Turkish Forum

Category: Regions

  • Turkish soldiers inside Syria abducted by Islamist rebels, news reports say

    Turkish soldiers inside Syria abducted by Islamist rebels, news reports say

    Turkish soldiers inside Syria abducted by Islamist rebels, news reports say

    BY ROY GUTMAN

    McClatchy Foreign Staff

    n_65477_1

    ISTANBUL — Turkish troops conducting a resupply mission to a small Turkish military post inside Syrian territory were ambushed and detained Wednesday by Islamic extremists affiliated with the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, according to Turkish media reports.

    The troops were later returned to Turkey, news outlets in the Turkish city of Sanliurfa said. But it wasn’t clear what happened to the four armored personnel carriers they’d been traveling in. One report said ISIS had kept the vehicles, which had been seen flying ISIS flags.

    Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan on Wednesday confirmed that a convoy had been sent to the tomb of Suleyman Shah, the grandfather of the founder of the Ottoman Empire. The tomb lies about 15 miles inside Syria, but Turkey claims sovereignty over the area under a 1921 territory. Erdogan said the convoy had been sent to deliver supplies to the Turkish military contingent assigned to guard the tomb.

    He did not, however, mention the ISIS ambush or the abduction of the Turkish troops, an incident that could put Turkey’s military, widely regarded as the region’s best equipped, on a collision course with ISIS, whose militants are fighting both Syrian government forces and other anti-government rebel groups for control of eastern Syria.

    “Right now, the issue is not about ISIS,” he told reporters in Ankara. “The job of our convoy is to transfer aid to the Suleyman Shah tomb.”

    The Turkish military said the dispatch of the convoy was a planned activity, and nothing out of the ordinary.

    Local news reports said the vehicles crossed into Syria from the Sursitpinar border gate and were ambushed near the town of Manbij. The troops – the exact number was not reported — were then taken to Manbij and later repatriated to Turkey, Sanliurfa.com reported, citing local Syrian sources and another unnamed source.

    The news portal, without naming its source, said that the vehicles, after their capture, were being driven about with ISIS flags on them.

    In mid-March, ISIS demanded that Turkey abandon its military outpost at the tomb and threatened to attack and destroy it. This apparently gave rise to a secret conversation among top Turkish officials about whether Turkey should seize the opportunity to take on ISIS, an Iraq-based offshoot of al Qaida that is also fighting the Iraqi government for control of western Iraq and is considered a serious menace to regional stability. Al Qaida leaders denounced the group earlier this year for disobeying orders to withdraw from Syria, where another rebel group, the Nusra Front, is al Qaida’s recognized affiliate.

    A recording of the secret conversation about a possible incursion into Syria was posted on YouTube and proved deeply embarrassing to the Erdogan government, which launched a major investigation to find the source of the security breach. The government also blocked access to YouTube and Twitter in an effort to halt dissemination of the recording.

    According to news accounts, Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu can be heard on the recording saying that “without a strong pretext,” Turkey would not receive support for an intervention into Syria from the United States or other allies. The chief of Turkish intelligence, Hakan Fidan, reportedly responded that “if needed, I would dispatch four men to Syria” and “have them fire eight mortar shells at the Turkish side and create an excuse for war.” He added: “We can also have them attack the tomb of Suleyman Shah as well.”

    If the government was seriously considering doing anything at the time, it was put on hold following the publication of the discussion.

    Based on the scanty details available Wednesday, it wasn’t possible to determine whether the resupply convoy was a genuinely routine operation or a probe to test ISIS’s intentions.

    via ISTANBUL: Turkish soldiers inside Syria abducted by Islamist rebels, news reports say | World | The Sun Herald.

  • UNITED WE WEEP, DIVIDED WE SLEEP

    UNITED WE WEEP, DIVIDED WE SLEEP

    DUMBBELLS (English slang for stupid fools)

    DÜMBELEKLER (Turkish slang for stupid fools)

    I sing what was lost and dread what was won,
    I walk in a battle fought over again,
    My king a lost king, and lost soldiers my men;
    Feet to the Rising and Setting may run,
    They always beat on the same small stone.

