Tag: CHP

  • Turkey’s humbled secular opposition seeks to shed elitist image

    Turkey’s humbled secular opposition seeks to shed elitist image

    Jonny Hogg

    Reuters

    9:48 a.m. CDT, April 9, 2014

    Turkey's main opposition Republican People's Party Leader Kilicdaroglu addresses his party MPs during a meeting at the Turkish parliament in Ankara

    Turkey’s main opposition Republican People’s Party Leader Kilicdaroglu addresses his party MPs during a meeting at the Turkish parliament in Ankara (Umit Bektas Reuters, / April 8, 2014)

    ANKARA (Reuters) – Chastened by its failure to dent Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan’s domination at the ballot box, Turkey’s main opposition is looking to the conservative religious heartland it long shunned and trying to shed its image as bastion of an old secular elite.

    Erdogan, arguably Turkey’s strongest leader since Mustafa Kemal Ataturk founded the secular republic on the ashes of the Ottoman Empire, has all but monopolised politics for a decade, aided by the virtual absence of an opposition able to command anywhere near his Islamist-rooted AK Party’s mass support.

    His rivals’ hopes that his grip might be weakened by a graft scandal and anti-government protests last summer proved misplaced. The AKP increased its share of the national vote and held the key cities Istanbul and Ankara at March 30 local polls.

    “I have decided to emigrate to Izmir,” one disgruntled opposition supporter wrote on Facebook, referring to the Aegean coastal province which remained a stronghold of the staunchly secularist Republican People’s Party (CHP).

    The CHP’s mild-mannered leader, Kemal Kilicdaroglu, puts on a brave face. Four years after taking the reins of the party on a reformist agenda, he believes it must vie for the support of millions of conservative Turks who have bought into the Islamist-rooted AK Party’s vision.

    “We had aimed to combine under the CHP roof all the forces supportive of the republic, democracy, and the secular system,” he told Reuters in his office in Ankara, noting the party had seen a modest gain in its overall share of the vote but acknowledging it needed to reshape its strategy.

    “We have a deep-rooted identity and past. If today we seek the votes of all citizens, we cannot differentiate among them. We need to embrace all and every one.”

    Efforts to broaden the CHP’s appeal saw them select a former nationalist party candidate to run for mayor in Ankara, a move that brought them to within one percentage point of victory.

    It could now see them try to settle on a consensus candidate in the August presidential race, an election in which Erdogan, bolstered by the 46 percent share of the vote his party won at the municipal polls, is widely expected to stand.

    “We’d like to see a candidate who people from all parties will vote for willingly … If such a candidate emerges, we will support them,” Kilicdaroglu said, adding that collaboration with the nationalist MHP party, once anathema to the CHP, would not be out of the question.

    Erdogan’s party reaped the reward of its work on social services, from roads and education to health care and refuge collection, in rural areas that had For generations felt neglected under traditional secularist parties.

    “Dirt and filth,” Erdogan said, had marked their rule. He saw no place for them in what he called the New Turkey.

    The CHP, in the past a mixture of leftist and nationalist forces, has much to do to claim the territory of the poor that should be their natural constituency.

    Turkish politics are polarised as scarcely ever before while Erdogan fights what he deems subversive elements in police and judiciary concocting allegations of graft. He accuses a U.S.-based cleric of running a terrorist organisation in cahoots with major opposition parties he labels an “alliance of evil”.

    “VAST SPACES OF CONSERVATISM”

    The CHP’s voter base has been largely confined to a secular-minded, urban middle class. It controls towns on the Aegean coast and mobilises large numbers in the cosmopolitan centres of Ankara and Istanbul, but little is done to lure the significant Kurdish vote, and the party is almost non-existent in the windswept expanses of the central and eastern Anatolian plains.

    Jonathan Friedman, lead Turkey analyst for London-based Control Risks, doubts whether opposition party leaders would be willing to sacrifice their own power in seeking a united front.

    “I wouldn’t underestimate the opposition’s inability to cooperate. People are united in being anti-Erdogan but haven’t managed to move beyond that to be ‘for’ something,” he said.

