the historians, the opposition and the government. This way, everyone’s hands touch each other once. This way everyone shakes hands.”
These expressions were expressed in a letter by a friend, using a concrete event as an occasion, based on the concern we are talking about here. This is an example of what I mean. This is a sign that shows us and our interlocutors what idea we have and where we want to talk. It is an attitude and action that would not be embraced by anyone with any political discourse, but could be put forward in a humane/natural and Muslim manner.
