Category: America

  • Turkey’s Syria policies are criticized as Erdogan prepares to meet with Obama – The Washington Post

    Turkey’s Syria policies are criticized as Erdogan prepares to meet with Obama – The Washington Post

    By Associated Press, Published: May 13

    REYHANLI, Turkey — Anti-government protests flared for a third day on Monday in Turkish town devastated by two powerful car bombs near the Syrian border, and some Turks accused their leader of putting the nation’s security at risk by backing the rebels fighting Syria’s government.

    Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan said Turkey will “not refrain” from responding to twin car bombings it has blamed on Syria, but that his government will be cautious and avoid being drawn into its neighbor’s civil war.

    via Turkey’s Syria policies are criticized as Erdogan prepares to meet with Obama – The Washington Post.

  • If Turkey Does Not Change  Its Syria Policy …

    If Turkey Does Not Change Its Syria Policy …

    U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry meets with Turkish Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan at Ankara Palace in Ankara

    US Secretary of State John Kerry (L) meets with Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan at Ankara Palace in Ankara, March 1, 2013. (photo by REUTERS/Jacquelyn Martin)

    By: Kadri Gursel for Al-Monitor Turkey Pulse Posted on May 6.

    Let’s begin by reading some paragraphs from a speech that captures Turkey’s new profile in the Middle East, complete with its policy, ideology and, of course, rhetoric. International readers who follow Turkey closely will guess who the speaker was. These quotes are long, but not boring:

    About This Article

    Summary :

    If Turkey doesn’t change its partisan, sectarian approach to Syria, it will provoke further sectarian tensions among armed groups in Turkey and the region, writes Kadri Gursel.

    Original Title:

    If Turkey Does Not Change Its Syria Policy…

    Author: Kadri Gursel

    Translated by: Timur Goksel

    Categories : Originals Syria Turkey

    “Today they are saying prayers for us. They are praying for us in Gaza, Beirut and Mecca. This is the massive responsibility we are shouldering. You are not only responsible for Edirne, Hakkari and Van. You are bearing the responsibility for Nicosia, Sarajevo, Baghdad, Gaza, Jerusalem, Erbil and Damascus. There is the responsibility for 250 innocent Syrians who were viciously massacred yesterday [May 4] by having their throats slit at Banias. I am appealing to my organization. Every life lost in Syria is one of ours. … We don’t care who says what. What we care about is the conviction that ‘Believers are brothers.’ …

    “We are not like other states. We are not a state that will keep quiet to protect its interests. We want to be able to account for ourselves when the book is placed in front of us. When screams of slaughtered children are resonating, we can’t be mute devils. You, Bashar Assad, you will pay for this. You will pay heavily, very heavily for showing courage you can’t show to others to babies with pacifiers in their mouths. A blessed revenge will smother you. With God’s permission we will see this criminal asked to account and bless his almighty. What is going on has long reached the point of forcing the limits of tolerance. The international community has not yet taken the steps expected from it about Syria. … To the Syrians who ask when is God’s help coming, I say there is no doubt God’s help is near.”

    I took these lines from a May 6 news report in the daily Milliyet. When you read it, you’ll see that the speech was on May 5, and that from the references to cities, the speaker was from Turkey.

    In its content and style, this text is a perfect specimen of the Islamist, pro-Ottoman political culture that has spread and gained strength in Turkey over recent years. Those who apply the norms of traditional diplomacy and statesmanship that prevail in international institutions to this text might surmise that that the speech was given by a fiery Islamist orator. But these remarks belong to Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan of the Turkish Republic — generally assumed to be a secular state.

    He was addressing members of the parliament and officials of his ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP). The venue was the town of Kizilcahamam, near Ankara. The meeting’s purpose was a discussion of party policies.

    The prime minister often gives these kinds of talks. Whenever he does, Turkey’s political culture becomes more closely attuned to the Middle East.