    “There is no real sign they’re trying to bring in fresh blood and fresh thinking to move beyond the symbolic politics of the past — waving the flag of Ataturk – and start trying to appeal more seriously to Turkey’s Anatolian heartland.”

    Copyright © 2014, Reuters

    via Turkey’s humbled secular opposition seeks to shed elitist image – chicagotribune.com.

  • THE SICK JOKE

    THE SICK JOKE

    “Hegel observes somewhere that all great incidents and individuals of world history occur, as it were, twice.  He forgot to add: the first time as tragedy, the second as farce.”

    Karl Marx, The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte (1851)

    harpogrpucho chico

     

    Oh fabulous farce, the art of the improbable, the exaggerated, the ludicrous, the bizarre, the brazen and often the stupid, the essence of what Turks once called democracy, a word they dare not now pronounce. Still, aren’t we all so lucky to be living in Turkey? Sure we are. Turkey, the land of politicians that plunder while they pray, ludicrously lie without blushing and murder and maim the nation’s youth. Turkey, once brimming with hope, now the land of hopelessness. Still…aren’t we happy, happy, happy? Of course we are. Therefore aren’t we stupid? Of course we…. next question, please.

    Forget your troubles! Get happy! Allah, Yahweh and Jesus all love you! Why the other night the commanding general of the world’s largest, best trained and best armed terrorist group was released from jail. He was lucky. Hundreds of his fellow officers, jailed years before him, are still inside. Strange isn’t to have a nation’s army called a terrorist group? Who would dare call it so? The name, their name, is treason. Their names are the names of founders of the ruling religious fascist party. Meet Abdullah Gül, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan and Bülent Arınç, the three stars of that fast fading, soon to close farce called Ergenekon. And this dynamic trio, this merry band, the Harpo Marx, Groucho Marx and Chico Marx of their shameless Turkish times, they cooked up this entire treacherous deal. Really, these guys are too much, a real riot of laughs. So get this, after the general was released, all three sent him congratulations messages. So funny they are… HA-HA-HA. They couldn’t be any funnier if they had hit him in the face with cream pies. These three comics canned the general for 26 months and then they celebrate his release. HA-HA-HA! Then they sent for the real clown and in comes the major opposition party leader to join in the celebration. HA-HA-HA!  Too much, wouldn’t you agree? Don’t you love farce?

    Well, Ergenekon has been legally stinking for years. It’s all based on fabricated evidence and secret, false witnesses. Who wrote this joke? Well start with the CIA and assorted traitorous dopes in Turkey. Who produced it? Harpo, Groucho and Chico, with a supporting cast of sold-out journalists, police, prosecutors and judges. Who’s the evil genius? Every farce needs an evil genius. Why he’s an old friend of Harpo, Groucho, and Chico. His name? Feto. Who’s he? He’s an under-educated imam who peddles a line of religious snake-oil blather that appeals to people who are too busy to read and think. But not too busy to be sneaky, violent and suborn treason. He has a big following in Turkey. He makes loads of money so bankrolling the Ergenekon farce was not even a slight problem. And, of course, to further darken the melodrama enter the CIA. Color me green as in a green card for Feto. Color me green as in an Islamic green tie for Groucho. Color me green as in massive bribes and kickbacks and secret bank accounts in the Alps. So far, so bad. Yes, Uncle Feto has been very good to these destroyers of Turkey. And he has been true to his word. He promised to destroy democracy years ago before he escaped into the welcoming arms of the CIA in America, Pennsylvania to be precise. But now pity poor Feto. His old subversive comrades have turned on him. It seems they need a patsy, like Lee Harvey Oswald was fifty years ago. Why? Well, it seems that Groucho and his bit-player ministers and assorted cronies have been stealing everything. Hoses are everywhere sucking, sucking, sucking. Their houses are collapsing from the zillions of shoeboxes stuffed with dollars and euros and whatever else flies in. So Groucho needs a cover, something to take him from being a pious thief to a savior of the nation. Hmmm….