    Willam Butler Yeats (1865-1939)

     

    I read the news today, oh boy. Here’s what Reuters said:
    “Prime Minister Tayyip Erdoğan has applied to Turkey’s constitutional court on Friday to challenge the alleged violation of his and his family’s rights by social media, a senior official in his office told Reuters.”

    Isn’t it grand, this so-called rule of law. The prime minister is correct in his action. Long ago his family’s rights were well-established as were his. When the fox owns the chicken coop every day the menu-du-jour is chicken. We and the world know the quality of those who rule this sad country.

    But who’s to argue? Not the sheep…if they whimper, they’re next. And besides, they’re well-bribed with food and coal and things magical from the bountiful Ankara sky. They have indeed learned to deeply love their Big Brother. They repay with their pathetic ballots. So, who? Perhaps young people who, like all young people everywhere, thought they had a future? Sorry. Enough of them have died and been maimed. Maimed by the prime minister who now frets about his and his family’s rights. Hah! So surely it will be the political opposition who once thought they had a patriotic responsibility, even a cause? No cause. No thought. No brains. No nothing. The military? The ones with the soundest, strongest emotional and ethical legacy? Nope. Folded up like a cheap suit. Hardly a whimper. Generals now bow their heads to thieving politicians. Cowardly submissive stuff like that makes one wonder if they ever received an education (and at taxpayer expense). Atatürk? Huh? Please, we must not speak aloud of such things. So who’s left to argue? Media? Ha! Sold-out. Universities? Ha! Ha! Expounding on pet obscurities, historical quirks, dead poets and deader laws and what once was and now will never be. There is no time left for history and literature and law and medicine and philosophy and too many more words. Speaking of which, what about writers? Well, who reads? The world is too much with all of us, and we are all too late.

    So who will care? Care enough to act, to really act? To stand up and say that this is enough. That the people will no longer be governed by a corrupt political process. Nor by numbskull, repetitive political opposition parties nor by America’s CIA gangsters? Is that too much to ask?

    It seems so. Time grows short. Another crooked election is coming, this one presidential. One way or another the same small people will throw the same big stones at us. Ah Turkey, the saddest country with the saddest people with the saddest stories. Always beating on, always being beaten. Ah, dear Turkey, Atatürk’s children deserved so much more. So did Atatürk.

    James (Cem) Ryan
    Istanbul
    19 April 2014

     

    “A slave is one who waits for someone to come and free him.”

    Ezra Pound (1885-1972)

    jefferson

     

     

  • Turkey Losing Propaganda War Over Syrian Armenians

    Turkey Losing Propaganda War Over Syrian Armenians

    By: Amberin Zaman , Columnist for Al-Monitor

    Al-Monitor

    download

    “The bearded men came to our home. They spoke Turkish. They rifled through our belongings and asked if we had guns.” This is how Sirpuhi Titizyan, a refugee from Kassab, a mainly Armenian village in northern Syria that was overrun by jihadists fighters on March 21, described her ordeal to Agos, an Istanbul-based Armenian weekly.

    The frail octogenarian blamed Turkey’s prime minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, for Kassab’s fall. “Had Erdogan not cleared the path to Kassab, this many evil men would not have come,” Titizyan said. “May Allah blind Erdogan,” she thundered in a separate interview with Aris Nalci, a Turkish-Armenian blogger.

    [READ: Why Erdogan Keeps Winning]

    But readers of the mass circulation daily Hurriyet, which disingenuously claimed to have interviewed the sisters first, were offered a completely different version of events. When asked to respond to allegations that Turkey had helped to orchestrate the attack against Kassab, Sirpuhi was quoted as saying: “If this were so, why would the [Turkish] government be helping us?”

    Sirpuhi and her sister Satenik have become the unwitting tools of a propaganda war pitting Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s regime and members of the Armenian diaspora against Turkey and its rebel proteges.

    The Islamist fighters promised the women, who were among a handful of elderly people left behind, that they would help them join their fellow villagers in regime-controlled areas of Latakia and Tartus. But they handed the pair over to Turkish authorities in the neighboring province of Hatay instead.

