Turkish Forum

Category: Turkey

  • BUSTED – EYP Identifies Islamists in Greece That Communicated with the Caliphate In Secret Operation

    BUSTED – EYP Identifies Islamists in Greece That Communicated with the Caliphate In Secret Operation

    By Hellas Frappe on Tuesday, August 26, 2014

     

    ISIL Syria AP

    According to Petros Kasimatis from HellasForce, the “hawks” of Greece’s National Intelligence Agency have been in crosshairs recently with Iraqi Jihadists because they have been tapping into their conversations via satellite for the benefit of their allied forces. The wiretappings, which were part of a classified operation, were also conducted for Western intelligence agencies, and officials who are concerned about the ongoing developments in the Middle East.

    The surveillance, says Kasimatis, was conducted from the Ministry of Order on Katehaki Street and according to the him covered an area that reached as far as Kazakhstan.

    The wiretappings, he notes, provide officials with specific information (such as espionage and counter-terrorism data) and cover NATO areas that have been designated as being unsafe.

    He claims that the operation, which was confidential for all intent and purposes, apparently yielded significant results and the evidence that has been gathered by Greek officials is apparently fundamental.

    Who would of ever imagined that from the top floors of the Katehaki building Greeks cunningly intercepted the calls of Turkish Asians and jihadists? (It might sound incredible, but they did). Think about it. Who could ever believe that Greek officials were involved in such an important and effective national operation from the rooftop of the Ministry of Public Order? (No one we bet!)

    The evidence that was gathered by Greek intelligence officials, points out the author, is not only impressive but it has allowed KYP to somehow “frame” Turkish speaking Asians and Muslims who have their own reasons -and intent- to conspire against our own country as well.

    Over the next few days, the author pledged to publish various elements that were used by the Hellenic Police in a series of operations from the evidence that was gathered by EYP via these wiretappings, and of course HellasFrappe promises to follow his revelations and present the information as it is released.

    There are very few times we commend our officials, but this time the commander of the secret service Mr. Th.Dravillas, our political elite and all other relevant officials involved in this case should be applauded for doing such a great job! If this operation helps to keep our nation safer then bravo to them once more!

    From Petros Kasimatis
    Original article in Greek – hellasforce
    Translation – HellaFrappe Team

  • Leading members of Hizb ut-Tahrir reject ISIS declaration of Khilafah

    Leading members of Hizb ut-Tahrir reject ISIS declaration of Khilafah

    Wednesday, 02 July 2014 10:51

    5 Pillarz

    Prominent figures of Islamic political party, Hizb ut-Tahrir have rejected the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham’s (ISIS) declaration of the Khilafah.

    No official statement has been issued by the veteran Islamist organisation in any of its media forums, but key figures have publicly rejected ISIS’ surprise announcement on Sunday.

    Jordan

    Media spokesperson of HT in Jordan, Mamdooh Qatishaat, said: “It is nothing more than empty speech that does not add anything to the reality of ISIS. They were a militia before the announcement, and they are still a militia after the announcement.

    “They do not have any real authority in Syria or Iraq, and they have not achieved any real security internally or externally. It is not possible for the Khilafah to exist without real authority on the earth. Therefore the announcement of ISIS is empty speech without substance, and no evidence or reality on the ground or resources.

    “If any movement wishes to announce a Khilafah anywhere on earth, they are required to follow the method of Rasool Allah (saw) to achieve this objective, including having full, open, and clear authority over the land, securing it completely internally and externally. This land must also have the resources needed to set up a Khilafah. So how can this be a Khilafah when they aren’t even a state with the resources and requirements necessary to begin with?”

    Qatishaat cited evidence from the life of Prophet Muhammad (saw), saying: “The Islamic State in Madinah was under the complete authority of Rasool Allah (saw), and the internal and external security was completely under Islam. The Messenger of Allah (saw) would manage people’s affairs, and lead the armies, and judge between people in their disputes, and send messengers, and meet them publicly – not in hiding, and the State had all the necessary resources and requirements that a State needs in the region.”

    He said that the announcement of the Khilafah “will not be a piece of news spread throughout the deceptive media. Rather it will be – by the Will of Allah (swt) – a resounding earthquake that will flip the political status quo on its head, and change history forever”.

    Qatishaat concluded by saying: “The re-establishment of the Khilafah is a fard on all Muslims. It is not a fard on Hizb ut-Tahrir alone. Whoever establishes it truthfully, they are to be followed (regardless of their group affiliation). The situation here is not so; they do not have the resources or requirements of a State, or real authority on the earth, or safety, or security. This announcement of ISIS is of no value or effect, and the Muslims are still responsible for continuing to work to re-establish the Khilafah until it is done.”