    So what does he do? He blames Feto for the whole disaster. The new game is called Fingering Feto. And that’s why the Turkish Marx brothers, now little angels, are congratulating the general. I wonder if they will send congratulations to all the hundreds of soon-to-be-released prisoners whose lives they have stolen? Do they really think that the Turkish people will believe that they are clean, that they too have been made patsies by the patsy, Feto? Remember, farces are brazen and bizarre.

    Groucho says he’s saving the nation from Feto’s horrible assault on privacy and the military and everything else. Groucho is, as usual, lying, since he said he was the lead prosecutor in all these cases. Farces are ludicrous too. And so the leading opposition has made an alliance of sorts with Feto. The result? Voters in the coming election can vote for the treasonous ruling party or the treasonous major opposition party. This is pretty funny isn’t it? HA-HA-HA.

    Or is this the stupid part? HA-HA-HA!

    James (Cem) Ryan
    Istanbul
    8 March 2014

    Brightening Glance, 

     

    The General Leaves Jail

     

  • AK Party’s Sovereignty  Over Istanbul Threatened

    AK Party’s Sovereignty Over Istanbul Threatened

    Sarigul waves to his supporters in Ankara.
    Mustafa Sarigul waves to supporters at the beginning of the Republican Peoples Party’s 13th extraordinary congress in Ankara, Jan. 29, 2005. Although later expelled from the CHP, he may now run on its banner in the Istanbul mayor’s race next year. (photo by REUTERS/Umit Bektas)

    By: Kadri Gursel for Al-Monitor Turkey Pulse Posted on October 31.

    Turkey can be roughly divided in two: Istanbul and the rest of the country. Istanbul is the role model for all Turkey. Turkey emulates Istanbul. It doesn’t matter whether it is political, cultural, social, economic, sports, whatever. There are two prerequisites for any trend to be adopted by Turkey: To originate from Istanbul or to be approved by Istanbul. Any trend that is not adopted by Istanbul is bound to remain ineffectually local.

    About This Article

    Summary :

    According to polls, current mayor of Istanbul Sisli district Mustafa Sarigul may win local elecations as main opposition CHP candidate, if he chooses to run in 2014.

    Original Title:
    AK Party’s Sovereignty Over Istanbul Threatened
    Author: Kadri Gursel
    Posted on: October 31 2013
    Translated by: Timur Goksel

    Categories : Originals  Turkey

    Istanbul is the key junction of the country. Istanbul decides who passes through that junction and who can’t. Therefore it is not possible to win Turkey without winning in Istanbul. Or, those who lose Istanbul in the end will lose the country. This rule has never been negated.

    After the Sept. 12, 1980, coup, the Motherland Party set up by then-Deputy Prime Minister Turgut Ozal won the first elections it participated in, in 1983. Its eventual loss of power began with its losing the Istanbul local elections in 1989; in the 1991 general elections, Motherland was defeated.

    Also, the beginning of the march toward power by the mainstream Islamic current was the 1994 local elections. Today’s Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, who was then the Istanbul provincial leader of the Welfare Party, was catapulted to the forefront of Turkish politics by winning the mayoralty elections for metropolitan Istanbul.

    Since that day it has always been the candidates of Islamic parties who won the local elections of Istanbul. Their uninterrupted hold on local rule in Istanbul accrued massive political and administrative experience to Turkey’s Islamist movement. It is said that Erdogan’s team, while he was the mayor of Istanbul, today occupies a significant part his party’s core.

    This megacity also provided massive financial resources to the Islamist movement for its politics. To illustrate the potential of the Istanbul economy to indirectly finance politics, one only needs to remember that that 39% of the entire tax revenues of Turkey, the 17th biggest economy of the globe, are generated from Istanbul.

    It is this Istanbul that will go to the ballot box at the end of March 2014, once again for local elections to decide whether the current Islamist local rule is to continue after 20 years in power.

    Voters are in such a predicament for the first time during the AKP’s reign. Looking at likely candidates and interesting poll results, we can forecast that the AKP’s local rule in Istanbul might be heading into a touch-and-go situation.