    The sisters have since been resettled in Vakifli, the sole Armenian-inhabited village left in Turkey since 1915.

    That was when more than a million Armenians were slaughtered by Ottomans in what most historians concurred was the first genocide of the 20th century. Much of the violence took place as hundreds of thousands of Armenians were uprooted from their homes and ordered on a “death march” to the Syrian desert in Deir al-Zor.

    Coming just weeks before the 99th anniversary of the genocide on April 24, the campaign in Kassab was bound to bruise Turkey’s image. And that is why, wrote Agos editor-in-chief, Rober Koptas, Turkey intervened with opposition fighters to prevent them from moving against Kassab in the past. So what prompted the change? he asked. Most Armenians, Koptas notes, would give the shortcut answer that it was “to harm Armenians.” But as he said, any harm suffered by Kassab’s Armenians would harm Turkey, too. The more likely reason that Turkey did not stand in the way of the rebels this time was because the conflict was tipping in the regime’s favor. Kassab would give the rebels a strategic foothold in Latakia and unprecedented access to the Mediterranean Sea. But at what price?

    via Turkey Losing Propaganda War Over Syrian Armenians – US News.

    more: http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2014/04/09/turkey-losing-propaganda-war-over-syrian-armenians

  • Turkey is again with Erdogan

    Turkey is again with Erdogan

    ali askerThe Turkish government banned YouTube last week, after Ankara made the same with Twitter. According to the western media  there are more than 10 million Turkish users on Twitter in Turkey. Independent experts said that the crackdown is related with nationwide municipal elections, which was held this Sunday. The lecturer of Turkish Karabuk University, Doctor of Law Ali Asker answered questions for newcafe.ge.

    –          Why Government banned Twitter and Youtube? What are the main and real reasons?

    –          There are official and unofficial explanations about the banning the access to social networks. Government declares that, they banned the access to Twitter because Twitter had not obeyed Court’s decision. According to the official procedures the implementation of the decision should have taken place within a month. But what about Youtube? Government says it is related to the state security issues. The reason was shown that the content of the discussion about Syria conflict in Turkish Ministry of Foreign Affairs was leaked to the press, the Turkish Telecommunications Communication Presidency decided to ban the access to Youtube. The ban is still continuing.

    –          How the society reacted to the banning? What is the reaction of the political parties and media?

    –          The opposition declared there is no legal basis for the decisions. They even think it is government’s provocation. People in social networks the government in engaging in corruption. At the same time there is not unanimous opinion among the representatives of ruling party related with the issue. Turkish President openly protested against the case. Media criticizes the government and consider the decision as the pressure on freedom of thought. The number of people who protesting against the Government’s decision gradually increases. But it seems that the Prime Minister Erdogan doesn’t have any plan to recede yet. On the contrary he appealed to the court to begin the criminal case about some media representatives “who offend the authorized person of state” with their “abusive twits”.

    –          What do you think, is the Prime Minister Erdogan able to keep his power? What can you say about current political climate in Turkey?

    –          I think that Erdogan party (AKP) can pass the election as first party again. But it is very important to balance power in major cities.  In Istanbul, opposition candidate Sarigul (from CHP – opposition party) is a strong candidate. However the social base of Istanbul reduces the assumptions that CHP will take victory. The conservative part of the society in Istanbul is as strong as always. But in Ankara we can see different results in this election. In Ankara Mansur Yavash (from CHP) is a strong opponent, at the same time he has nationalist views, therefore his vote potential could be serious in Ankara.

    30 March elections are local elections, but the process and the results are extremely important. It is important to pay attention to one issue: In the history of Turkish Republic, traditionally the right and left, secularization and Islamism were against each other in overt or covert way.  Same as today. But in recent years we witness some tension decrease. Especially in the conservative election potential. Left side is not as acute secularist as before. Taking into consideration the recent events in Turkey, we cannot  claim that the election (in Turkey) is a confrontation between Islamic and secular values. Because, there is a division in conservative side. In the other hand there are serious bribery charges against senior officials from the ruling party who respects primary the Islamic value. According to Islam bribery is one of the serious faults. I mean there is a traditional competition in this election as secularism – Islamism, but it is not as strong as before.

