New Age Islam
Wed Feb 12 2025, 03:13 AM

Middle East Press ( 1 Dec 2020, NewAgeIslam.Com)

Comment | Comment

Middle East Press On Turkey To Fix Ties With Israel, Barack Hussein Obama And Netanyahu: New Age Islam's Selection, 1 December 2020


By New Age Islam Edit Desk

1 December 2020

• Turkey Opens Secret Channel To Fix Ties With Israel

By Amberin Zaman

• Trump Is Leaving Biden A Landmine Field In The Middle East

By Joe Macaron

• A Political Flirt: The Diaries Of Barack Hussein Obama

By Marwan Bishara

• Netanyahu Prepares His Iran Cards Before Biden Takes Office

By Ben Caspit

------

Turkey Opens Secret Channel To Fix Ties With Israel

By Amberin Zaman

Nov 30, 2020


The chief of Turkey’s national intelligence service has been holding secret talks with Israeli officials, part of a Turkish-initiated effort to normalize relations, well-placed sources have told Al-Monitor. Speaking to Al-Monitor on condition that they not be identified by name, three sources confirmed that meetings had taken place in recent weeks with Hakan Fidan representing Turkey in at least one of them, but they declined to say where. Governments typically decline to formally comment on intelligence-related issues.

One of the sources said, “The traffic [between Turkey and Israel] is continuing,” but he did not elaborate. There has been no ambassador in either country since May 2018, when Turkey showed Israel’s ambassador the door over its bloody attacks on Gaza and Washington’s decision to move its embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.

Fidan is believed to have held several such meetings in the past, to discuss joint security concerns in Syria and Libya among other things, as first reported by Al-Monitor, but the sources said the latest round was specifically aimed at upgrading ties back to ambassador level.

There is mounting worry in Ankara that the incoming Joe Biden administration will be less indulgent of Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s bellicosity, which has seen Turkey mount three separate incursions against the Syrian Kurds since 2016, send troops and Syrian mercenaries to Libya and Azerbaijan, and lock horns with Greece in Aegean and Eastern Mediterranean waters. The biggest concern is that, unlike President Donald Trump, Biden will not shield Turkey from sanctions over its purchase of Russian S-400 missiles and for Turkish state lender Halkbank’s paramount role in facilitating Iran’s multibillion-dollar illicit oil for gold trade.

“The calculation is that making nice with Israel will win them favor with the Biden team,” said a Western official speaking not for attribution. “It’s like Lucy and the football; it works each time,” he said, referring to a recurring theme in the world-famous cartoon strip “Peanuts.”

Gallia Lindenstrauss, a senior research fellow at the Israeli Institute for National Security Studies, agrees that there’s a window of opportunity for turning the page. “I would think it would be in the interest of both states not to overstate the meaning of the step of bringing the ambassadors back. As relations were not downgraded in 2018, it is from the diplomatic protocol point of view a simple step.”

“Both states can present it as a goodwill step for the coming Biden administration that is likely to be more interested in relaxing tensions between Israel and Turkey than the Trump administration, which didn't push this agenda at all,” Lindenstrauss added in emailed comments to Al-Monitor.

Commercial ties between the two countries — vaunted as the only pro-secular democracies in the Middle East until Erdogan took a sharply authoritarian turn — have remained intact.

But one of the sources aired skepticism at the prospects of a real reset “for as long as Turkey continues to be the global headquarters for Hamas."

Israel alleges that hundreds of Hamas operatives, among them US-designated terrorists who have plotted attacks against the Jewish state, have been offered sanctuary and in some cases Turkish nationality by Ankara. In August, the State Department blasted Ankara for hosting two Hamas leaders, including Ismail Haniyeh, head of the Hamas political bureau. “President Erdogan’s continued outreach to this terrorist organization only serves to isolate Turkey from the international community, harms the interests of the Palestinian people, and undercuts global efforts to prevent terrorist attacks launched from Gaza,” it said in a statement.

Egypt, which has also had rocky relations with Turkey since the ouster of Mohammed Morsi, similarly accuses Turkey of harboring its Muslim Brotherhood opponents.