    There is indeed a factor that can be a serious threat to AKP in Istanbul: Mustafa Sarigul, the current mayor of multi-cultured cultured, richest and most populated district of Sisli in the center of Istanbul. Unless there is major surprise, he is expected to join the main opposition Republican Peoples Party (CHP) in the coming days and announce his candidacy for Istanbul’s mayoralty.

    Polls say that if Sarigul becomes a candidate then the contest would be between Sarigul and the current Mayor Kadir Topbas, the most likely AKP candidate. One of Turkey’s leading pollsters, Konsensus, in its latest survey revealed on Oct. 16 on CNNTurk found that 46.8% of voters in Istanbul said they would vote for CHP if Sarigul were its candidate. His possible rival Topbas had 44.9% support in that poll. The poll was taken from 1,000 respondents on Oct. 7-9 and had a margin of error of plus or minus 3%. Thus one can say that Sarigul and Topbas are running neck and neck.

    Sarigul, 57, was elected to  parliament for the Social Democrat Populist Party (SHP) of the late Erdal Inonu in 1987. Sarigul was only 30 at the time, thus becoming the youngest-ever member of parliament. In 1999, he was first elected as the mayor of Sisli, a center of trade and finance where people of widely divergent  social classes, ethnic groups and religiosity live. Sarigul, who was then the candidate of the Democratic Left Party of the late Bulent Ecevit, received 39% of the votes. In 2004, when he ran as a candidate of the CHP, he scored an overwhelming victory of 65.7%. The candidate of the ruling AKP mustered only a meager 22% vote.

    In 2009, Sarigul was elected mayor of Sisli with 54.7% of the vote, while his AKP rival fared even worse with 18%. Nearly all the polls taken so far indicate that should Sarigul not run under the CHP banner, that party would only get about 30% of the vote.

    It is therefore necessary to speak of a basic “Sarigul difference.” Sarigul is a politician who gets votes also from outside the CHP constituency. If he had not been supported by the secular middle class and Alevis of Sisli, but also by the Kurds, conservatives, nationalists, Jewish and Christian minorities, the CHP couldn’t have defeated the AKP so soundly. It was impossible to achieve such a success only with the quality of municipal services provided.

    It is therefore possible to assert that Sarigul had succeeded in overcoming Turkey’s divisive fault lines with his political narratives and attitudes, and managed to bring together such conflicting social and cultural diversities in his own person. In his narratives you would find such themes as “embracing 100% of citizens, not to discriminate between us and them, and to strive for the well-being of people without sectarian considerations.”

    Such narratives based on opposing polarization and discrimination could be dismissed as futile in countries where they are internalized in all institutions and in principles of democracy. But Turkey is not a country where democracy has deep roots. Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the leader of the ruling AKP, has opted to consolidate his power by systematically polarizing the people; any opposition to polarization and any attempts to unify people are therefore meaningful and will accrue political gains. Erdogan’s remarks against the Gezi protesters insinuating that he could let his supporters loose in the streets by saying, “We are hardly holding back 50% of the country,” are fresh in our minds.

    Sarigul’s positioning himself with a positive outlook against Erdogan’s polarizing narrative is not a coincidental. The conflicting political narratives and attitudes of Sarigul and Erdogan actually reveal a common characteristic of the two men: Their capacity to reach larges masse and  to influence them. This naturally makes them rivals.

    Sarigul says, “There are two political actors in Turkey who have risen from nothing.” One is himself and the other is Erdogan.

    Their social roots are not all that different. They are both of Anatolian origin; both are children of low-income families. Both did not have easy lives as children and young boys.

    It is meaningful that Sarigul in his just-published book, Not One Missing, Not One Extra, telling his life story and recounting his political endeavors, recalled the days when he was working at the transport department of Istanbul Municipality in the late 1970s, and noted that Erdogan was working there, too.

    It is time to wait for the outcome of the CHP Party Council meeting on Sarigul’s return to the CHP; he was expelled from it in 2005 because he was competing against then-party Chairman Deniz Baykal.

    We have to observe the forthcoming local elections above all from the perspective of Istanbul. The results of local elections in Istanbul will also affect the outcome of the presidential election scheduled for August of the same year, and Turkey will head into the 2015 general elections in a political climate conditioned by these two elections.