    – How Culen Jamaat (one of the main religious movement in Turkey, the leader of this movement Fatullah Gulen lives in US – J.M.) influences Turkey’s policy?

    – Gulen Jamaat is the strongest community in Turkey. They have human potential in different positions. They have certain power in media sector and trade. The Government used heavy phrases against Gulen and it caused different reaction both domestically and abroad. In this process there is one subtle point which we should pay attention. There is distance among the Gulen Jamaat and other Islamic communities, even they are competitors. Therefore Gulen’s people have not any serious opportunity to influence the results of these elections. I thing the process which will start after elections will create great interest, so let see.

    – What do you think the Turkish Government will do concerning banning social networks?

    – Social networks in Turkey will be opened. Ankara Administrative Court already has the decision about the opening the Twitter. I think the Government will change its decision after the social pressure is over.

    http://www.newscafe.ge/

  • Turkey must look beyond Erdogan

    Turkey must look beyond Erdogan

    Premier can no longer return country to moderate path

    ftRecep Tayyip Erdogan, Turkey’s prime minister, this weekend faces the biggest test of his 11 years in power. In the past few months, the 60-year-old premier has polarised Turkish society by passing a raft of illiberal laws with the apparent intent of protecting himself and his cronies from corruption allegations that have rocked his government. To save his political skin, Mr Erdogan reassigned thousands of police officials investigating the allegations. He has now gone a step further by banning Twitter and YouTube ahead of the vote. Understandably, many fear Turkey is lurching towards authoritarian government.

    Mr Erdogan faces a moment of reckoning on Sunday when Turks vote in local elections across the country. If Mr Erdogan’s AK party scores about 45 per cent or higher, his position will be consolidated and he will be in a position to meet his goal of running for the Turkish presidency. But if he wins less than 40 per cent or loses the crucial cities of Istanbul or Ankara, his leadership will be seriously damaged.

    The people of Turkey must decide their political future. That is only right. But even if Mr Erdogan performs well – and the AKP retains a very strong following in its Anatolian heartland and beyond – he can no longer be regarded as a figure who can unite Turkey and return the country to stability. Turkey must start looking for its next generation of leaders – even within the ranks of the AKP – who can end the political turmoil.

    The fundamental problem the nation faces is the schism between Mr Erdogan and Fethullah Gulen, a powerful Sunni Muslim cleric based in Pennsylvania. A decade ago, Mr Erdogan and Mr Gulen joined forces to conduct a peaceful revolution against Turkey’s army and secularist leaders, allowing the moderate Muslim AKP to consolidate power. Now the Gulenists are leveraging their position inside Turkey’s security and judicial structures to undermine Mr Erdogan, whom they believe has become a detached authoritarian. As is often the case in history, the revolution is devouring its own children.
    The internecine warfare is destroying Turkey’s independent institutions and the international reputation it earned in the early years of AKP power. Then it was hailed as an example of a moderate democratic Muslim majority state. In order to sully Mr Erdogan’s reputation, the Gulenists, members of a shadowy group that can in no way be seen as a responsible opposition, appear to be leaking compromising tape recordings alleging corruption by Mr Erdogan and his allies. Mr Erdogan’s ban on Twitter, which is still in force despite an adverse court ruling, came as he tried to staunch the leaks. Overall, Mr Erdogan’s high-handed conduct in office brings immense cost to the country’s standing.

    When set against the past decade of Turkish history, this is a tragic turn of events. At the start of the millennium, Turkey acquired much political favour in the west as it carried out reforms under the aegis of the International Monetary Fund and the EU.