The prevailing consensus is that the United States’ waning diplomatic and military engagement in the region has eased what many view as Turkish irredentism in its former Ottoman dominions. However, despite its success in curbing Kurdish ambitions in Syria, salvaging Libya’s Government of National Accord from the jaws of a rival warlord, and helping Azerbaijan defeat Armenia, Turkey has found itself increasingly isolated. Israel, Egypt, Greece and Cyprus have united against Ankara’s ongoing gas drilling operations in contested waters in the Eastern Mediterranean through a mix of economic and military cooperation accords.

More broadly, Saudi Arabia, France and the United Arab Emirates in particular have been pushing back against Erdogan’s efforts to expand Turkey’s military hegemony across the Levant, the Maghreb and the Horn of Africa.

The UAE and Bahrain’s decision to establish diplomatic ties with Israel — scoring brownie points in Washington is part of their calculus too — has left Turkey looking even more friendless. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu will be in no rush to make up with Ankara just as he is courting Turkey’s Gulf foes.

Turkey’s growing economic difficulties are seen at the root of Erdogan’s efforts to shift course. These are poised to grow sharply worse despite continued Qatari benevolence should US or EU sanctions come into play. Tellingly, Turkey withdrew its seismic exploration vessel, the Oruc Reis, from the disputed Mediterranean waters Nov. 30 ahead of an EU summit that is due to be held Dec. 10-11 and where sanctions against Ankara are to be weighed.

In a further climb down, Ankara has now reached out to Saudi Arabia. Erdogan spoke to Saudi King Salman bin Abdul-Aziz Al Saud Nov. 21 ahead of a G20 summit chaired by Saudi Arabia. Turkish officials quoted by Middle East Eye said Erdogan sought his help to end an unofficial boycott of Turkish goods that is beginning to take a toll. Turkey’s exports to the kingdom fell 15% in September compared with the same period last year, the third straight month of decline, Bloomberg reported. 

Relations between the two countries took a nosedive following the gruesome Oct. 2018 murder of dissident journalist Jamal Khashoggi at the Saudi consulate in Istanbul. Turkey led a noisy campaign to expose Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman’s alleged role in the affair. Last week a Turkish court added six new defendants — including two close aides of the prince — to the 20 Saudis who are being tried in absentia for their alleged participation in killing and then dismembering Khashoggi.

Erdogan had spurned Salman's entreaties to bury the story in the days following Khashoggi’s death. Salman’s global image has been sullied beyond repair, with the United Nations and the CIA pointing to his complicity. Yet he remains stronger than ever with many Saudis rallying behind their prince in the face of what they see as a global conspiracy.

Turkey’s goal was to prevent the prince’s accession to the throne, reckons Ali Shihabi, a New York-based expert on the Middle East and the co-author of “The Saudi Kingdom: Between the Jihadi Hammer and the Iranian Anvil.”

“What the Khashoggi affair exposed beyond all was Erdogan’s lack of understanding of how the Saudi succession works,” Shihabi told Al-Monitor in a telephone interview. Moreover, the notion that any wedge could be driven between the king and his son was never realistic.

While the Saudis are open to bringing relations to a “level of cordiality,” Shihabi contended, the steady drip of incriminating evidence against the crown prince through the international media “left a very bad taste.”

"I don’t see that mistrust of Erdogan disappearing any time soon. Not before Erdogan moderates his regional fantasies,” Shihabi predicted.

https://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2020/11/turkey-ties-israel-biden-trump-s400-saudi-arabia-erdogan.html

-----

Trump Is Leaving Biden A Landmine Field In The Middle East

By Joe Macaron

30 Nov 2020


US President Donald Trump has caused much damage by questioning the legitimacy of the US elections and the victory of his opponent, Joe Biden. His refusal to accept the results of the vote has not only caused much trouble at home but it has also undermined the image of the United States abroad and its moral authority to preach smooth power transition and commitment to democratic ideals to foreign leaders.

This, along with the policies he is leaving behind after four years in the White House, is setting up a turbulent transition for Biden at home and most probably a rough start for the new administration abroad, especially in the Middle East.

In recent weeks, Trump’s administration has been giving unprecedented attention to the region. At least four US officials have visited Israel and close Gulf allies in recent weeks: Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, Special Representative for Iran and Venezuela Elliott Abrams, Assistant Secretary for Political-Military Affairs R Clarke Cooper from the State Department and the White House adviser, Jared Kushner.

