Tag: Recep Tayyip Erdogan

12th president of Turkey

  • Turkish PM receives award on behalf of Isa-Beg Ishakovic

    Turkish PM receives award on behalf of Isa-Beg Ishakovic

    Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan received an award on behalf of Ottoman statesman Isa-Beg Ishakovic, founder of Bosnian capital Sarajevo in Bosnia-Herzegovina on Saturday, Anadolu Agency reported.

    Erdogan 16092012

    Delivering a speech at the ceremony, Erdogan said that Sarajevo had a different spirit and atmosphere among all cities in the world.

    “Sarajevo is a bit Cairo, a bit Beirut, Damascus and Baghdad. Sarajevo is a bit Paris, London and a bit New York. Sarajevo has a similar spirit and atmosphere with Istanbul, Edirne, Bursa and Konya. It is Sarajevo, a city of Balkans.”

    Sarajevo was one of the most colorful cities in the world, he said. Although the city suffered from great pains in the recent history, it has become a symbol of friendship and peace today, he went on saying.

    Erdogan said that he believed that Bosnia-Herzegovina would join the EU in the shortest time of period, but the country should ensure stability in order to be a member of the EU. Stability was a must to attract international investments, he said.

    Premier Erdogan said that Turkey secured stability, peace and tranquility and its economy tripled in the last decade.

    via Turkish PM receives award on behalf of Isa-Beg Ishakovic – Trend.Az.

  • Letter to The Honorable Abdullah Gül, President of the Republic of Turkey

    Letter to The Honorable Abdullah Gül, President of the Republic of Turkey

    9 September 2012

     

    The Honorable Abdullah Gül

    T.C. Cumhurbaşkan

    06689 Çankaya

    Ankara

     

    Dear Mr. President,

    Would you allow me to show my concern about maintaining your well-deserved prestige and to tell you that your star which, until now, has shone so brightly, risks being dimmed by the most shameful and indelible of stains.

    You have passed healthy and safe from the troubles pertaining to your rise to the presidency. You seem to have won over the hearts of the citizens. But what filth this wretched “Syria Affair” has cast on your name and the name of your country. The government of Turkey, in primary collaboration with the government of the United States of America, has dared to attempt to destroy the duly constituted government of Syria. In that process it has funded, encouraged and armed a motley gang of terrorist killers that include numerous members of Al-Qaeda and other recognized terrorist groups. The Hatay region of Turkey is being used as a staging area for attacks on a neighboring country, a country that until recent months had enjoyed great favor with Turkey. Hatay, perhaps the most enlightened, peaceful region in Turkey, now is under occupation by gangs of terrorist killers. The people are regularly accosted on the streets by these ruffians, and asked if they are Alevites. You will be next, they are told. The shops and restaurants are being ripped off by these foreign mercenaries. Send the bill, to Tayyip, they say, He sent for us. And rather than protect the citizens the police turn a blind eye. What is going on, Mr. President? Who is ruling this country?

    Many innocent Syrian people, including my wife’s uncle in Damascus, have been murdered by this assembled-in-Turkey terrorist machine. Moreover, the good citizens of Hatay are daily threatened by this scum that the government of Turkey has organized, of course with the help of the CIA, proven by history to be experts in unspeakably violent subversions. This lawless behavior, indeed a crime against the Syrian people, and a war crime in terms of the Geneva Conventions, is the supreme insult to all truth, all justice, all morality and all religion. Now Turkey is willingly sullied by this filth. History will record that it was under your presidency that this crime against humanity was committed. Something must be done Mr. President.

    As these government and foreign operatives have dared to drag the reputation of Turkey through the filth of deceit, lies and murder, so shall I dare. Dare to tell the truth, as I swear to tell it, since the normal channels of the media and the Turkish justice system have failed so miserably to do so. My duty as a good citizen is to speak, and not become an accomplice to this murderous travesty of justice. My nights would otherwise be haunted by the spectre of innocent men, women and children, not so far away, suffering the most horrible tortures of war.

    And it is to you Mr. President, that I shall proclaim this truth, with all the revulsion that an honest man can summon. Knowing your integrity, I am sure that you do not know the truth. If you did, you would have long ago taken action against this blatant attack on Turkish sovereignty. The ruling power is complicit in this attack. And the opposition is hopelessly divided and incompetent. So to whom if not you, the first magistrate of this country, shall I reveal the vile baseness of those who are truly guilty, the ones steeped in innocent blood up to their elbows.

    As you know, Mr. President, the problem has always been Turkey. Blessed with abundant natural resources, an edenic environment for agriculture, waters teeming with fish, vast olive groves overlooking the sea, a winning warm water climate, the land nexus between east and west, Turkey has always been a target. And being a target is most uncomfortable and always susceptible to treachery.