    Once the country’s negotiations on EU membership stalled, progress quickly unwound. But what the country is also discovering is that the strong levels of economic growth enjoyed during Mr Erdogan’s first decade in office may be drawing to an end. Growth this year could be a mere 2 per cent, down from about 9 per cent a few years back.
    This weekend’s election must therefore mark a watershed in Mr Erdogan’s leadership. Whatever the result, the way forward for Turkey is to restore authority and integrity to the nation’s institutions. It may well be that Mr Erdogan wins enough backing on Sunday to remain at the helm of national politics. But his reputation as a statesman is shredded.

    FT, 28 March 2014

  • Daily Press Briefing – March 24, 2014

    Daily Press Briefing – March 24, 2014

    Daily Press Briefing – March 24, 2014

    03/24/2014 06:57 PM EDT

    Marie Harf

    Deputy Spokesperson
    Daily Press Briefing

    Washington, DC

    March 24, 2014

    QUESTION: Do you have a comment on the downing of a Syrian jet apparently —

    MS. HARF: Yes.

    QUESTION: — in the Syrian airspace yesterday by the Turkish?

    MS. HARF: Well, obviously, we’ve been following the issue closely. We have been in close contact with our Turkish counterparts – I would remind you, NATO allies – regarding the incident. We are committed to Turkey’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. We note that the Turkish Government has been fully transparent about the rules of engagement it is operating under since the Syrian Government shot down a Turkish aircraft in 2012. The Turkish Government in this case said its forces only fired after the Syrian military aircraft violated Turkish airspace and after repeated warnings from Turkish authorities. Obviously, the Government of Turkey is looking into the incident more, but we are talking to them and will remain in contact with them.

    QUESTION: So to the best of your information, do you have any independent information that it was actually shot down over Syrian airspace or Turkish airspace?

    MS. HARF: Where it was actually shot down, I don’t have specific information about that, but as I said, the Turkish Government said it only fired on the aircraft after it violated Turkish aircraft – or, excuse me, airspace, and was repeatedly warned by the Turkish Government not to do so.

    QUESTION: Are you concerned that any escalation might involve all other NATO allies, considering that you have some sort of a pact with Turkey?

    MS. HARF: Well, I think it’s a little soon to sort of take this more broadly. I would note that I don’t think Turkey has asked for anything yet in terms of NATO. Obviously, we’re talking to them about how to move forward here, but again, I think it’s too soon to sort of draw broader characterizations about what might happen next.

    QUESTION: And finally, Brahimi said that he doesn’t see Geneva II reconvening anytime soon. Do you have any comment on that?

    MS. HARF: Well, we have obviously been working with the special representative quite closely. We want – all want Geneva – the Geneva process, I would say, to reconvene when we can make progress. And up until this point, we’ve seen the Syrian regime not come to the table as a party that wants to make progress here. So I know he’s working on it to see if and when we can reconvene this and how, to see if we can move this diplomatic process forward.

    QUESTION: So you said that Turkey has been fully transparent about the rules of engagement? What does that mean, exactly?

    MS. HARF: That it has operated under since the Syrian Government shot down a Turkish aircraft in 2012.

    QUESTION: Right, but —

    MS. HARF: So I think what it means, without knowing all the specifics here, is that, for example, it repeatedly warned —

    QUESTION: Yeah.

    MS. HARF: — the Syrian aircraft not to violate its airspace. It only then took action. That’s what I think rules of engagement refers to here.

    QUESTION: Right. Right. But the rules of engagement, are they public? You don’t have —

    MS. HARF: I can check.

    QUESTION: Is that what that means in terms of —

    MS. HARF: Or do we mean transparent with the United States? I don’t know.

    QUESTION: Well, transparent – I mean, maybe you’d like to see —

    MS. HARF: I’ll check.

    QUESTION: — the Turkish Government tweet the rules of engagement or perhaps put them on Facebook or YouTube or something like that.

    MS. HARF: I would note here that there have been more tweets from Turkey since the government blocked it than there were before.

    QUESTION: So can we just —

    MS. HARF: Which is an interesting, I think, signal to people that try to clamp down on freedom of expression that it doesn’t work and isn’t the right thing to do.

    QUESTION: Are you helping in this?

    QUESTION: So —

    MS. HARF: Hold on. We’ll – let me finish Matt.