    The debate in Turkey drags on: What is the reality of Ankara’s Syria policy? What have we reached with this policy, what results did we obtain and how would it affect Turkey if we persist without making changes?

    To answer these questions, a reality check is needed that goes beyond Turkey’s feverish, epic-heavy rhetoric. Objective and cool-headed observations from outside become important at times like this.

    An April 30 report by the International Crisis Group, “Blurring the Borders: Syrian Spillover Risks for Turkey,” represents a significant contribution that objectively narrates the results of Turkey’s response to the Syrian crisis — and the risks it poses for the country.

    The follow assessments made in the report’s executive summary illustrate the gap between Erdogan’s rhetoric and realities: “Turkey is seen increasingly as a partisan actor. While Turkish leaders claim it has sufficient resources to be the region’s main power, leverage over Syrian events is clearly limited. … Turkey has no capacity to solve intractable problems inside Syria alone, and is not considering significant military intervention. Stepped-up arming of opposition fighters seems unlikely to enable them to topple the regime quickly. And Turkey’s wishful thinking about the Ottoman past and a leading historical and economic role in its Sunni Muslim neighbourhood is at odds with the present reality that it now has an uncontrollable, fractured, radicalised no-man’s-land on its doorstep.”

    In the same section of the report, Turkey is asked to accept that the Syrian crisis may continue for a long time and to make long-term political modifications accordingly. The Syrian crisis served as a litmus test that exposed the neo-Ottoman tendencies of those running Turkey’s foreign policy. By definition, the pro-Ottoman inclination of the neo-Islamist ruling political class is also pro-Sunni. Turkey’s Syria policy has put Turkey on the Sunni side of the Sunni-Shiite fault line in the Middle East. This gives rise to a perceived geopolitical threat among Shiite actors.

    The report warns on this tendency: “Whereas Turkey in 2008 was praised for its ability to speak to all regional players from Israel to Iran, it has now aligned predominantly with conservative Sunni Muslim partners such as Qatar and Saudi Arabia… In order to talk to all parties from a position of greater moral authority, it should avoid projecting the image of being a Sunni Muslim hegemon. It should also re-secure its border and ask Syrian opposition fighters to move to Syria. Publicly adopting a profile of a balanced regional power, rather than a Sunni Muslim one, would likewise do much to reduce any possibility that the sectarian polarization that is crippling Syria will jump the border to Turkey, in particular to Hatay province.”

    The International Crisis Group suggests that Turkey not follow a tacitly Islamist foreign policy, but rather a secular one. This is an appropriate recommendation. Of course, to follow a foreign policy not imbued with Islamism, the Islamists have to make extraordinary efforts. But if this Islamist, pro-Sunni and pro-Ottoman Syria policy is maintained in its current form, Turkey will find itself in opposition to alienated Muslim actors who are not conservatively Sunni. This will substantially weaken Turkey’s soft power in the Middle East and the world and will limit its ability to launch initiatives.

    A pro-Sunni foreign policy and narrative could also upset the already sensitive sectarian harmony in Turkey.

    Turkey decided in August 2011 to topple the Baath regime and open its borders to the armed Syrian opposition, thus making Turkey the rear base of rebel forces. Border security was intentionally neglected to ease the movements of rebel forces. To change this policy now, and to act again as a state of law and order, may lead to a loss of prestige and influence by Ankara over the armed opposition, especially the Free Syrian Army. But if this risk isn’t taken, the consequence will be that Turkey will substantially fall short of having a state of law. The Turkish-Syrian border may pose threats to Turkey’s security, as seen in the Feb. 11 bombing at Cilvegozu border crossing [Bab al-Hawa] that resulted in the deaths of 14 people.

    In addition to internal clashes in Syria mutating into a sectarian civil war, the danger for Turkey involves its image as a party to this war — and the possibility that it may be held responsible for its share of the war crimes committed by Sunni groups it has been militarily supporting.

    To be sure, there is a political price to be paid by Turkey for changing its Syria policy — but the cost of not changing it will be higher.