    Since the death of the founder of modern Turkey, who tossed the imperialist occupying powers into the sea, Turkey has been in a state of decline, particularly regarding its susceptibility and submission to western interests. First it was Communism! Communism! Communism! And a nervous America needed an Islamic green buffer zone against godless Russia. So Turkey said Yes! Yes! Yes! Please forgive us for not joining all you western imperialists in World War II. Please allow us to become a “green zone.” And  please, please, please take some incredibly fertile land from our agricultural heart in Çukurova, eight kilometers east of Adana. And of course build your airbase, said Turkey, but please like us and respect us. So America built its airbase in the fertile heart of Turkey. And that was the beginning of America’s close relationship—meaning CIA involvement—with Turkey. Vital rural education programs were abandoned lest those evil Communists infiltrate. And in the villages, ignorance remained. And the politicians knew it. And the plunder began. And today, Mr. President, the headquarters for this foul deed being done to Syria, the Syrian people, and the Turkish people is at Incirlik Air Base. What goes around, comes around, Mr. President.

    At the root of it all is one man, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, the head of the AKP ruling party and the prime minister of the Republic of Turkey. A man of bombast, scowls and ill-humor, he seems not to like anyone. It’s the strangest thing, Mr. President, to observe his grin when visiting the White House in Washington DC. And then the pain that comes to his face when he returns to his native land. He came to power in a landslide election in 2002 that was repeated four years later. Could it have something to do with the lack of education in the provinces, Mr. President? Since he came to power he has relentlessly embarked on a policy to divide and weaken the republic. I am sure you have noticed this, Mr. President. Haven’t you?

    Who is this man? Upon what meat doth this our Caesar feed, that he is grown so great?

    I suspect American hamburgers and hotdogs, Mr. President. For he and his ilk are of them. And now, during these days of tragedy, there are no longer any secrets, Mr. President.

    Who is this prime minister who so disparages, dismisses, defames and divides, to wit:

    • What head of government would jail the senior officers and the command and general staff of a nation’s armed forces and within months enter a de facto war against its hitherto peaceful neighbor, Syria?
    • What head of government would actively solicit the entry into its country of known terrorists?
    • What head of government would defy the will of the people as expressed by the existence of a parliament by arming known terrorists at the behest of a foreign power, i.e., the United States of America?
    • What head of government would jail many hundreds of students for protesting their desire for a free education? Some are sentenced to as much as an eight year imprisonment for being members of a “terrorist” organization because they wore traditional poşhu headscarves.
    • Who is this prime minister of a secular, democratic, equal rights espousing country who:
    • In Istanbul 2010 International Women’s Day, opined to a conference of representatives of women’s organizations that women are not equal to men. His wife sat stoically on the dais.
    • On International Women’s Day, 2008 encouraged women to have three and even better, five, children each.
    • On 16 August 2008, called martyred (killed in action) Turkish soldiers “kelle”, a derogatory expression likening them to heads of cattle.
    • In 2011 changed the name of the Ministry for Women and Family to the Ministry of Family and Social Policies thus further effacing and disparaging women.
    • In 2011 on International Women’s Day, he was asked why honor killings had increased 14 fold since 2002 under his regime. In bizarre logic, the prime minister said the enormous increase was because more murders were being reported, thus apparently both praising and loathing improved administrative procedures.
    • After the Turkish Air Force with the help of American “intelligence” from drone observation aircraft bombed and killed 34 innocent Kurdish citizens on 28 December 2011 in Uludere, the prime minister announced his opposition to abortion preposterously likening it to rape. He thus deflected attention from the massive loss of life caused by the Turkish military.  No viable explanation has yet been given.
    • In 2011, in a gross demonstration of his Taliban state of mind, the prime minister ordered the destruction of The Statue of Humanity by the acclaimed sculptor Mehmet Aksoy. The statue stood in Kars on the Armenian border. The prime minister called the statue dedicated to Turkish-Armenian peace, “ucube,” a “freak.”
    • And now, in primary collusion with agents of the United States of America, the prime minister and his oh-so-willing underlings have launched an illegal, unconstitutional aggression against the Syrian Arab Republic, a sovereign nation. Can they have so soon forgotten the international crime and human disaster that such illegal recklessness brought to the innocent Iraqi people? Have they so quickly become emboldened to disregard the will of the Turkish people who so courageously chose not to collaborate with the western rape of Iraq in 2003?
    • And now, in primary collusion with agents of the United States of America, the prime minister and his oh-so-willing underlings have launched an illegal, unconstitutional aggression against the Syrian Arab Republic, a sovereign nation. Can they have so soon forgotten the international crime and human disaster that such illegal recklessness brought to the innocent Iraqi people? Have they so quickly become emboldened to disregard the will of the Turkish people who so courageously chose not to collaborate with the western rape of Iraq in 2003?
    • Has he forgotten the many historical foreign connivances of America? Has he forgotten the murderous campaigns of subversion that featured ruthless CIA involvement? Has he forgotten the American CIA killer-puppet Pinochet? Has he forgotten the destabilizing bombings, the tortures, the disappearances of pregnant women who were executed after giving birth, their children re-engineered for the “new” Argentine society? Has he forgotten the School of the Americas at Ft. Benning, Georgia, a state terrorist training camp? How about the KUBARK program, the CIA how-to-do-it interrogation manual, the book that destroys victims’ minds? Deep, disorienting shocks, day and night jumbled, electroshock, humiliation, silence, noise, sensory deprivation, the slow destruction of brains, has he remembered any of this? And now Turkey has the very same type of organization teaching assassination, sabotage and terror. Mr. President, in times like these we must remember our Nietzsche: “He who fights with monsters should look to it that he himself does not become a monster. And when you gaze long into an abyss the abyss also gazes into you.”
    • Has he forgotten Iran (1953), Guatemala (1954), Cuba (1959-present), Congo (1960), Cambodia (1961-73), Brazil (1965), Argentina (1976), Indonesia (1965), Vietnam (1961-74), Laos (1961-73), Cambodia (1961-73), Greece (1946-81), Chile (1973), Afghanistan (1979-present), El Salvador, Guatemala, and Nicaragua (1980s), Grenada (1983), Turkey (1980-present), Agfhanistan (1979-89) (2001-present) and Iraq (1991-present)? These are all victims of terror American style.
    • Has he forgotten the human wreckage caused by these American assaults? Surely he remembers the horror that America brought to Turkey in 1980, the torture, the mass imprisonment, the executions? Has the prime minister not had his fill of the criminal antics of the USA and its CIA? Most of humanity has, Mr. President? Have you?

