How should we interpret Iran’s President Ahmadinejad’s joining the oath ceremony of the new President of Ecuador leftist economist Rafeal Correa and hand in hand with the Bolivian leader Evo Moralles in a very friendly manner?

When we  look at the entire of the same photo, the message is clear. An Islamist known President is taking place in the oath ceremony that the leftist leaders administrating most of the South American countries which are mentined as the back garden of America. Many take place in the oath ceremony as the meeting of the anti-American groups.Venazuella’s leader Hugo Chavez,Bolivian President Evo Moralles,  Nicaragua’s revolutionary leader Daniel Ortega,Chili’s President  Michelle Bachelet, Brasilian leader Lula da Silva…And among them Iran’s President coming from thousands of miles away. In an atmosphere he is criticized even in his country for such an utopical enterprise of strategic partnership against America

In fact at the back stage of the photo Ahmedinejad is seen,( even independent from the photo in a way) there is a different intellectual discussion.The meeting of the Islamists targeted by America and the leftist movement, is their cooperation possible?

Especially after the Iraqi invasion, the anti-war movements that met with the common aim of the Islamists started a new discussion. But in Turkey in this context, a few weak voices were heard and the discussion was no way further than the intellectual show  for the media columns. We must take into account  the efforts for the most recent political formation apart from this discussion.

At least in the west, with all its brightness, the discussions questioning the opportunities of the common movement around the slogan identified with the leftist movements as the anti-imperialist. But in Turkey in an atmosphere that from the conservatives(confused with Islamism) to the leftists a wide group of people were eager to be abettors and liberalism was percepted as a dogma that should be believed in, not many people were interested in neither the political nor the intellectual side of these discussions.

The important matter coming out especially in the internet that had a very important function as an alternative means of communication in  the period of the global invasion especially after 9/11 is the need of another speech for the leftist movement in the world

The leftist movement is forced to find a ground after the romantic protests more than the “anti-globalization” criticizing the system that emerged after the anti-exploitation left its place during the cold war.

At this point it was inevitable for the western life styles of the leftist intellectuals to face with the Islamic world and Islam targeted  against the values of the civilisation.  Even the discussions have started recently, interesting discussions are taking place about where it goes with the Islamists (the definition of this word is another question)  at least are thought to gather around the “anti-imperialist” talks.

Among them Fred Halliday’s article briefly  saying that the it is a dream for the left to meet with Islamists( www.opendemocrasi.com) Fred Halliday, among the tutors of the famous  London School of Economics (LSE)  is known as the Middle East expert

With a complete orientalist point of view it is not something new not only  trying to present the Islamist movements as the operational extention of all the suppressive administarations including  reactionism and facism but also trying to present this as a historical back stage( Starting from Amr Abdulkadir,the label to the Muslim resistance against the exploitation as secular nationalists.)

But these arguments, aiming to cut the leftist lookout, patterns barrowed from the orientalist speeches(his doctorate study was on Yemen) even distorting the contemporary political history, basically, turn into the repetiton of the characters locking the discussions of life styles, anti-imperialist issue, academic disciplines, the western way of thinking,

He is trying to get rid of this dispute by trying to offer such a primitive life style to Islam apart from proving his claims in his article (12/1/2007) as a reply to the article written by Fouzi Slisli and Jacqueline Kaye  that disproofs the cooperative claims of the Islamist movements who bring a big criticism to his claims.

The reason why I talk about these is neither to talk about the miserable situation of the left or to write a legend of rebellion in Iraq after all that had happened.The point that the Islamists and the leftist ally against the globalization could not notice is; opposing the imperialism and the global capitalism has a more sophisticated dimension and more than protesting, systematically it should be taken into account.

For example we must notice the nonsenseness of  protesting the exploitation before questioning our consuming habbits.

At this point, if we take it from the opposite side,we must think why the Islamic values are targeted in the new American doctrine.

Still Muslims are holding in their hands the system of the values that can develope alternative power that can stand against the global capitalism.

The new orientalist academicians as F. Halliday seen in the leftist environment, since they are aware of this, when needed can leave the anti-imperialist literature and negotiate with the global capitalism.

After the collapse of the Soviet Union, the left without a political ground in order to replace the anti-imperialism on a real ground, initially must face with the Islamic world.

Otherwise they can function as the left version of the Great Middle East Project after being pushed into the paranthesis of the woman rights and sexual freedom.

It is the responsibility of the Islamists to rescue Islamism and the Islam world from the representation trap as Al- Qaide.

Ýlgili YazýlarEnglish, Siyaset