    Kadri Gürsel is a contributing writer for Al-Monitor’s Turkey Pulse and has written a column for the Turkish daily Milliyet since 2007. He focuses primarily on Turkish foreign policy, international affairs and Turkey’s Kurdish question, as well as Turkey’s evolving political Islam.

     

     

    Read more: https://www.al-monitor.com/originals/2013/05/turkey-syria-policy-backfire-sectarian.html#ixzz2Sa5FdwMl

  • Flash News!!!! Boston Bomber Master Mind is Armenian

    Flash News!!!! Boston Bomber Master Mind is Armenian

    bostonThe hunt for Misha: Bomb investigators search for mysterious ‘bald, red-bearded Armenian man’ accused of radicalizing Tamerlan

    • Tamerlan Tsarnaev is thought to have fallen under the influence of a new friend, a Muslim convert known only as Misha
    • He is said to have steered the 26-year-old elder Boston bomber to a radical strain of Islam
    • ‘Somehow, he just took his brain,’ said Tamerlan’s uncle, Ruslan Tsarni, who recalled conversations with Tamerlan’s worried father about Misha’s influence
    • Zubeidat Tsarnaeva, mother of the bomber’s said it was ‘nonsense’ that Misha converted her son to terrorism

    According to Daily Mail, as the investigation into why and how the Boston bombers unleashed their deadly attacks continues, the focus has centered to an elusive and mysterious Muslim convert known only as Misha.
    Family members of Tamerlan Tsarnaev describe Misha as the guiding influence in the elder bomber developing radicalized views – but to date it is believed that law enforcement and the media have failed to find him.
    Speculation as to who Misha is wildly varies, with some suggesting he is the mastermind behind the marathon bombings while others think that he could be a Russian spy – sent to identify and keep tabs on young men like Tamerlan who are at risk of turning to militant.

  • Two Countries, Turkey and Venezuela, Are Candidates for a Crisis

    Two Countries, Turkey and Venezuela, Are Candidates for a Crisis

    With the bloom coming off the emerging markets rose, one economic model has drawn a circle around two countries that stand the greatest risk of falling into a crisis.

    Chlaus Lotscher | Photolibrary | Getty Images

    David Rees, emerging markets economist at Capital Economics, said the firm has developed five criteria to identify whether a country’s economy has overheated to the point where it is threatening to develop into a full-scale problem.

    The good news is that the Capital model finds no country in “immediate threat of crisis.”

    But the bad news is that at least two countries are tilting in that direction and could pose danger to investors.

    Rees identifies the endangered duo as Turkey and Venezuela.

    (Read More: Tesco Quits US as Profits Fall for First Time in 20 years)

    Turkey’s stock market has surged 7.3 percent in 2013 and is up 42 percent over the past 12 months. The country outperformed virtually all other emerging markets in 2012 as it modernizes its economy and pushes pro-growth programs.

    Venezuela’s markets tell an even more robust story, with the Caracas exchange booming 37 percent this year and more than 200 percent over the past 12 months. While some feared the rally might falter due to political upheaval after President Hugo Chavez’s death, the market has gone on its merry way.

    Despite the powerful gains, Rees advises investors to watch five factors: Growing current account deficits; rapid credit expansion; surging short-term external debt; bubbling stock market prices (50 percent is considered a red flag); and large growth in real exchange rates.

    Broadly speaking, capital inflows “are something of a double-edged sword” for developing economies, Rees said. They both can help spur development but also “can fuel overheated economic growth and asset price bubbles,” he added.

    “In extreme cases, capital flight can then lead to recession and sharp falls in asset prices that can culminate in defaults on debt repayments,” Rees said in an analysis.

    The warning comes as emerging markets take a break after a decade of strong growth.

    Overall, emerging market stocks are down for the year, with the iShares MSCI Emerging Markets exchange-traded fund off more than 7 percent. Investors have pulled more than $2 billion from the ETF, the third-most of any of its peers, according to IndexUniverse.