    And now Syria, a new horror brought to the Syrian people courtesy of Turkey and America.

    And of course, the not-so-secret planning that turns out to be so terribly fatal. Earlier this year, General Dempsey, David Petraeus, now the CIA capo, and Hillary Clinton came to town, and came to down, and still come to town. A typical American foreign policy team, one civilian and two generals. In case you haven’t been paying attention, Mr. President, American foreign policy has shrunken to its bare essentials: military muscle-flexing and threats. Culturally insensitive and hopelessly hypocritical, it relies on force alone. In between these American visits the Turkish foreign minister feverishly visited Washington. Their cartoonish visits are insulting to Turkey. Meanwhile, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, the Mu’ammar al-Khaddafi Human Rights Award winner for 2010, soon after the award ceremony ended commenced raining bombs on al-Khaddafi’s head. He then proceeded (like Hillary Clinton) to celebrate his former host’s murder by evisceration via sodomy with various sharp instruments. Then he turned his invective on his former Syrian friend, Bashar al-Assad. How seductive must be the eye-popping smiles of that most incompetent, amoral American secretary of state.

    The deep and treacherous pockets of Saudi Arabia and America’s other military stooge, Qatar, would provide the financing of their fellow Arab neighbor’s demise. In violation of its constitution Turkey now provides a safe haven for the so-called Free Syrian Army, a collection of mercenaries and terrorists dredged up by the collective intelligence services of Turkey, the USA, Israel, and any other western jackals that want some of the action. How does such a safe haven in Hatay differ from the safe haven provided to the PKK in Iraq? Make no mistake, Mr. President, the Free Syrian Army is the equivalent in every way of the America-financed mujadhideen, the “freedom fighters” of the 1980s war in Afghanistan. And venal Turkish businessmen, having been denied projects in Iraq due to governmental blundering, rub their hands together anticipating post-war reconstruction contracts in Syria.

    And lately, again the CIA visited Turkey in the form of its boss, the military man, the general, David Petraeus, a man who as an honorable West Point cadet swore to not lie, cheat or steal, all of which he now does with wanton abandon for his country. Who would not say that this man has not become a monster? And the day after Petraeus left, the prime minister suddenly became a latter-day Mehmet the Conqueror shouting that “In a short time we will go to Damascus and God willing pray in the Emevi mosque.” And a day later 25 soldiers were exploded into very small pieces carrying ammunition in an armory in the middle of the night in Afyonkarahisar. A minister blamed God. The commanding general blamed the media. As usual, all explanations were garbled. As usual, the circumstances are highly suspicious. As usual, an investigation is pending. Chaos, chaos, always the chaos.

    Isn’t this all this a disgusting business, Mr. President?