    Of course, in an unpredictable country like Turkey, wide open to surprises, five months is, politically, a very long time.

    Read more: http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2013/10/akp-istanbul-threatened-city.html#ixzz2jONqG3c6

  • CHP leader: ‘Genocide’ being committed against Istanbul’s skyline

    CHP leader: ‘Genocide’ being committed against Istanbul’s skyline

    Main opposition Republican People’s Party (CHP) leader Kemal Kilicdaroglu said a crime as big as ‘genocide’ is being committed against Istanbul’s skyline.

    The CHP leader said on his Twitter account on Tuesday that neither humanity nor history will forgive those who destroy the historic skyline of the city. He later shared an image showing an old photo of Sultanahmet and a new photo of the same area side by side. The newer photo shows three skyscrapers visible behind the historic mosque. The skyscrapers in the image are highlighted by drawn-on light bulbs, reminiscent of the logo of the ruling Justice and Development Party (AK Party). In the corner of the image there is the figure of Ottoman Fatih Sultan Mehmet, who conquered Istanbul in 1453. The sultan is shown wiping away his tears with a handkerchief in one hand and holding a tulip in the other. In the original version of the famous sultan photo, he is sniffing a flower in one hand and holding a handkerchief in the other.

    Kilicdaroglu accused the AK Party of allowing this construction to damage the silhouette of the historic city. At a symposium over the weekend, Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan warned mayors against unplanned and improper urbanization. Erdogan urged those who think only of “stone and concrete” when it comes to city planning to re-evaluate their ideas and create cities that have “souls and direction.”

    In remarks to Today’s Zaman, experts unanimously stated that the damage to Istanbul’s historic silhouette has been done and they urged authorities to take action against further unplanned urbanization. In 2012, the traditional silhouette of Istanbul, which comprises Hagia Sophia, Topkapi Palace and the Blue Mosque, was marred by a high rise building erected in the district adjacent to the historic peninsula. Currently, a new bridge under construction over the Golden Horn, a mosque on Camlica Hill and the rebuilding of Taksim Square are being debated because of aesthetic concerns.

  • Erdogan Angered After Opposition  In Turkey Meets With Assad

    Erdogan Angered After Opposition In Turkey Meets With Assad

    Turkish PM Erdogan shakes hands with main opposition leader Kilicdaroglu in Ankara

     

    Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan shakes hands with main opposition Republican People’s Party (CHP) leader Kemal Kilicdaroglu (R) as they meet in Ankara, June 24, 2012. (photo by REUTERS)

    The visit of four parliamentarians of the main opposition Republican People’s Party [CHP] to Damascus on Thursday and their meeting with Syrian President Bashar Assad has once again exposed an important weakness of the ruling Justice and Development Party [AKP] government.

    By: Kadri Gursel for Al-Monitor Turkey Pulse.

    About This Article

    Summary :

    Syrian President Bashar Assad’s meeting in Damascus with members of the opposition Republican People’s Party has exposed the weakness of Turkey’s Syria policy, writes Kadri Gursel.

    Original Title:
    Erdogan Angered by Turkish Opposition Meeting with Assad
    Author: Kadri Gursel
    Translated by: Timur Goksel

    As I wrote previously, the Turkish public doesn’t strongly support Ankara’s goal of toppling Bashar Assad and the Baath regime and replacing them with a new rule dominated by the Muslim Brotherhood. But this capacity gap Ankara is facing in its Syria policy is not confined only to lack of adequate public approval and support. More crucial is the antagonism and polarization caused in segments of the society and national politics by the Syria policy.

    The visit of the CHP delegation to Damascus and their meeting with Assad is an outcome  of this antagonism.

    The AKP rule couldn’t transform its policy for regime change in Syria to a “national cause” by persuading the majority of the public. It simply could not goad the public to get excited by its policy. If they had been successful, the CHP delegation could not have gone to Damascus. They would have been worried about public reaction to such a visit.