    Lebanon

    The director of the central media office of HT in Lebanon, Osman Bakhach said: “Resurrecting the caliphate should not be accomplished through blood, charges of apostasy and explosions.

    “We are invested in the question of the Islamic caliphate and are advocates of the idea. We devised for this end a certain approach – the prophetic approach – calling for a state that opens its arms to all people, Muslims and others, including Christians and Jews, not to be a state where Muslims can not stand each other and fight amongst each other. That is something we categorically reject.”

    He added: “We do not approve of the methods and practices of some Islamist groups today. Intra-fighting, in our opinion, is not the right way to bring about the caliphate. Threatening those opposed to the establishment of the caliphate in this way is improper. Establishing the Islamic state is not accomplished by considering every dissenter an apostate whose killing is deemed lawful. In this way, ISIS proclaims itself both adversary and arbiter.”

    Bakhach did not rule out that individuals will support the idea “because the caliphate is the dream and wish of every Muslim. Some simple-minded people might get carried away by this call and support it.” He argued that “the political context of ISIS requires reassessment, especially in Syria because since its inception, the group did not fight the Syrian regime, rather it raised the banner of liberating the liberated and entered into conflict with the opposition. That is why we believe that its call is a claim that is not undisputed.”

    UK

    On Monday, Dr Reza Pankhurst who spent four years in Egyptian prison under Hosni Mubarak for his affiliation with HT wrote on his Facebook:

    “Back in 2006, a group declared an Islamic state in Iraq with an anonymous Abu Umar al-Baghdadi as its Amir. It was widely dismissed by others who claimed that the “state” had no real estate other than a few internet addresses. Yesterday, the proclaimed successor to Abu Umar – one Abu Bakr – was anointed as a “caliph” by the same group.

    “Just like in 2006, these announcements appear to have little relationship to ground realities, and are more to do with internal politics and competition between various militant factions. People should treat the topic seriously, and not in mockery. These are political issues of great concern to many, and deserve to be dealt with properly. Not as propaganda pieces between competing factions, as appears the case from the statement released.”

    The university lecturer and author of the book “The Inevitable Caliphate” added: “Two conditions appear to be missing from this declaration – the first being an actual self sufficient state that is capable of defending itself. Any analysis of what they currently hold will come to the conclusion that any concerted effort will remove them from the map very quickly. The fact that the US/ UK are holding back from even air strikes is another issue which requires its own political analysis separate from this.

    “Secondly, they would have to take bay’a from the people of influence – as it is, they have gathered their own group members and taken bay’a. Yet ISIS is just one element of the forces in Iraq/ Syria – and by no means so dominant as to claim their opinion is all that counts. Where is the bay’a of the tribal leaders, and other influential people? The idea that ISIS shura council comprises the Ahl hal wal aqd is something else that doesn’t tally with reality at all. But this second condition is irrelevant when the first has not been met. Even their statement admits their “state” may be erased shortly.”

    Hizb ut-Tahrir has been working for the re-establishment of the Khilafah in the Muslim world since 1953.

  • I reveal Tayyip Erdoğan’s numbered Swiss account!

    I reveal Tayyip Erdoğan’s numbered Swiss account!

    Opinion

    Burak Bekdil

    I have a feeling that our editor in chief, David Judson, will be mad at me for not sharing this scoop with the newspaper and instead revealing it in this column.

    Well… I have gained access to a document that shows two international companies, both with multibillion-dollar Turkish contracts in their portfolios, deposited unexplained funds into a numbered Swiss account that Swiss financial authorities have verified belongs to Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan.

    The first document, endorsed by the bank’s executive board, verifies wire transfers into the account, one coming from a multinational energy giant, and another from a weapons manufacturer – both names withheld.

    The second one verifies that the numbered account, totaling $655.76 million as of April 9, 2009, belongs to Erdoğan.

    As a matter of journalistic ethics, I shall certainly avoid revealing my sources or how I have gained access to these documents, should any prosecutor dare to take legal action against the prime minister. I must admit, though, that there is one problem: The documents in my possession are photocopies forwarded from one PC to another. So, I advise Mr. Judson not to become angry with me, or I might produce documents proving his links to the armed wing of the Ergenekon gang.

