Andrew Sullivan says Turkey may be the United States' "most important ally" (really?) and condemns "myopic" Europe for not immediately welcoming a non-European country into the EU. Easy for him to say of course. So does Andrew support the resolution coming before Congress that would (finally) recognise the Armenian genocide? Or does he line up with the American foreign policy establishment and think this is a subject best left under the carpet? I think I can recall Andrew being pretty vociferous about the horror of western indifference to Darfur and I doubt he'd be quite so friendly towards anyone who denied the Jewish (and gypsy and homosexual) holocaust so where does this Turkophilia* come from? Which is it, posturing or principle? I'm as glib as the next clown but this just seems, well, glib and just another opportunistic stick with which to beat the Bush administration.
*I am not a Turkophobe. I'd love to spend more time in Istanbul for instance. Fascinating place. But Turkey's desire to be an EU member is far from a slam-dunk, so to speak.
October 06, 2007
Given it's sullivan it's mere posturing about turkey.
It's a useful stick with which to beat the france & germans who he's never forgiven for being right about the iraq war whilst he was busy grovelling at the feet of his then heroes bush,cheney & rumsfeld and shrieking abuse at any who opposed them.
Hell hath no fury like a columnist made ridiculous.
Posted by: kb | October 07, 2007 at 11:43 AM