    Of course, Mr. President, all the posturing about meetings and speeches are hoaxes. This rape of Syria was cooked long ago in Washington. How so? On 20 August 2012 a car bomb exploded in downtown Gaziantep. Warnings had been issued weeks ago that this would. But despite this “intelligence,” the car bomb was carried by a flat-bed truck and offloaded in front of the police station. So much for being alert. Nine people were killed, scores injured. But suddenly something spilled out of a blacker-than-black bag. It seems that three American neo-con think tanks (the Brookings Institute, the America Enterprise Institute and the War Studies Institute) had figured it out in advance months ago at a Washington DC conference. It was attended by representatives from Turkey and Saudi Arabia. First it was called a “scenario,” later a “plan,” then, amazingly, it wasn’t called anything. It just disappeared, never to be mentioned again.

    What’s the difference? Well, hundreds of generals and other senior staff officers remain jailed because of a laughable military coup “scenario” called “Sledgehammer” (Balyoz). This cartoon involved bombing mosques and shooting down Turkish planes. The so-called evidence was slathered across on the front page of so-called newspapers like Taraf, Mr. President. Hundreds of senior officers were arrested, Mr. President! A mammoth investigation and round-up ensued. The army’s command and general staff was purged. But about the American bomb “scenario?” Nothing! The story ran in the press for one day. After that a great silence has prevailed. Why, Mr. President? No arrests. No investigation. No questions. And soon thereafter the CIA’s David Petraeus came to town again, this time peddling another deceitful scheme. How disgusting, Mr. President.

    And guess what familiar names surround the think-tank bomb fiasco? Richard Perle of the 1980 Turkish military coup infamy, Eric Edelman and Douglas Feith, neo-con diplomatic thugs from the recent Bush regime. It all smells to the highest of heavens, Mr. President.

    This is the plain truth, Mr. President, and it is terrifying. It will leave an indelible stain on your presidency. I realize that you may have no direct power over this issue, that you may be limited by the Constitution and your entourage. You have, nonetheless, your duty as a man, which you will recognize and fulfill. As for myself, I have not despaired in the least of the triumph of the right and justice. I say with the most vehement of conviction: truth is on the march, and nothing will stop it. Today is only the beginning, for it is only today that the positions have become clear: on one side, those who are guilty, who do not want the light to shine forth, who crave war and power, on the other hand, those who seek justice and peace and eschew the disgusting laws of the jungle.

    Yes, Mr. President, truth is on the march. The full deception is apparent. And now the Turkish government stands alone in the eyes of the world as a deceiver par excellence. A conniver for the base interests of its American boss. A subversive conspirer who illegally arms, quarters and trains secret terror forces, and by doing so subverts its own constitution. How can this not be treason, Mr. President?

    Mr. President, when the truth is buried underground by lies and deceptions and subterfuges, it grows and builds up so much force that the day it explodes it blasts everything with it. We shall see whether we have been setting ourselves up for the most resounding of disasters. Sadly, it seems clear that Turkey is well along its own road to perdition.

    Today, the endgame now rages inside and outside Turkey. The dangers to the nation and its citizens are clear and present and deadly. And all these dangers lay bare the full deceit of the plan. All is now in plain sight, particularly the vastness of the crimes.

    Herein follows some of the international laws and agreements possibly broken by this violent, criminal cabal organized and directed by the United States of America and the Republic of Turkey, The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and The State of Qatar, among others. These are the laws and statutes possibly breached by this vile bunch, headquartered in Istanbul and Incirlik Air Base in Adana. And whose international terrorist militants who are trained and staged in the Hatay region in southeastern Turkey. Of course, there are other higher level operators far distant from Turkey that can easily be traced through the nefarious deeds of their hired henchmen. We know who they are, and where they are, Mr. President. Their list of offenses is long and grievous, Mr. President, particularly for a nation whose government takes great pride in its religious piety.

    I accuse this monstrous cabal of possible crimes against the following standards of civilized behavior.

     

    CRIMES AGAINST MANKIND

    Realizing that the Republic of Turkey is the sole operator within your jurisdiction, I nevertheless accuse all the above mentioned parties and their agents of committing the crime of naked, treacherous aggression, of committing crimes against peace, of committing crimes against humanity, and of committing war crimes against the Syrian people of catastrophic proportions. These grave offenses are described in greater particularity as follows:

    The Constitution of the Republic of Turkey

    Declaration of State of War and Authorization to Deploy the Armed Forces

    Article 92.

    1. The power to authorize the declaration of a state of war in cases deemed legitimate by international law and except where required by international treaties to which Turkey is a party or by the rules of international courtesy to send Turkish Armed Forces to foreign countries and to allow foreign armed forces to be stationed in Turkey, is vested in the Turkish Grand National Assembly.
    2. If the country is subjected, while the Turkish Grand National Assembly is adjourned or in recess, to sudden armed aggression and it thus becomes imperative to decide immediately on the deployment of the armed forces, the President of the Republic can decide on the mobilization of the Turkish Armed Forces.