Meanwhile, Trump has ramped up sanctions on Iran and is suspected of giving a green light for Israel to kill Iranian nuclear scientist Mohsen Fakhrizadeh. A US aircraft carrier group led by the nuclear-powered USS Nimitz has also moved back into the Gulf region. This offensive posture seems linked to US domestic politics rather than to a clear policy objective.

Allies of the outgoing administration in the Middle East may have congratulated Biden, but they are also giving the impression that they will join hands with Trump and the political opposition to the Democratic White House he will soon lead.

Still, they, along with the rest of the Middle East, are gearing up for the Biden presidency. Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman now seems inclined to resolve the dispute with Qatar (even though it is not clear yet if he will give this foreign policy win to Trump or Biden) and ease relations with Turkey; he is also more cautious about normalisation with Israel. MBS is aiming to defuse tensions so he can start on the right foot with the Biden administration.

Egypt’s President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi seems to be making conciliatory moves. The Egyptian government has been releasing political prisoners in recent weeks. In Turkey, Erdogan has felt less constrained to let go of his son-in-law Berat Albayrak as finance minister whose primary added value until recently was being the indispensable contact person for Kushner and Trump’s White House. Iran is also trying to avoid escalation in the region, hoping to potentially restore nuclear talks with Biden and get US sanctions relief.

It seems Middle Eastern leaders are expecting Biden’s presidency to be the exact opposite of Trump’s and to bring back aspects of Barack Obama’s. But this may not be the case, as his recent appointments of national security officials have shown. However, the new administration will certainly change the way US foreign policy is conducted in at least three ways.

First, institutional decision making will be restored in Washington. US foreign policy under Trump was dangerously personalised by a leader with narcissistic and authoritarian inclinations, which helped foreign leaders gain more influence in the White House. Officials who challenged his authority were fired from his administration or pushed to resign and those who stayed were loyalists or opportunists. Traditional foreign policymaking was sidelined and so was inter-agency cooperation. Trump did not trust key institutions like the Pentagon and the State Department, which were defunded or marginalised under his administration.

Once Biden and the Democrats are officially in power, Middle East leaders will no longer be able to get their way by exchanging late-night WhatsApp messages with Trump’s son-in-law or pretend the US State Department is a trivial agency. They will have to turn to traditional diplomacy, dealing with the embassies and official emissaries. The re-establishment of this institutional process also means a return to rivalries between US agencies over foreign policy issues, most notably in the Middle East. This will likely slow down the decision-making process in Washington.

Second, the Biden administration will bring back the predictability of US foreign policy. The domestic turmoil of Trump’s presidency – the high-level investigations, the impeachment, the racial tensions, the Twitter rants, the constant change of appointed officials, etc – affected not only US politics but also political dynamics abroad.

The outgoing president’s penchant for unconventional foreign policy moves – using tariffs as a political tool, bashing allies, casually issuing threats to use force, and engaging traditional foes like North Korea’s Kim Jong-un and Afghanistan’s Taliban – also brought uncertainty on the international scene. Biden will likely bring back positive engagement with traditional allies, especially in Europe, and return to foreign policy rhetoric that can be more easily anticipated.

Third, there will likely be a major shift in the US priorities in the Middle East. The Biden administration will most likely align with the thinking of the Washington establishment, seeking to pull US resources out of the Middle East to focus on deterring Russia and China, a move that Trump is now making more difficult by antagonising Iran.

The Biden administration will seek to mitigate conflicts across the Middle East and will most probably face resistance from concerned actors looking to maximise their strategic positions. This expected shift of priorities in Washington to deter Russia and China on a global scale will be most probably be viewed by Middle East leaders once again as a sign of weakness and as an affirmation of the limits of US power.

Trump has overly invested in the Middle East with emphasis on a transactional approach, and Middle East leaders should prepare to not to be overindulged by Washington in the next four years. His core approach was the advancement of an Arab-Israeli alliance against Iran at the expense of traditional Arab partners like Jordan, and the support of disparate allies ranging from Turkey’s Recep Tayyip Erdogan to Saudi Arabia’s Mohammed bin Salman.