    Still, some strategists remain positive on the group, reasoning that the underlying indicators remain strong even if sentiment has shifted due to negative headlines in the high-profile BRIC nations – Brazil, Russia, India and China.

    (Read More: By 2015, Producing in China Will Be as Costly as US)

    “In general, we see good long-term value in emerging markets based on favorable economic fundamentals,” Wells Fargo said in a recent analysis. “Valuations for emerging markets overall and for the larger markets are some of the cheapest in the world.”

    Investors should keep watch, then, on where the real opportunities — and crises — present themselves.

    “There is a risk that a prolonged period of loose monetary policy in the developed world could push large flows of capital into EMs over the coming years,” Rees said. “Accordingly, it would be useful to know if, and when, a crisis is about to unfold.”

  • Kerry compares Boston and Mavi Marmara victims

    Kerry compares Boston and Mavi Marmara victims

    By TOVAH LAZAROFFGIL HOFFMAN

    US Secretary of State compares the 2 tragedies saying he has “deep feelings when violence happens”; MK Shaked: Kerry should go to Chechnya.

    ShowImage
    People comfort each other after deadly twin blasts at the Boston Marathon, April 15, 2013. Photo: Reuters

    US Secretary of State John Kerry compared the victims of the Boston Marathon bombing to the nine Turkish activists killed by the IDF as they tried to break Gaza’s naval blockade, at a press conference in Istanbul on Sunday.

    “I know it’s an emotional issue with some people,” Kerry said of the Mavi Marmara deaths. “I particularly say to the families of people who were lost in the incident: We understand these tragedies completely and we sympathize with them.”

    He then added, “And nobody – I mean, I have just been through the week of Boston and I have deep feelings for what happens when you have violence and something happens and you lose people that are near and dear to you. It affects a community, it affects a country,” Kerry said. “We’re very sensitive to that.”

    Senior Israeli leaders, including Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, Justice Minister Tzipi Livni, Energy and Water Minister Silvan Shalom, Economy and Trade Minister Naftali Bennett, and Deputy Foreign Minister Ze’ev Elkin all made a point of not responding to Kerry’s comparison on Monday.

    High-ranking diplomatic officials in Jerusalem said they believed Kerry was misunderstood and he was really only trying to show empathy with the people of Turkey on a national level. The officials accused the press of deliberately trying to twist what Kerry had said.

    But Knesset members from across the political spectrum condemned Kerry’s comparison and said they found it extremely offensive.

    Since the 2010 raid, Israel has released video footage showing activists beating the soldiers with metal sticks and chairs as they descended onto the boat. The IDF said that metal rods, improvised sharp metal objects, sticks and clubs, 5 kg. hammers, firebombs and gas masks were found on board the boat.

    It said that these weapons were used against the naval soldiers and that seven soldiers were injured. It added that activists had also taken two pistols from the soldiers.

    The relatives of the nine Turkish activists, including one dual American citizen, have argued that their loved ones were killed in cold blood as they sailed to offer humanitarian assistance to the people in Gaza.

    The three victims of the bombing in Boston were killed last week after two brothers with ties to Chechnya exploded two bombs at the finish line of the America’s oldest marathon. The victims had gone to watch a race that attracts athletes from across the United States and around the globe. Among the 176 people injured were runners who used the marathon to raise money for humanitarian causes.

    “He completely distorted reality and turned white into black and black into white,” said Labor MK Nachman Shai. “How can he make such a comparison? In Boston, terrorists killed civilians. On the Mavi Marmara ship, terrorists were killed.”

    Bayit Yehudi faction chairwoman Ayelet Shaked went further, saying that Kerry mixed up the assailants and the victims.

    “According to what Kerry said, he should fly now to Chechnya to pay a condolence call to the parents of the poor terrorists in Boston,” Shaked said.