     

    United Nations General Assembly Resolution 3314: Definition of Aggression

    Aggression is the use of armed force by a State against the sovereignty, territorial integrity or political independence of another State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Charter of the United Nations.

     

    Charter of the United Nations

    Chapter VII: Action with respect to threats to peace, breaches of the peace, and acts of aggression

    Article 40.

    In order to prevent an aggravation of the situation, the Security Council may, before making the recommendations or deciding upon the measures provided for in Article 39, call upon the parties concerned to comply with such provisional measures as it deems necessary or desirable. Such provisional measures shall be without prejudice to the rights, claims, or position of the parties concerned. The Security Council shall duly take account of failure to comply with such provisional measures.

     

    International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights

    Article 20.

    1. Any propaganda for war shall be prohibited by law.
    2. Any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence shall be prohibited by law.

     

    Nuremberg Tribunal Charter
    The Tribunal established by the Agreement referred to Article 1 hereof for the trial and punishment of the major war criminals of the European Axis countries shall have the power to try and punish persons who, acting in the interests of the European Axis countries, whether as individuals or as members of organizations, committed any of the following crimes.

    The following acts, or any of them, are crimes coming within the jurisdiction of the Tribunal for which there shall be individual responsibility:

    (a) Crimes Against Peace: namely, planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression, or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances, or participation in a common plan or conspiracy for the accomplishment of any of the foregoing;

    (b) War Crimes: namely, violations of the laws or customs of war. Such violations shall include, but not be limited to, murder, ill-treatment or deportation to slave labor or for any other purpose of civilian population of or in occupied territory, murder or ill-treatment of prisoners of war or persons on the seas, killing of hostages, plunder of public or private property, wanton destruction of cities, towns or villages, or devastation not justified by military necessity;

    (c)Crimes Against Humanity: namely, murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation, and other inhumane acts committed against any civilian population, before or during the war; or persecutions on political, racial or religious grounds in execution of or in connection with any crime within the jurisdiction of the Tribunal, whether or not in violation of the domestic law of the country where perpetrated.

    Leaders, organizers, instigators and accomplices participating in the formulation or execution of a common plan or conspiracy to commit any of the foregoing crimes are responsible for all acts performed by any persons in execution of such plan.

    Note: the above provisions were codified as legal principles by the International Law Commission of the United Nations.

     

    Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts (Protocol 1) (2nd part)

    Article 50. Definition of civilians and civilian population

    1. A civilian is any person who does not belong to one of the categories of persons referred to in Article 4 A (1), (2), (3) and (6) of the Third Convention and in Article 43 of this Protocol. In case of doubt whether a person is a civilian, that person shall be considered to be a civilian.

    2. The civilian population comprises all persons who are civilians.

    3. The presence within the civilian population of individuals who do not come within the definition of civilians does not deprive the population of its civilian character.

     

    Article 51. Protection of the civilian population

    1. The civilian population and individual civilians shall enjoy general protection against dangers arising from military operations. To give effect to this protection, the following rules, which are additional to other applicable rules of international law, shall be observed in all circumstances.

    2. The civilian population as such, as well as individual civilians, shall not be the object of attack. Acts or threats of violence the primary purpose of which is to spread terror among the civilian population are prohibited.

    3. Civilians shall enjoy the protection afforded by this Section, unless and for such time as they take a direct part in hostilities.

    4. Indiscriminate attacks are prohibited. Indiscriminate attacks are:

       (a) Those which are not directed at a specific military objective;

       (b) Those which employ a method or means of combat which cannot be directed at a specific military objective;

       (c)  Those which employ a method or means of combat the effects of which cannot be limited as required by this Protocol; and consequently, in each such case, are of a nature to strike military objectives and civilians or civilian objects without distinction.

    5. Among others, the following types of attacks are to be considered as indiscriminate:

    (a) An attack by bombardment by any methods or means which treats as a single military objective a number of clearly separated and distinct military objectives located in a city, town, village or other area containing a similar concentration of civilians or civilian objects; and

       (b) An attack which may be expected to cause incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians, damage to civilian objects, or a combination thereof, which would be excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated.

    6. Attacks against the civilian population or civilians by way of reprisals are prohibited.

    7. The presence or movements of the civilian population or individual civilians shall not be used to render certain points or areas immune from military operations, in particular in attempts to shield military objectives from attacks or to shield, favour or impede military operations. The Parties to the conflict shall not direct the movement of the civilian population or individual civilians in order to attempt to shield military objectives from attacks or to shield military operations.

    8. Any violation of these prohibitions shall not release the Parties to the conflict from their legal obligations with respect to the civilian population and civilians, including the obligation to take the precautionary measures provided for in Article 57.