Unlike Trump, the Biden presidency will most probably be reactive instead of proactive in the Middle East. This means minimal engagement with Iran, complex relations with Turkey and the appeasement of Israel. Biden will be somewhere between Trump and Obama and will have to reckon with Trump’s legacy in the Middle East, which includes new preconditions to strike a deal with Iran and a timid Arab-Israeli normalisation process.

Some Middle Eastern leaders are wary of the coming change in Washington. If the Biden administration sets a new tone in exposing their authoritarianism or goes too far in engaging the Iranian regime, these staunch Trump allies might be inclined to ignore Biden’s demands on human rights issues and exploit their new alliance with Israel to stand their ground. They can directly cooperate with Israel or use its clout in Washington to pressure the Biden administration.

The legacy of the outgoing Trump presidency may offer some opportunities for the new administration moving forward, but the regional challenges will persist. The Trump team has already planted a field of foreign policy landmines in the Middle East and clearing it over the next four years will be a fraught endeavour. Middle East leaders will test Biden early on and the new US president will have to show some spine if he is to be taken seriously over the next four years.

-----

Joe Macaron is a fellow at the Arab Center Washington DC.

https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2020/11/30/trump-is-leaving-biden-a-landmine-field-in-the-middle-east/

------

A Political Flirt: The Diaries Of Barack Hussein Obama

By Marwan Bishara

30 Nov 2020


When in June 2009, Barack Hussein Obama, who had just become the president of the world’s foremost superpower and leader of the “free world”, started his landmark speech to the Muslim world with, “al-salamu alaykum” or “peace be upon you”, Arabs and Muslims must have felt like Dorothy in the film Jerry Maguire when she tells Jerry, “You had me at hello.”

Obama had us at al-salamu alaykum.

It was great to see the US president speaking at Cairo University, humanising and engaging the Muslim world, but it also felt like he was hedging on almost every issue, probably realising, correctly, that his detractors back home were listening to every word. Indeed, they called his trip an “apology tour”.

At that time, my critique of certain aspects of the president’s speech on Al Jazeera did not go down well with some of my prickly colleagues, who were (rightly) taken by the magic of the moment. But in his own recollection of that day in his memoir, A Promised Land, Obama is a sweet-talking pragmatist, a realist at heart.

Obama can talk the talk. He just loves to flirt with ideas and with the public, loves to orate, preach, and sermonise. But he should have known better than to flirt with the Muslim world without having the intention to commit.

Alas, he did not walk the walk. He did not come through on many of his promises, or perhaps more accurately, the promise of his presidency, for which he feels only partly responsible. In his book, he repeatedly laments people pinning too much hope on him and stretching or misinterpreting his words.

When he acted proactively, as when he reached a landmark nuclear disarmament treaty with Russia or when he crashed a China-led climate change meeting to force a compromise between China and Europe in Copenhagen, progress was in fact possible.

But it got harder and more complicated when it came to fulfilling his promise to end America’s endless war in the Middle East and do away with the mindset behind it.

He says he was misunderstood. He says that he opposed the Iraq war, as other American realists did, but not the Afghan war. He says that he is no pacifist who believes everything can be resolved with diplomacy. His extensive use of drones, which he mentions only in passing in the book, showed him capable and willing to champion new means of warfare.

On the other hand – and there is always “on another hand” with this guy – he seems to think, as he did in his earlier years, that politicians are “actors in a rigged game”. It is one thing to want to end a war, but it is another thing to actually get it done, when the military and foreign policy establishments are stacked against it, set in their ways, defending indefensible mantras about credibility and prestige.

If he wanted to decrease troop deployment in Afghanistan and the Pentagon wanted it increased, he felt obliged to accept a compromise with the formidable generals in the form of a surge.

His vice president, Joe Biden, urged him not to get rolled over by the Pentagon but rolled over he got, at least until he “grew more comfortable and efficient” in his role as commander-in-chief.

And he rolled over when Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu rejected his demand that Israel freezes the illegal settlement-building as long as the negotiations with the Palestinians were under way. Obama compliments Netanyahu, he calls him “smart, canny, tough and a gifted communicator” in his book, even though he clearly dislikes him, and accuses him of orchestrating a campaign against his administration.

Obama shows sympathy for the Palestinian suffering, but instead of condemning its perpetrator, Israel, he defends the “unbreakable” US commitment to its security. He also blames the Palestinians for refusing to endorse the rigged diplomatic charade and for demanding Israel choose between “Jewish settlements” and a “peace settlement”. He even found it in himself to blame Al Jazeera for Arab anger at Netanyahu’s intransigence.