    Deputy Defense Minister Danny Danon, who in the past would have been the first to slam the Obama administration, continued his trend of more measured responses since he was appointed to his new post.

    “It is never helpful when a moral equivalency is made confusing terrorists with their victims,” Danon said.

    “As our American friends were made all too aware once again last week, the only way to deal with the evils of terrorism it to wage an unrelenting war against its perpetrators wherever they may be.”

  • A threatening silence

    A threatening silence

    Guest Column | A threatening silence

    By NICOLE SADANIANTZ · April 22, 2013, 9:26 pm

    I am half-Armenian by heritage. My father emigrated from Istanbul to the United States at the age of 17. But I was on the fence about writing this letter. I don’t like to disturb the peace. Politics overwhelms me. Then I searched through The Daily Pennsylvanian’s online archives for “Armenian genocide.” The most recent article related to the subject was from February 15, 2001. Apparently it’s been 12 years since this issue was covered by our newspaper. I decided it was due time to put it back on the table.

    April 24 commemorates the day in 1915 when over 200 Armenian intellectuals and leaders were arrested, imprisoned and promptly executed. This was the culminating and revealing moment of the discrimination that had built through the latter part of the 19th century into the 20th century. But it would be only the beginning for the 1.5 million Armenians who would die over the next eight years. Mass deportations, forced marches through the desert, starvation, torture and the conscription of young boys into the army … The Ottoman government, namely the Young Turks, concealed the horrors under the chaos of World War I.

    But there are reports and photographs from British and American ambassadors testifying to the truth of the experience. There are government documents suggesting that the massacres were systematically planned. And there are the words of Hitler that have, paradoxically, come to serve as evidence of the genocide: “After all,” he asked, “who remembers the Armenians?”

    His question begs the question, “Why should we remember the Armenians?” Why do we need to talk about events that occurred now nearly 100 years ago? What would the purpose be? I’ll admit it’s a question I have frequently asked myself. I have no interest in casting a shadow upon the Turkish people of today. I have no interest in vengeance. So why bother?

    Because Hitler did follow through with his plans for genocide. Because my father and his family emigrated to escape the oppressive environment in Turkey. Because contemporary Turkish writers including Hrant Dink and Orhan Pamuk have been persecuted for attempting to raise awareness of the genocide. Because innocent souls have been dying in Darfur since 2003. Because our nation has witnessed brutal acts of violence over the past year, from Aurora to Newtown to Boston.

    Because no death is trivial. No death should be invisible.

    I can understand the Turkish desire to deny or justify the annihilation in order to protect the honor of great-grandfathers. No one wants to admit that his or her family was involved in controversial acts. No one wants to feel guilt and shame running through his or her own veins. And I can understand our president’s desire to not explicitly name these acts “genocide.” He fears the decay of crucial alliances in precarious times.

    But what about the honor of Armenian great-grandfathers? What about the memory of Armenian great-grandmothers? The children who should have become great-grandparents. The great minds. The great artists. We are still in mourning. We hear their cries and feel their thirst. And our grief cannot find closure until these traumas and deaths are recognized for what they were.

    There is a way forward, a way that will prevent genocide from occurring again. This I believe. I believe that I do not want Turks, 19-year-olds like myself, to feel guilt and shame running through their veins. What happened 98 years ago is not their fault, and it should not be their burden. I believe that we should gather. I believe that we should lay out the cards for all to see. I believe that we should talk. I believe that we should work together to find peace, person-to-person. Then, perhaps, our governments will follow suit.

    It’s an unfortunate legacy we’ve inherited. But no good can come of it so long as we continue to hide, continue to push this conversation aside. So as we meet each other today, I ask that we do so in peace and in earnest. I ask that we consider the tragedies that surround us and vow to not condone them with silence … To not condemn them to silence.

    Nicole Sadaniantz is a College sophomore. Her email address is [email protected].

    via The Daily Pennsylvanian :: Guest Column | A threatening silence.