    That AKP couldn’t fully convince its own constituency of the legitimacy and validity of its Syria policy is a fact. But roots of the polarization between the main opposition and the ruling party on Syria case go deeper.

    Their antagonism arises from the Alevi-Sunni polarization in Turkey. Although the Alevi minority in Turkey diverges from Arab Alewites in their beliefs and rituals and have indigenous features peculiar to Anatolia, they don’t regard the Syrian regime with sentiments of confrontation and hostility as does the Sunni mainstream Islamic current that prevails in Turkey.

    Turkish Alevis are majority secularists. When you add their fears of Sunni Islamism, it is inevitable that they feel an affinity to the secularist regime in Syria.

    And, also to be noted is that the Turkish Alevis heavily vote for the secularist CHP.

    The same goes for Arab Alewites of Hatay and Mersin regions who had elected three of the parliamentarians that were in the delegation that visited Assad. The sympathy for the Assad regime openly voiced in these two provinces is a cause of distress for the ruling party circles.

    You have to look at the photos printed in Friday’s Turkish papers showing Safak Pavey, the deputy chairman of the CHP and member of Parliament from Istanbul, and the three other parliamentarians, Aytug Akici [Mersin], Hasan Akgol [Hatay] and Mevlut Dudu [Hatay], in the light of these facts.

    According to reports in the Turkish press, the CHP delegation asked Assad for the release of journalists — American Austin Tice and Palestinian Bashar Khaddumi —known to be detained by the regime. Four months ago, a CHP delegation that also included Mevlut Dudu and Hasan Akgol went to Syria and took delivery of Turkish cameraman Cuneyt Unal who had been in a regime prison for more than three months.

    The ‘’humanitarian mission’’ label affixed to this meeting must not have convinced Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan. His harsh reaction was headlined by mainstream daily Haberturk: “Why Did You Send Them to That Brute?”

    The “brute” that the prime minister was referring to is Syrian President Bashar Assad.

    It was the CHP chairman, Kemal Kilicdaroglu, that Erdogan was taking to task with the question that he asked at an Ankara press conference: “Why did the main opposition of this country send its parliamentarian to that brute? What did they achieve there?”

    It is possible to understand the anger of the prime minister. At issue is the political support by Turkey’s main opposition party to a regime and its leader that has been demonized by the prime minister of Turkey and his government. “Humanitarian mission” pretext is not convincing to the government.

    It was hardly surprising that Bashar Assad in a statement issued in Damascus saluted the CHP delegation and the Turkish opposition. The statement said Assad told the CHP delegation: “Syria has to distinguish between the attitudes of the Turkish people, who support stability in Syria, and the Erdogan government that supports terrorism, extremism and destabilization in the region.”

    The statement also said that the delegation led by parliamentarian Hassan Akgul conveyed the “Turkish people’s rejection of interference in internal affairs of Syria and their wish for good relations with their southern neighbor.” The Damascus meeting thus provided a vehicle to transmit Assad’s views explained to the CHP delegation to the Turkish public as well.

    According to a news report by Utku Cakirozer, the Ankara representative of daily Cumhuriyet, when asked in the meeting, “Is a regime without Assad feasible?,” Assad replied:

    ‘”I can’t leave even if I wanted to. I will not abandon ship until we get to a calm port in this storm. My people are behind me. If the storm ends one day, if there are elections, democracy comes and people tell to me leave, then I will. I mean I will go if I have to, but my people have to tell me that.’’

    It was possible to understand from these words that Assad has no intention of leaving Damascus until the 2014 elections. Assad’s remarks about Erdogan constituted a challenge:

    ‘’The Syrian crisis has become an existential struggle for Erdogan and Emir of Qatar. If Syria wins, they will lose in their country. There is also an ideological dimension of this affair. They want to see political Islam dominate Syria. We want t preserve secularism.’’

    Assad reportedly said, “Turkey has the most influence on the situation in my country. Most weapons and terrorists come via Turkey. Twenty-five percent of our land border with Turkey is under the control of the PKK, and 75 % of it is under Al Qaeda.”