     

    Article 52. General protection of civilian objects

    1. Civilian objects shall not be the object of attack or of reprisals. Civilian objects are all objects which are not military objectives as defined in paragraph 2.

    2. Attacks shall be limited strictly to military objectives. In so far as objects are concerned, military objectives are limited to those objects which by their nature, location, purpose or use make an effective contribution to military action and whose total or partial destruction, capture or neutralization, in the circumstances ruling at the time, offers a definite military of advantage.

    3. In case of doubt whether an object which is normally dedicated to civilian purposes, such as a place of worship, a house or other dwelling or a school, is being used to make an effective contribution to military action, it shall be presumed not to be so used.

     

    Article 57. Precautions in attack

    1. In the conduct of military operations, constant care shall be taken to spare the civilian population, civilians and civilian objects.

    2. With respect to attacks, the following precautions shall be taken:

    (a) Those who plan or decide upon an attack shall:

    (i) Do everything feasible to verify that the objectives to be attacked are neither civilians nor civilian objects and are not subject to special protection but are military objectives within the meaning of paragraph 2 of Article 52 and that it is not prohibited by the provisions of this Protocol to attack them;

         (ii) Take all feasible precautions in the choice of means and methods of attack with a view to avoiding, and in any event to minimizing, incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians and damage to civilian objects;

     

    The Nuremberg Principles

    These principles define a crime against peace as the “planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression, or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements, or assurances, or participation in a common plan or conspiracy for accomplishment of any of the forgoing.”

    Mr. President, these are grievous, heavy offenses. I well realize that some, in particular the government of the United States, may consider them to have become “quaintly” obsolete. But that is not the opinion of the overwhelming majority of mankind and its nations. I have hitherto considered the Republic of Turkey to be among those nations advocating the primacy of the rule of law. Unfortunately, given the current situation, I am no longer so sure.

    Finally, I must turn to another aspect of morality, the concept of divine justice. Because of the outrageous hypocrisy of the accused parties these are the most disgusting and egregious of charges, Mr. President.

     

    CRIMES AGAINST GOD

    I accuse these Turkish ringleaders and their murderous operators, these so-called Muslims who take such great public pride in proclaiming their faith while reviling the faith of others, in particular, the Alevites, I accuse these blatant hypocrites of sinning against the word of God as revealed by his esteemed prophet, Muhammad, as proscribed by the following verses of the Holy Koran:

    Sura 4:92 that says “It is unlawful for a believer to kill another believer.”

    Sura 4:93 that says “He that kills a believer by design shall burn in Hell forever. He shall incur the wrath of God, who will lay his curse upon him and prepare for him a mighty scourge.”

    Sura 5:60 that says “Shall I tell you who will receive a worse reward from God? Those whom God has cursed and with whom He has been angry, transforming them into apes and swine, and those who serve the devil. Worse is the plight of these, and they have strayed farther from the right path.”

    Sura 49:11 that says “Do not defame one another…”

    Only God can judge them. And God will do it in God’s good time. But in the meantime, while these so-called Muslims and their non-Muslim supporters, advisors, financers and protectors still live in this world so should they be compelled to adhere to the laws of this world else we all become like them, demons and monsters.

    I realize that this letter is long. But so is the list of transgressions against humanity by the current Turkish government and its enablers. I have but one passion, Mr. President, the search for light, in the name of humanity which has suffered so much and is entitled to happiness. My protest is simply the cry of my very soul.

    With my deepest respect, Mr. President,

     

    James (Cem) Ryan, Ph.D.

    Founder, West Point Graduates Against the War

     

     

     

    PS. With apologies and thanks to Emile Zola who would surely understand.

     

    Cc.  International Criminal Court, Office of the Prosecutor, The Hague, The Netherlands

     

  • The Lonely Man of the Middle East

    The Lonely Man of the Middle East

    erdogankay5

    (By Stanley Weiss : Huffington Post. 02 Sep.2012

    GSTAAD — When Turkish Prime Minister Tayyip Recep Erdogan met last month with Russian strongman Vladimir Putin about the civil war in Syria, political biographers had a right to be confused. After all, one is the leader of a government that has imprisoned more journalists than China and Iran combined; empowered special courts to arrest citizens on suspicion of terrorism without evidence or the right to a hearing; sentenced two students to eight years in prison for holding a sign at a rally demanding “free education;’ and has seen more than 20,000 complaints filed against it in the European Court of Human Rights since 2008. The other is president of Russia.

    That the leader of secular, democratic Turkey — a long-time U.S. ally and member of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization — has managed to out-Putin Putin when it comes to steamrolling civil liberties the past ten years is just the beginning of the way politics is changing on the Black Sea. Even while Putin receives a fresh round of global scorn for the two-year prison sentence metered out to three young women of the Pussy Riot punk band, Erdogan has successfully executed every trick in the Putin playbook, except one. But it is that one failure that may have the most dramatic effect on the future of Turkey and the direction of U.S. foreign policy.