    QUESTION: So do you have any additional comment on the Twitter ban? When Erdogan announced that he was going to do this, he said now every – he didn’t care about international reaction and now the world would see the power of the Turkish Republic.

    MS. HARF: Well, I think what the world saw was the number of people inside Turkey tweeting about what they thought about it being blocked there.

    QUESTION: Well, could I ask you what you think —

    MS. HARF: Yes.

    QUESTION: — about the power of the Turkish Republic since they have failed so dramatically to enforce this ban?

    MS. HARF: We have conveyed our serious concerns over this action directly to Turkish authorities, both from here and on the ground. Obviously, we support freedom of expression in Turkey and everywhere else. We oppose any action to encroach on the right to free speech, and continue to urge directly the Turkish Government to unblock its citizens’ access to Twitter and ensure free access to all social media platforms —

    QUESTION: Right, but —

    MS. HARF: — so they can see what you and everyone else tweets.

    QUESTION: Right, but what does it say to you, if anything, about the power of the Turkish Republic?

    MS. HARF: In what respect?

    QUESTION: The fact that they’ve tried to ban it and it hasn’t worked. I mean, is this the kind of thing that you want to see a NATO ally doing or boasting about —

    MS. HARF: No.

    QUESTION: — beforehand, and then —

    MS. HARF: No.

    QUESTION: — failing miserably at it?

    MS. HARF: Well, the second part – clearly, we think it’s good that people inside Turkey are still able to express themselves, but that doesn’t mean that it should be blocked. I wasn’t trying to give that statistic —

    QUESTION: Okay.

    MS. HARF: — in terms of saying that it’s an acceptable action.

    QUESTION: So you’re —

    MS. HARF: No, clearly this is not an action we think the Turkish Government should take. We’ve told them that directly. We will continue to tell them that directly. There’s no place in a democracy for this kind of clamping down on people’s right to free speech. There’s just not.

    QUESTION: Okay. And so you would encourage people in Turkey to defy – to continue to defy the prime minister’s ban. Is that —

    MS. HARF: I’m not going to go that far, but I – what I will say is it’s important for people all over the world to hear what the Turkish people have to say.

    QUESTION: Do you see any connection between the Twitter issue and the downing of the plane, the Syrian plane, perhaps that Mr. Erdogan is trying to export his —

    MS. HARF: Not at all.

    QUESTION: — local issues? You don’t see that?

    MS. HARF: Not at all. No, not at all.

    QUESTION: Are you helping the Turks in breaking the blockade?

    MS. HARF: Is the United States Government?

    QUESTION: Yeah.

    MS. HARF: No, not to my knowledge. We’ve been in contact with Twitter and with the Government of Turkey about this, but to my knowledge, no, we are not. But we’ve said very clearly to the Turkish Government that this is not acceptable and that we do not think they should be able to block their citizens’ access to these kind of social media platforms.

    QUESTION: Mm-hmm. And —

    QUESTION: Just to clarify, Marie, you – I asked this question last week, that whether United States Government is involved with this case in the —

    MS. HARF: With Twitter?

    QUESTION: In this dispute between the Twitter and the Turkish Government in terms of the legal process, and you said no. Still the case? Still —

    MS. HARF: Well, I don’t think I said no; I think Jen said no. But we saw over the weekend, I think, some more actions being taken, right? So I’m not sure exactly how you asked the question last week, but what I can say is that we have been in contact with Twitter and separately with the Government of Turkey to talk about the fact that people should not have their access blocked to Twitter.

    QUESTION: So it is a legal dispute right now, and that maybe – I mean, Turkish Government is pursuing this ban, and they took several additional measures during the weekend to stop the people to use Twitter, like DNS ban, et cetera.

    MS. HARF: Which we think is an encroachment on their citizens’ freedom of expression, and we don’t think that it should be continued.

    QUESTION: You are in contact with the Twitter in terms of legal dispute or —

    MS. HARF: I’m not say in terms of any – I don’t know the legal – the specific legal aspect you’re referring to. We are in touch with Twitter, yes, broadly speaking. I don’t know exactly what that contact is like, but I don’t know if the legal – if that’s an internal Turkish matter, I’m not exactly sure, but we’ve been in contact with both Twitter and the Turkish Government.