Much of this is already known, but what is less known is just how much Obama is annoyed or intimidated by the influence of the Israel lobby, which may partially explain his sheepishness towards Israel.

He contends in his book that, unlike relations with other allies, disagreement with Israel comes with a “domestic political cost”. Those who criticised Israel’s policy “risked being tagged as ‘anti-Israel’ (and possibly anti-Semitic) and confronted with a well-funded opponent in the next election”.

Predictably, some have already labelled Obama’s claim as “anti-Semitic”.

Obama writes how he was moved by Arab protesters during the early days of the Arab Spring, by their “Yes, we can” spirit, and decided to pressure Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak to step down, despite opposition from his senior cabinet members and from Saudi and Emirati leaders, who warned him that America would no longer be trusted.

He was also moved by reports of potential bloody civil war in Libya and decided to act against the advice of Secretary of Defense Robert Gates. Alas, his failure, as he puts it, was not to follow through.

His earlier drive soon came to a halt, as counter-revolutionary forces stepped in and chaos spread throughout the region. He stopped following through on his previous plans or pronouncements, choosing instead to disengage or temper expectation.

After five years of disappointments, Obama arrived at his “don’t do stupid sh**” foreign policy moment in 2014. He became as disillusioned with our region as many were disappointed in him.

Obama is wrong on many issues, but he is not wrong in asking the Muslim world to “closely examine the roots of [its] unhappiness”.

If his detractors only looked in the mirror, they would see that Obama’s shortcomings pale in comparison to our own; just think of how divided, hateful, and malicious we are towards each another in the Arab and Muslim worlds.

It is also paradoxical, not to say hypocritical, of us to condemn the US as an imperial hegemon and plead with it to intervene on our side, be it against an enemy or a neighbour.

It is a cop-out to blame Obama for many of our own failures. Why should an American president give a hoot if we do not give a damn?

He is a flirt, not a fool.

-----

Bishara was previously a professor of International Relations at the American University of Paris. An author who writes extensively on global politics, he is widely regarded as a leading authority on the Middle East and international affairs.

https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2020/11/30/a-political-flirt-the-diaries-of-barack-hussein/

-----

Netanyahu Prepares His Iran Cards Before Biden Takes Office

By Ben Caspit

Nov 30, 2020

“One of their eyes and possibly both were directed at Washington and not at Iran,” Maj. Gen. (ret.) Amos Yadlin, the former head of military intelligence and current director of the Institute for National Security Studies, told the Army Radio Station Nov. 29. He was responding to the interviewer’s question about the motives behind the Nov. 26 assassination of Iran’s nuclear program mastermind, Mohsen Fakharizadeh. While the entire Middle East is caught up in the unprecedented tensions between Tehran and Jerusalem and growing concerns in other regional capitals, the more interesting axis is actually the one between Washington and Tel Aviv (where Israel’s security agencies are located).

The Iranians, Americans and the rest of the world have already estimated that the particularly impressive and daring operation in the heart of Iran was most likely the work of Israel’s Mossad. While Israel did not assume formal responsibility for the attack, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu could not resist a barely veiled admission in a video clip he posted shortly after the news broke.

“Israel’s activities in recent months in general, and this time in particular, remind me of a hurried shopping spree by the mistress of a dying lover,” a Western diplomat serving in the region told Al-Monitor on condition of anonymity. “She knows that once he closes his eyes for good, the party is over, so she is doing as much as she can right now.”

According to this interpretation, Netanyahu’s desk and that of Mossad Chief Yossi Cohen are piled high with “to do” lists, and they are trying to tick off as many boxes as possible before Washington cuts off their credit line. Their goal is to undermine Iran’s nuclear program, destabilize the Iranian regime and create as much chaos as possible to hamper renewed negotiations by the future Joe Biden administration with Tehran and a return to the Barack Obama administration’s Iran policy so reviled by Netanyahu.

When Netanyahu approves Cohen’s proposed Mossad operations behind enemy lines, he also maintains eye contact with two separate Washington entities: the White House and the State Department. If Israel was behind this operation, this could explain the encouraging wink from Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, alongside President Donald Trump’s retweet of Israeli journalist Yossi Melman’s report of the Tehran assassination. From the transition headquarters of President-elect Biden on the other side of the capital, Netanyahu gets a glowering stare. Former Obama administration officials, meanwhile, take turns condemning the killing.