    Chief of General Staff Gen. İlker Başbuğ was telling the truth when he said that an asymmetrical psychological war was being waged against the military. The fact that none of us could realistically vouch for the democratic credentials of each and every single member of the Turkish Armed Forces does not change the fact that political Islamists – not too well disguised as “liberal democrats” – have long been trying to systematically fight the military establishment, through means reminiscent of spy novels. In fact, this is a war of intelligence and public relations, and the asymmetrical warriors naturally have the upper hand over their symmetrical enemies.

    As a matter of fact, one principal casualty each time there is an asymmetrical war is the judiciary, which gets dangerously politicized. The grand coalition of Islamists – i.e., the neo-Islamists, post-modern Islamists, liberals, neo-liberals and opportunists disguised as democrats – looks so precisely “guided on target” that it may even prefer to sink the entire ship that sails under the name Turkey in order to destroy the whole chamber of the helmsman.

    How undemocratic can you behave in order to bolster democracy? Can you torture and shoot the enemies of democracy? Hang them en masse in public squares, all in the name of democracy? Only recently, Erdoğan angrily addressed the main opposition leader Deniz Baykal, saying, “If you cannot prove your allegations [against my party], you are despicable!” He was right.

    But who will be the despicable one if civilian prosecutors fail to verify the authenticity of the famous “coup document” that appears to be a photocopy, with its original not existing anywhere? Are “the despicable” only those who allege some foul play by the government but cannot verify it?

    The prime minister has the habit of viewing the judiciary through an entirely ideological pair of spectacles. For example, he has claimed that Baykal’s Republican People’s Party, or CHP, has defrauded its accounts, saying, “This was verified by a ruling from the Constitutional Court.” If – and naturally so – an irreversible verdict from the supreme court should suffice for a “public verdict,” then we would end up in the weird situation where Turkey’s ruling party has behaved unconstitutionally, as its various activities to undermine secularism in favor of political Islam also carry a seal of approval from the same court.

    Last week, the prime minister was typical Erdoğan again. He pledged immediate (legal) action should anyone get hold of the original “coup document.” Why did he take legal action against “coup-plotters” when the original document did not exist anywhere? As always, the motto is “all is halal [permissible] as long as it suits our political agenda…”

    Unfortunately, Erdoğan’s self-declared “liberal” supporters are no exception. Take, for example, prominent columnist, Hadi Uluengin, the liberal voice of daily Hürriyet and someone of whom I am quite fond. This is how he justified the storms around the photocopied document in his June 24, 2009, column, “Who’s wearing out whom?”:

    “Éwhether the plan to ’finish off the AKP and Fethullah Gülen’ is authentic or forgery… it would be purely legitimate if Turkey’s democrats, who have had to endure four coups, four coup attempts and several other [undemocratic actions by the military] in less than half a century got agitated by this document. They are endlessly right [about their retort]…”

    Uluengin is right about the history of undemocratic military practices in our country. But his reasoning – that even if the document were false, democrats would have every right to attack the military – is a little bit excessive.

    By the same logic, someone can always forge documents verifying corruption by the ruling Islamist elite, get them photocopied and distribute them to Erdoğan’s opponents – and since Turkey’s recent history is full of corrupt practices, it would be purely legitimate for our democrats to get agitated even though we could not authenticate these bogus papers.

    Is this how Turkey is going to become a more democratic place?