    QUESTION: I mean, because Twitter is represented by the lawyers right now in Turkey, and there will be maybe case against —

    MS. HARF: I don’t have more details on any legal action that may or may not be happening in Turkey. I just don’t have those details. What we’ve said is separate and apart from that. People should be able to express themselves freely, whether it’s on Facebook or Twitter or whatever – Flickr, Tumblr, whatever people want to use – and that governments should not encroach on their – they shouldn’t block access for their citizens to do so. I don’t have a lot more information.

    QUESTION: Yeah, but —

    QUESTION: What about Instagram?

    MS. HARF: And Instagram too.

    QUESTION: Yeah, the problem —

    QUESTION: Not Instagram.

    QUESTION: Not – (laughter). Don’t play favorites now, Marie.

    MS. HARF: I am not. I am not on Instagram, but —

    QUESTION: The problem, the Turkish Government is trying to get some information about some users, specific users who are tweeting against the government and —

    MS. HARF: What I’m saying is that we oppose the Turkish —

    QUESTION: And the Twitter – and my question – okay. My question is —

    MS. HARF: Yes.

    QUESTION: — Twitter assured to Turkish Twitter accounts users that they will not disclose any private information.

    MS. HARF: That would be a question for Twitter, not for me.

    QUESTION: Yeah. But are you supporting this stand of Twitter against Turkish Government?

    MS. HARF: That’s not something that I should take a stand on. I don’t think that’s something that the company, Twitter, can decide on its own.

    QUESTION: Because —

    MS. HARF: What we have said is that governments should not block access for their citizens.

    QUESTION: Yes. But at the same time it’s a privacy question – not only freedom of expression, but the people are also trying to protect their privacy —

    MS. HARF: Again, that a question that’s —

    QUESTION: — and the Turkish Government is trying to get the information of all of the users.

    MS. HARF: That’s a question, I think, is better addressed to Twitter, who controls that issue. What I am saying is people’s freedom of expression should not be blocked by their own government.

    QUESTION: So no comment about the privacy?

    MS. HARF: I don’t have more for you than this – for you on this case than that.

    QUESTION: Okay.

    MS. HARF: I’m happy to check with our folks and see if there’s more.

    QUESTION: Right.

    MS. HARF: I just don’t think I’ll have more.

    QUESTION: Okay. Thank you. Please.

    And another question about the jet incident.

    MS. HARF: Yeah.

    QUESTION: Are you concerned that this confrontation between Turkey and Syria can turn into a more broader confrontation just before the elections, because —

    MS. HARF: Well, I think that’s the question Said just asked, and what I said was it’s a little too early to make sweeping characterizations about what may come from this. Obviously, we know there was a situation here where the Turks repeatedly warned the Syrians before taking action. I don’t think I want to probably draw broader conclusions about what will happen going forward.

    QUESTION: No, I’m – my question wasn’t related NATO that Said asked in terms of the NATO involvement. Beyond the NATO involvement, are you encouraging the parties to deescalate the tension?

    MS. HARF: I mean, we’re certainly in contact with the Turkish Government here on this issue. I’m not – I mean, in terms of the parties, you’re talking about the Assad regime?

    QUESTION: No, the parties – NATO ally, Turkey. Because there will be an election this week —

    MS. HARF: Right.

    QUESTION: — and the main —

    MS. HARF: I’m not seeing the connection here.

    QUESTION: The main opposition party urged to not do any military intervention, military – I mean, unilateral military action against Syria just before the election, to use a populist tool just before the election. So this is the concern of the main opposition party and other parties in Turkey.

    MS. HARF: I think I probably don’t have much comment on internal Turkish politics or how they may or may not respond —

    QUESTION: It stirs an international crisis.

    QUESTION: Well, are you encouraging the Turks to kind of remain calm and not escalate the situation?

    QUESTION: Yes.