Israel has the upper tactical and operational hand in its secret war with Iran. Israel’s edge is decisive; the blows inflicted on Iran in recent years are abundant and painful. Nonetheless, the Iranian regime is planning for the long term. Current events, as far as they are concerned, are simply inconsequential background noise. Israel, on the other hand, is high on self-confidence and adrenalin, seeming intent to set the region on fire.

The operation attributed to Israel is a response to one of the most sensitive issues of the current era, and it suggests that Netanyahu has no intention of adopting a pragmatic view on the subject with the Biden administration. On the contrary, he plans on being oppositional and leading a hawkish line and an aggressive Israeli-Sunni coalition in order to prevent Biden from repeating the mistakes of his Democratic predecessor. Netanyahu will not bow his head at his first White House meeting with the new president. He will come spoiling for a fight.

Iran is confused, embarrassed, aching and hesitant. The official versions of Fakharizadeh’s assassination emanating from Iran range from an alleged robotic operation (supposedly a machinegun activated by remote control from the top of a Nissan vehicle, which then self-destructed) to a hit squad of 62 agents that the Mossad allegedly ran inside Iran. Israeli officials believe Iran faces a wrenching dilemma regarding reprisal for the assassination because it suspects Israel of trying to spark a conflagration in the region to force Trump to launch a military intervention in his final days in the White House. That is the last thing Tehran wants.

These latest developments take us back to three consecutive summers between 2010 and 2013, during which Israel considered a strike on Iran’s nuclear infrastructure during the days of the Obama administration. Prime Minister Netanyahu and then-Defense Minister and former Premier Ehud Barak supported such a move, while other Cabinet ministers and the heads of the nation’s security agencies demanded US approval of the operation or active involvement in it. One of the more interesting considerations discussed by Netanyahu and Barak — which they then raised with head of the Israel Defense Forces Lt. Gen. Gabi Ashkenazi, then-Mossad Chief Yossi Dagan, Military Intelligence Director Yadlin and other top officials — was whether an Israeli strike could draw the Americans into the conflict against their will. At a certain point, someone deluded Netanyahu into believing that such a scenario was possible. The late Mossad Chief Dagan got on a plane to Washington, met with his counterparts and returned with a huge container of cold water that he dumped on this hypothesis.

This same issue is now under discussion yet again. Trump is no Obama. The American president is likely the most unpredictable leader on earth, certainly from now until Jan. 20. A US B-52 bomber that overflew Israel on its way east, an additional US aircraft carrier making its way eastward, and frequent meetings in the region by Pompeo and other senior Trump administration figures (the president’s top adviser, Jared Kushner, is en route to Saudi Arabia) have generated slews of violent conspiracy theories that are firing up imaginations and further straining tensions between the Persian Gulf, the Red Sea and back.

Netanyahu’s gamble is a complex one. He could decide to go for broke right now and raise the ante even if it means getting off on the wrong foot with President-elect Biden and a possible confrontation with the incoming US administration even before it takes office. The old Netanyahu whom the world knew was cautious, hesitant, reluctant to engage in adventures, and knew his place in the hierarchy and balance of forces with world powers. Netanyahu of 2020, whose defence team petitioned the court this week to dismiss the three indictments against him on charges of bribery, fraud and breach of trust (a move that does not stand much of a chance), is a different leader. He is confrontational, supremely self-confident, spoiling for a fight and ready to take risks. Iran, at least, is in a much calmer place right now, as it waits to figure out President-elect Biden’s intentions.

https://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2020/11/israel-iran-us-benjamin-netanyahu-joe-biden-ehud-barak.html

-----

URL:    https://newageislam.com/middle-east-press/middle-east-press-turkey-fix/d/123622

New Age IslamIslam OnlineIslamic WebsiteAfrican Muslim NewsArab World NewsSouth Asia NewsIndian Muslim NewsWorld Muslim NewsWomen in IslamIslamic FeminismArab WomenWomen In ArabIslamophobia in AmericaMuslim Women in WestIslam Women and Feminism

Loading..

Loading..