The Gaza panel at this year's Davos meeting will be remembered as one of the most dramatic moments in the entire history of Davos. Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan's face-to-face blasting of Israeli President Shimon Peres was unprecedented, as was his storming out of the meeting. 

In a rather unprecedented cry of outrage, Prince Turki al-Faisal, one of the most prominent figures of the Saudi state, put it bluntly: If the US under the new Obama administration does not change its policy toward Israel and Palestine, the Saudis will no longer maintain their “special relationship” with the US (“Saudi Arabia’s patience is running out,” Financial Times, Jan. 23, 2009). Quoting from the Saudi king that his peace plan, called “the Arab peace initiative,” is still on the table, the prince added that “it would not remain there for long.” 

The 2009 Gaza massacre is not the first incident where Israel has killed, pillaged and destroyed Palestinian lives. In 1982 the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) under Ariel Sharon allowed the killing of more than 2,000 Palestinians in two Palestinian refugee camps in Sabra and Shatila.  

I get this question all the time: how does Turkey do it? In international relations, Turkey wants to be a member of the European Union, continue its partnership with the US, have good relations with Russia and Iran, be fully involved in Iraq and the larger Middle East, increase its presence in the Balkans and central Asia and open up to Africa and Latin America. Domestically, Turkey wants to strengthen its democracy, improve its human rights record, continue its economic development, find a solution to the Kurdish problem and ease the tensions between religion and the Turkish state.  

The current meeting between the Israeli and Palestinian presidents in Ankara comes only a few weeks before the multilateral summit in Annapolis, Maryland, in the US.  

Consider this wild scenario: After years of demonizing each other, the United States and the Islamic Republic of Iran put their differences behind them. They agree to be strategic partners and sign a document to seal it.

With the court case against the Justice and Development Party (AK Party) officially started, Turkey has entered a new period of political uncertainty.

The two-day summit in Annapolis ended on 29 November, 2007. Israel and the Palestine Authority agreed to start a new peace initiative

This is the question everybody is seeking an answer for. The Bush administration thinks it knows what the power is for and Mr. Bush believes he is putting it to good use in Iraq, Afghanistan, potentially in Iran and elsewhere. But the hard realities of war and what is happening in the real world belie this false sense of confidence.

After the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, many thought the date would mark a turning point in modern history. The common belief was that nothing would be the same again. We had entered a new era of global terror when humanity would unite against this universal evil. Sept. 11 turned out to be a major turning point, but not in the way the secular ideologues and the religious zealots of America had imagined.  

In one of his farewell speeches the outgoing Turkish President Ahmet Necdet Sezer reiterated his belief that the regime in Turkey is in danger. He thinks that if Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan becomes president the secular principles of the republic will be jeopardized. President Sezer is not alone in this.

Masud Barzani’s recent statements about Kirkuk are nothing new. We have heard other passionate statements from him before. What is new is the comparison between Kirkuk and Diyarbakir. This is something that will be talked about for years to come.Apparently, Mr. Barzani made this statement during an interview with al-Arabiyyah TV back in January 26, 2007. The Turkish government is in shock, and for a good reason.

The debate over Islam and democracy continues to gain momentum. As the state of democracy in Muslim countries has become a global debate, scores of people from academics, journalists and TV commentators to policy makers and NGOs are discussing the relationship between Islam and democratic values. Numerous meetings, panels, conferences, workshops are held to assess the state of democracy, civil society and human rights in the Muslim world

“Russia is the most reliable partner of the Islamic world and the most faithful defender of its interests,” Russian President Viladimir Putin said in 2005 in Chechnya’s capital of Grozny. Putin made this statement in the first session of the local parliament in Grozny. Given the place and its brutal history, what the Russian president has said is seriously ironic. But the story does not stop here.Russia’s desire to straighten its record with the Muslim world has gained visible momentum in the last few years. In 2005, Russia was granted observer status at the Organization of the Islamic Conference, the largest international organization in the Islamic world, representing 57 Muslim countries.