    MS. HARF: I’m not sure how they – I mean I’m not sure there’s even talk of escalation here. I’m happy to check with our folks and see. To my understanding, it was a limited situation. I haven’t heard that there is escalation here.

    QUESTION: Is —

    MS. HARF: I’m happy to check with our team. We’re still talking to the Turks to get the facts about what happened here, but I, quite frankly, haven’t heard talk that people are worried about that.

    QUESTION: So – because my question is related to another religious site within Syria belonging to Turkey. This is a Turkish territory, 35 kilometers from Turkish broader within Syria, and it’s under threat some groups, ISIS and other radical al-Qaida-affiliated groups. And some cabinet members, Turkish cabinet members, even urged not to do anything to provoke Turkey for any unilateral military action, for example. This is another concern for Turkey to be part of the unilateral military action within Syria. So only – not only the jet, but this is another risk for Turkey to involve with Syria in terms of this kind of military action.

    MS. HARF: Well, I don’t have any, in terms of that specific question, any details for you on that. Again, I think I’ll let the Turkish Government speak for what their response will or won’t be here. As I said, we’ve talked to them, we’ve gotten the facts of what’s happened here, and if there’s more to share tomorrow, I’m happy to.

    QUESTION: Marie, a question that is on Syria.

    MS. HARF: Mm-hmm.

    QUESTION: There are report that 600,000 Syrians have applied for asylum in Europe and the United States. Could you tell us the portion of that that is being sought with the United States?

    MS. HARF: I don’t know the answer, Said. Let me check with our folks and see. I don’t have the numbers.

    QUESTION: Just one more question on the Syrian jet.

    MS. HARF: Uh-huh.

    QUESTION: You said we’ve established the facts and multiple warning were issued, I guess.

    MS. HARF: Mm-hmm. By the Turkish Government.

    QUESTION: How – yeah. How did you establish that? Did they share any information with the State Department?

    MS. HARF: The Turkish Government?

    QUESTION: Yeah.

    MS. HARF: With the United States Government they did. I don’t know if it was us or with the Defense Department, but —

    QUESTION: Yeah. But they shared, like, intelligence information about the incident?

    MS. HARF: I don’t know if it’s intelligence they told us. They warned the Syrians multiple times. I don’t know the details of exactly what that —

    QUESTION: Yeah. But how did you verify what they actually conveyed to you?

    MS. HARF: I can check with our folks and see.

    QUESTION: Were you in touch with them in real time during the incident?

    MS. HARF: I don’t know. I’m happy to check. It might be – and it might be the Department of Defense, but I’m happy to check with them.

    QUESTION: So did you —

    MS. HARF: I just don’t know.

    QUESTION: Did you say that these pieces of information were verified, or you’re not sure?

    MS. HARF: We have no reason to believe that it’s not accurate, correct. Yes.

    QUESTION: Okay. But —

    MS. HARF: And I’m happy to see if there are more details about how we verified it, correct.

    QUESTION: I wanted to ask one more.

    QUESTION: No, no. One more on Syria.

    MS. HARF: Uh-huh.

    QUESTION: News reports said that the U.S. Administration has finished its review on its policy towards Syria and decided not to intervene militarily and not to provide the opposition with sophisticated arms and not to allow Saudi Arabia to provide this kind of arms.

    MS. HARF: I’m not sure those reports are true. I haven’t seen them, but I haven’t heard those reports. In terms of the first, we’ve always said all options except for boots on the ground are on the table. Happy to check with our team, but it’s my understanding, as we’ve talked about in here, that this is an ongoing discussion of what policies we should undertake in Syria. I’m happy to check and see if there’s been some decisions made, but to my knowledge there haven’t been.

    QUESTION: Is there any review?

    MS. HARF: As I said – we went over this, I think, ad nauseam one day, but there’s constantly a review of our policy in Syria. We are constantly looking at options, what we could do, what more we could do, how we could influence the situation. That’s ongoing, yes. But to my knowledge, there hasn’t been some sort of major decision on what we will or won’t do.

    QUESTION: Can you check on this, please?

    MS. HARF: I’m happy to.

    QUESTION: Thank you.