    Assad also appealed to the Turkish nationalist public by saying: “There is an increased opportunity for the Kurds to set up a state in the region. Kurds in Northern Syria have linked with Iraqi Kurds. It is a matter of time for a Kurdish state.”

    It appears that the visit of the CHP delegation to Damascus has become a serious headache for AKP’s Syria policy.

    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 was also a correspondent for Agence France-Presse between 1993 and 1997, and in 1995 was kidnapped by the PKK, an experience recounted in his book Dağdakiler(Those of the Mountains), published in 1996.

    Read more: http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2013/03/turkey-opposition-damascus-visit-against-ankara-syria-policy.html#ixzz2N2Clpsay

  • Has Turkey reached a dead-end in Syria?

    Has Turkey reached a dead-end in Syria?

    Has Turkey reached a dead-end in Syria?

    FIRDEVS ROBINSON

    A bomb blast in Cilvegozu confirmed that free passage for arms and fighters across the Syrian border is creating complex spillovers in Turkey. The administration’s humanitarian stance has been uncontroversial, but reports that Turkey has encouraged targeted violence in northern Syria illustrate the interests at play.

    On February the 11th  2013,  the 700th day of the Syrian uprising,  the Cilvegozu crossing near the Turkish town of Reyhanli was rocked with a deadly blast.  A parked minibus with Syrian number plates exploded at the busiest border gate between Turkey and Syria, killing 14 people and injuring many others. Turkey’s Interior Minister Muammer Guler said it came from Syria. “The terrorist act  was probably carried out by a Syrian but it was too early to apportion blame”.

    Turkish media didn’t hesitate to speculate. Most assumed it was the work of the Syrian regime; others suspected the jihadi groups and a few wondered if it could have been an accident involving fighters on their way to Syria. A Syrian National Council opposition delegation due in the area at the time claimed they were the real target. Turkish authorities and the military put out conflicting accounts of the situation.

    Whoever was behind it, the attack has raised serious questions about security.

    The site of the explosion lies opposite the Syrian border post of Bab al-Hawa. It was captured by the rebels last July. Since then, it has been the main crossing for people and vehicles, controlled by the opposition forces on the Syrian side.

    This was not the first time the Syrian conflict cost lives in Turkey. On 22 June 2012, Syria shot down a Turkish jet near the Turkish-Syrian border, killing two pilots. In October 2012, Syrian mortar shells landed inside Turkey.  Five people died.

    If anyone still doubted the extent of the spillover of the Syrian crisis into Turkey, the Cilvegozu attack should have made it clear.

    Yet, Ahmet Davutoglu, the architect of Turkey’s foreign policy, told the national daily Milliyet  that the recent attack might have been executed by those wanting to drag Turkey into the Syrian conflict.

    The leader of the main opposition Republican People’s Party (CHP), Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu, called on the government to make a “satisfactory” explanation for the bomb attack and asked why their local CHP deputy was not allowed to see the video footage of the bombing. “With your Syria policy, you dragged Turkey  into a swamp” he said, adding “If you meddle in another country’s internal affairs, they will come and meddle in yours, too”.

    Mr Davutoglu responded angrily. “As if the real culprit is not Assad or the terrorists; they blame the government for opening the borders to refugees. What kind of opposition is this?” he asked.

    It is not only the main opposition that has been critical of Turkey allowing free passage and flow of weapons to Syrian opposition. Local people living close to the border have long been complaining about the presence of Syrian and other foreign militants, freely moving in and out of the area.

    Turkey denies it has been supplying arms to the Syrian opposition.

    Feed with one hand, arm with the other

    There are more than 200 thousand Syrian refugees inside Turkey. Authorities do not allow the UNCHR or other international organisations to control these. Syrian civilians fleeing their government’s brutal attacks are well-looked after in Turkish camps. Shelter and support provided to the refugees by the government have not been controversial.  Even though the opinion polls indicate that there isn’t any desire for a military confrontation with the Syrian regime, the Turkish public is welcoming and generous towards the Syrian refugees.