    hurriyet.com.tr, August 26, 2014

  • In Turkey, a Loyalist Government Takes Shape

    In Turkey, a Loyalist Government Takes Shape

    Consistency is the theme of Turkey’s not-so-new government. Turkish President-elect Recep Tayyip Erdogan confirmed a year’s worth of speculation Thursday when he announced that Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu would succeed him as prime minister and chairman of the ruling Justice and Development Party.
    The decision was fairly straightforward. Davutoglu is known to be fiercely loyal to Erdogan and is therefore unlikely to stand in the way of his agenda, even though Davutoglu would technically be sitting in the more powerful political post. Davutoglu lacks Erdogan’s charisma and may have trouble connecting with the broader Turkish public, raising concerns that he won’t be able to lead the party to a strong enough victory in 2015 parliamentary elections. But Erdogan is also not about to let such issues undermine his perceived mandate to continue leading Turkey with the same intensity he showed over the past 11 years as prime minister.
    Cabinet appointments due in early September will probably also reflect this business-as-usual strategy, with Turkey’s national intelligence chief, Hakan Fidan, taking Davutoglu’s place as foreign minister. Fidan has been instrumental in the peace process with the Kurdistan Workers’ Party and will continue to drive that policy forward as the Justice and Development Party (also known by its Turkish abbreviation, AKP) vies for Kurdish votes. Much to the relief of investors eyeing Turkey after a wobbly year among emerging markets, rumors from the Justice and Development Party suggest that Deputy Prime Minister Ali Babacan and Finance Minister Mehmet Simsek will likely maintain influence over the country’s economic policy in the new government.
    What is a Geopolitical Diary? George Friedman Explains.
    The government taking shape in Turkey shows that Erdogan is not in the mood for experimental politics. Though so far he has the military tamed, he is still in the process of purging his erstwhile allies in the Gulen movement. Perhaps more disconcerting to Erdogan is that he is relying on the weaknesses and inherent divisions within his opposition to sustain his tenure as opposed to being able to rely on his own popularity. With just over half the electorate behind him, Erdogan is looking down the horizon at a number of issues that could cost him.
    First, Turkey’s largest export market, Europe, is still looking quite sickly. Meanwhile, Iraq, once a significant and growing export market for Turkey, is again finding itself ravaged by war. Turkey is trying to remain unaligned in the standoff between Russia and the West, remaining willfully blind to sanctions and ready to export to all. For its part, Russia is more interested in punishing Europe and keeping Ankara close, and so it is playing along. But Moscow cannot trust that Ankara will be as cooperative in the future, especially as the two countries start to push up against each other in the Caucasus.
    Those foreign policy complications start multiplying the farther south Turkey looks. With a jihadist threat encroaching on what was once considered a haven in Iraqi Kurdistan, Turkey’s energy gambit in northern Iraq is raising lots of questions. How does Turkey make peace with the Kurdistan Workers’ Party and draw the line at Kurdish autonomy within its own borders when, just across the border, Iraqi Kurdistan is trying to use Turkey’s backing of unilateral energy exports to declare independence? How does Turkey reinforce peshmerga forces in northern Iraq against jihadists when those jihadists have been quite helpful in containing Kurdish separatists in Syria? And if Iran’s military is creeping too close for Turkey’s comfort in Iraqi Kurdistan, what would a mobilization of Turkish forces in northern Iraq do to Ankara’s relationship with Arbil, not to mention its own Kurdish peace process? How can Turkey negotiate with Iran over increased energy exports when it is directly undermining Iran’s Shiite allies in Baghdad over Kurdish energy exports?
    Regardless of who sits
  • Erdogan on top

    Erdogan on top

    It would be better for Turkey if the presidency remained mainly ceremonial

    RECEP TAYYIP ERDOGAN, Turkey’s prime minister, certainly knows how to win elections. Since he helped to found the Justice and Development (AK) party 13 years ago, he has scored eight victories in a row. On August 10th he made it nine, winning Turkey’s first direct election to the presidency, with a crushing 52% of the vote. Given what have been broadly fair polls, with mostly high turnouts, nobody can seriously challenge Mr Erdogan’s democratic credentials.

    His achievements in over 11 years as prime minister are equally impressive. Since AK came to power in November 2002, economic growth has averaged some 5%. Inflation has been tamed. The army has been brought under greater civilian control. Mr Erdogan has made more progress than any previous political leader in giving Turkey’s Kurds greater rights. In 2005 he achieved something that had eluded all his predecessors: the start of membership talks with the European Union.

    20140816_LDP005_0

    Yet there are reasons to worry about Mr Erdogan’s ascendancy to Ankara’s Cankaya palace. With the army, the secular establishment and the political opposition all cowed, he has grown more autocratic. When Turks took to the streets in last summer’s Gezi Park protests, his reaction was to send in riot police with tear gas. After a corruption scandal erupted last year, engulfing even his own family, he took firmer control of the judiciary. He has responded to criticism with assaults on free media and on individual journalists (including virulent public attacks on The Economist’s long-serving Turkey correspondent), and with attempts to censor the internet.

    What makes this more troubling are Mr Erdogan’s plans to give the presidency, hitherto a ceremonial job, far more power. He wants to turn it into an executive position, as in France. To do this he must change the constitution, which usually needs a two-thirds majority in parliament. AK is unlikely to achieve that on its own, but it could secure enough votes by doing a deal with the Kurdish party. That would put Mr Erdogan in sight of his goal of an enhanced presidency, backed by a pliable prime minister, in which he could stay up to and beyond 2023, the centenary of Ataturk’s republic.

    Such an outcome is unappealing to those who believe in political pluralism. Powerful presidencies can work, but they need to be constrained by strong institutions of a sort Turkey still lacks. Mr Erdogan’s own autocratic tendencies compound this problem. But why should he pay any heed? There are two answers: a vulnerable economy and his own legacy.