    For two neighbors that fought eight wars between them from the eighteenth through the early twentieth century, Russia and Turkey have a lot in common. Both bridge Asia and

    Europe. Both enjoyed historic runs as world powers. Both have declared their intention to join Europe. And under Putin and Erdogan, both have taken historic steps away from democracy in an attempt to recapture past glory. Call it the four steps toward autocracy in a global age.

    Step one: Use the judicial system to crush your enemies.

    Like Putin — who The Economist recently argued is “building the legal framework for authoritarian rule” — Erdogan has used the courts to create what has been called “a new climate of fear in Istanbul.” While arresting students, journalists and activists in record numbers, he has trained his greatest guns on the military — which has defended Turkey’s secularism since 1921, when Mustafa Kemal Ataturk created modern Turkey out of the ashes of the Ottoman Empire. As one Turk recently observed, reflecting on the bloodthirsty dictator of Syria, the military is “the reason Turkey never had an Assad.” With hundreds of officers now behind bars on trumped-up charges that they planned a coup, this month, Erdogan forcibly retired 40 top admirals and generals currently on trial before their guilt or innocence could be established. But like Putin, Erdogan is granted a lot of slack by his own citizens — he took a moribund economy in 2003 and turned it into one of the strongest in Europe. Culturally, cities like Istanbul are thriving. Many Turks believe life is better under Erdogan, and don’t look fondly on the three coups the military staged since 1960 or the government it forced to quit in 1997.

    Step two: Mask your true ideology under the guise of democracy.

    Just as Putin speaks of democracy in Russia while making no attempt to hide his affection for the centrally-planned, KGB-dominated days of the Soviet Union, Erdogan has praised democracy while expressing disgust at Turkey’s separation of mosque and state, calling himself both “the imam of Istanbul” and “a servant of Shari’a.” Since taking power in 2003, Erdogan’s Islamist Justice and Development Party has tripled the number of students attending Islamist high schools; passed a new law requiring that every public facility in the country have a Muslim prayer room; taken control of the historically secular Turkish Academy of Sciences; and built more mosques than any previous government while announcing plans to create a super-mosque in Istanbul with the “highest minarets in the world.” Little wonder that in 2010, Saudi King Abdullah presented Erdogan with Saudi Arabia’s most prestigious prize for his “services to Islam.”

    Step three: Make friends with old adversaries at the expense of old allies.

    Just as Putin actively built friendships with old foes Germany, Italy and France during his first term, Erdogan took office announcing a strategic realignment of Turkish policy centered on “‘zero problems’ with the neighbors..” He sought out new partnerships with Iran, Syria, Libya, Pakistan and Hamas — and did so at the expense of the U.S. and Israel. In 2003, he won Arab plaudits for rejecting American requests to use Turkish territory to transport troops to Iraq. In 2009, he was hailed as a Muslim hero for picking a fight with Israeli President Shimon Peres at the World Economic Forum in Davos. Further raising Western eyebrows, he sided with Iran against the U.S. over Tehran sanctions; championed Palestinian statehood at the United Nations; lauded Pakistani soldiers accidentally killed by U.S. drones as “our martrys;” and even accepted a human rights award from former Libyan despot Muammar Gaddafi.

    Step four: Assert strength by walking softly and carrying a big stick.

    If there is one lesson of Putin’s that Erdogan hasn’t learned, it is that tough talk needs to be followed up by decisive action. The only battles Erdogan seems capable of fighting thus far are wars of words — making him look, as journalist Gideon Rachman puts it, “naïve and ineffective.

    He pledged to bring Hamas and Fatah together, and failed. He pledged to keep NATO out of Libya, and failed. He promised to end NATO’s intervention in Libya, and failed. When Israel killed nine pro-Palestinian Turkish activists on an aid ship bound for Gaza in 2010, he threatened to send the Turkish navy to protect future flotillas — then didn’t follow through. When Cyprus began developing oil fields off its coast in 2010, Erdogan threatened to send Turkish warships — then didn’t follow through. When Syria reportedly shot down a Turkish reconnaissance jet this past June, Erdogan promised that Damascus would feel Turkey’s wrath — and then didn’t follow through. It has led some to wonder if Turkey’s bark is worse than its bite.

    Syria may prove to be Erdogan’s undoing. Turkey first supported Syria, then tried to coax it to change, then criticized it, and then officially allied with the Syrian opposition. It has put Turkey in the uncomfortable position of being the only country that has allowed its soil to become the base of Syrian opposition as well as the sole NATO country trying to convince other NATO members to intervene. Other Muslims are now openly accusing Turkey of being part of a “sabotage axis” against Damascus, aligning with what nations like Iran regard as “the devil’s instrument on earth” — America — to unseat an Islamic regime.