    According to the Finance Minister Mehmet Simsek, Turkey has already spent more than 600 million dollars. 344 million dollars of that came from the state budget, and the rest from the local authorities. During my recent visit to western Turkey, I came across Syrian families settled in towns far away from the border regions and looked after by local administrations.

    So, it is not the humanitarian effort that is attracting criticism. It is the “act now, think later” approach of the government that is causing concern.

    Turkey’s foreign policy in recent years has been characterised with a series of miscalculations. Failure to fully assess the possible consequences of its active anti-Assad policy meant that Turkey has been dragged into the conflict in a way that it did not expect.

    Syria has proved to be a tough test for the institutional capacity of Turkish bureaucracy. The quality of Turkey’s intelligence and the efficiency of the various agencies sharing and analyzing available information have also come under scrutiny.

    The deepening crisis in Syria has exposed the lack of checks and balances in Turkey.

    The apparent lack of consultation between the decision makers and the experienced diplomats was one factor for this lack of foresight. Heavily self-censoring media and its failure to lead a healthy public debate on crucial national interest and security issues were the others.

    It has not been possible to challenge the Prime Minister Erdogan’s leadership style on foreign policy decision-making.  No serious questions were asked when Mr Erdogan promised to go to Damascus in the shortest possible time, if Allah wills to embrace their brothers. “That day is close. We will pray near the grave of Salahaddin Ayyubi and pray in the Umayyad Mosque” Erdogan said in June 2012.

    Eight months on, with no sign of Assad being toppled, criticizing the government’s policy is an even more hazardous activity. As for questioning the Syria policy, along with the usual minefields of the Kurds and the religious brotherhoods, this can land a Turkish journalist in trouble.

    It is no secret that Syria has become the number one destination for jihadists anywhere in the world and the Turkish public hears this not from its own mass media but from the international broadcasters such as the BBC.

    It was only days before the Cilvegozu attack that the BBC’s James Reynoldsshowed a bombmaking factory inside Turkey, with the explosives taken over the border to be used in Syria against pro-Assad targets.

    Ghaith Abdul-Ahad’s recent report How to Start a Battalion (in Five Easy Lessons) was another eye opener for many about Turkey’s role in Syria.

    Turkey sees the emergence of an autonomous Kurdish region along its Syrian border as the biggest threat to its national security. The civil war in Syria has heightened tensions between Turkey and its ethnic Kurdish population but it also focused the government’s attention on the urgency of a peaceful  solution.

    So, just as the Erdogan government is leading efforts to negotiate a settlement with its own insurgents, the PKK, another questionable tactic emerges.

    There are reliable reports that Turkey has recently been encouraging jihadi fighters to confront the Kurdish militia known as the Kurdish Democratic Union Party, or PYD, in the northern Syrian town of Ras al-Ayn.  Ras al-Ayn is just across the border from the Turkish town of Ceylanpinar and the Turkish sources also confirm increasing movement of militants at this crossing.

    The escalation of the civil war, the opening of new fronts and turning the already brutal war into an even more savage one will not help anyone.

    Time to think again?

    Turkey has already alienated some of its traditional allies by allowing itself to become a jihadist congregating point. The perception of Turkey as a key power contributing to the radicalising of the conflict in Syria is growing. For a country that has suffered from long years of violence perpetrated by extremists who found shelter in neighbouring countries, Turkey now needs to be very careful not to be seen to be doing the same.

    Turkey has been a significant player in this conflict right from the start. Some of its policies have had long term consequences both for itself and for the region.

    Now is the time for Turkey and other powers engaged in the Syrian conflict to come forward and to assist in undoing the harm that has been caused in part by their national or sectarian interests.

    The priority for everyone concerned about Syria should be to stop the appalling levels of violence and destruction.

    Getting rid of the Assad regime that had embarrassed and ignored Turkey should not be a matter of honour for Ankara.  It is up to the Syrians to do that. There are plenty of opposition activists struggling to create a democratic and independent Syria that will not repeat the mistakes of Iraq and Afghanistan.  Even though they are grateful for the humanitarian support they received from their neighbour, increasingly, they, too, are getting impatient with Turkey for bringing its proxy-war onto their lands.