    The biggest reason for Mr Erdogan’s poll victories is his delivery of rapidly rising living standards. But the economy is slowing. A gaping current-account deficit makes the country highly dependent on capital inflows; when global interest rates rise, Turkey could suffer. And it is caught in a “middle-income trap”, losing competitiveness in the basic goods it produces, but unable to move up to higher-tech ones. To keep growing, Turkey needs both liberalising reforms and foreign capital. Mr Erdogan has shown scant interest in reform. And although foreign investors stomach autocratic regimes around the world, they don’t much care for social instability of the sort that Mr Erdogan’s type of polarising politics usually portends.

    The hope that Turkey will one day join the EU has also kept investors interested. This is where Mr Erdogan ought to think of his legacy. Building giant infrastructure projects is all very well, but if he is to underpin Turkey’s modernisation he needs to pull it back onto its European course. EU membership is a remote prospect just now, but moving away from Europe’s liberal democratic norms will make it an impossibility.

    Gul, not Putin

    The first test of Mr Erdogan’s intentions will be the choice of prime minister. This week Turkey’s outgoing president, Abdullah Gul, threw his hat into the ring (see article). Not only is Mr Gul widely respected, both at home and abroad, but he has also briefly held the job before. Moreover, as a co-founder of the AK party, he has enough political clout of his own to stand up to Mr Erdogan. Mr Erdogan should accept that a strong prime minister would be better for Turkey. If he insists on having a puppet instead, people may start to compare him not to Ataturk but to his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin.

    THE ECONOMIST Aug 16th 2014

  • Turkey’s New Sultan Erdogan removes another check on his authoritarian drift.

    Turkey’s New Sultan Erdogan removes another check on his authoritarian drift.

    The Wall Street Journal
    Review & Outlook

    Updated Aug. 13, 2014 12:18 p.m. ET
    Recep Tayyip Erdogan called his triumph in Turkey’s weekend presidential election a “trophy night for democracy.” That’s one way to put it. Another is that Mr. Erdogan is using his success at the polls to move his country toward a politics of illiberalism that will undermine democracy.
    Sunday’s vote marked the first time Turks directly elected a president. Mr. Erdogan, who has served 11 years as Prime Minister, garnered 52% of ballots—13 points ahead of Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu, the candidate put forward by the two main opposition parties, the Republican People’s Party (CHP) and the Nationalist Movement Party (MHP). Selahattin Demirtas of the pro-Kurdish Peoples’ Democratic Party placed a distant third with 10%.
    As with municipal elections in March that saw Mr. Erdogan’s Justice and Development Party, or AKP, retain key mayoralties, some opposition media were quick to allege voter fraud. While fraud can never be ruled out, the resort to the allegation is symptomatic of the state of the opposition, which has failed to advance a serious agenda to compete with the AKP’s record of jobs and growth. Turkish GDP grew fourfold over the last decade—the main source of Mr. Erdogan’s popular appeal.
    Yet there is little question that Mr. Erdogan and the AKP are hollowing out the institutions of Turkish democracy. The Turkish government has in recent months attempted to ban YouTube and Twitter ; dealt brutally with peaceful protesters; fired or reassigned thousands of judges, prosecutors and law enforcers deemed insufficiently loyal; and earned the dubious honor of being the world’s top jailor of journalists in 2012 and 2013, according to the Committee to Protect Journalists.
    It may now get worse. Mr. Erdogan has already vowed to transform the presidency into an energetic executive office from the largely ceremonial function it currently plays. Abdullah Gul, the outgoing President who possesses more liberal instincts, will no longer serve as a moderating influence on Mr. Erdogan. And since no figure within the AKP can match his political skill and charisma, Mr. Erdogan is likely to lord over whoever might serve as the country’s next Prime Minister.
    One silver lining might be a settlement of Turkey’s long-running tensions with its Kurdish minority. Mr. Erdogan has launched a productive peace process with the Kurds, who in recent years have been permitted to assert their linguistic and cultural identity in ways that were unthinkable a few years ago.
    But elsewhere in the region, he is less than constructive. Turkey under Mr. Erdogan has emerged as a chief backer of Hamas, hosting Saleh al-Arouri, the operative suspected to have masterminded the kidnapping of three Israeli teens earlier this summer. Ankara may also seek rapprochement with Tehran, having already helped the Iranian regime evade sanctions by facilitating billions of dollars in gas-for-gold transactions.
    Turkey is a NATO member and was long a linchpin of the American order in the Middle East—or at least what remains of it. Neither the Obama Administration nor the European Union can be blamed for Mr. Erdogan’s turn away from Western standards of openness and moderation, but Washington and Brussels should call him out if he continues his habit of abusing individual rights.