    Far from “zero problems with its neighbors,” Turkey now has problems with all its neighbors, including Russia, Iran, Iraq, Egypt, Israel and Armenia. It has led the Turkish magazine Radikal to observe that Turkey, which was once known as the sick man of Europe, is now becoming “the lonely man of the Middle East.” With no NATO allies coming to the rescue anytime soon, Turkey runs the risk that its own Kurds — which it has been battling for three decades — will ally with Kurds in Syria to destabilize Turkey’s southern border. As the Centre for Research on Globalization puts it, “Should Syria burn, Turkey will ultimately burn too.”

    Once again, Erdogan is turning back to the Putin playbook: term-limited out as prime minister, he is working to rewrite the Constitution to give the president more power: an office he will then run for, Putin-style, in 2014. It was said that Syria is the place where Ataturk, as a young military officer, first proved his greatest strengths. A century later, it is revealing a Turkish prime minister’s greatest weaknesses. Where it will lead — for Turkey, and for America — nobody knows. But we’ll soon find out how much of Putin that Erdogan really has in him.

    Stanley A. Weiss is Founding Chairman of Business Executives for National Security, a nonpartisan organization based in Washington.

     

    Huff Post gözüyle  Melih Aşık Açık Pencere (31 Agustos 2012)
    ABD’nin en çok okunan haber sitesi Huffington Post, Stanley Weiss imzasıyla “Recep Tayyip Erdoğan: Ortadoğu’nun yalnız adamı” başlıklı bir yorum yayımladı…
    Yazıda Erdoğan, Rus lider Putin’le kıyaslanıyor, ortak taktiklerinden ikisi şöyle kaydediliyor:
    – Düşmanlarını yok etmek için yargıyı kullan…
    – Gerçek ideolojini demokrasi maskesi ardına gizle…
    Yazıda Erdoğan’dan “Çin ile İran’ın toplamından daha fazla gazeteciyi hapseden hükümetin lideri” diye söz ediliyor…
    Erdoğan’ın dış politikadaki başarısızlıkları şöyle sıralanıyor:
    Hamas ile El Fetih’i bir araya getirmeye çalıştı, başaramadı. NATO’yu Libya’nın dışında tutmaya çalıştı, başaramadı. İsrail Mavi Marmara’da 9 Türk eylemcisini öldürdüğünde Türk donanmasını diğer insani filoları korumaya yollayacağını söylemişti, sözünde durmadı. Kıbrıs Cumhuriyeti petrol kuyuları açmaya başladığında Türk savaş gemilerini göndereceğini bildirmişti, sözünde durmadı. Haziranda Suriye bir Türk keşif uçağını düşürdüğünde Şam’ın Türkiye’nin gazabını hissedeceğini söylemişti, sözünde durmadı.
    Yazar “Suriye Erdoğan’ın yıkımı olabilir” diyor.
    Altını çizdiğimiz diğer satırlar:
    “Türkiye topraklarında Suriye muhalefetine üs veren tek ülke olduğu gibi öteki NATO ülkelerini savaşa teşvik eden tek NATO ülkesidir aynı zamanda.
    Diğer Müslüman ülkeler şimdi Türkiye’yi Suriye’ye karşı ‘sabotaj ekseni’nin parçası olmakla suçlamaktadır.
    Sıfır problemin çok uzağında kalan Türkiye’nin bugün komşuları; Rusya, İran, Irak, Mısır, İsrail ve Ermenistan ile sorunu vardır. Türkiye bugün kendi Kürtlerinin Suriye Kürtleriyle ittifak kurarak güney sınırlarını dağıtması riskiyle karşı karşıyadır…”

  • Turkish politics: Erdogan’s counterproductive ambition

    Turkish politics: Erdogan’s counterproductive ambition

    Recep Tayyip Erdogan is too focused on becoming Turkey’s next president

    Sep 1st 2012 | ANKARA AND ISTANBUL | from the print edition

    20120901 EUP001 0

    THE Turkish prime minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, has recently been seen sporting a Cossack-style hat like Ataturk’s. Kemalists were horrified. Yet nobody could dispute that Mr Erdogan has been Turkey’s most impressive leader since the great man’s death in 1938. His mildly Islamist Justice and Development (AK) party came to power in 2002 on a wave of popular support and a rejection of decades of inept rule. Mr Erdogan has lifted Turkey out of stagnation and political paralysis and made it an inspiration in its region.

    He has chipped away at the generals’ might, improved the rights of women and Kurds, doubled GDP per head, built modern roads and hospitals and empowered the downtrodden. His reforms prodded the European Union into opening membership talks in 2005. Despite worries about a gaping current-account deficit, the economy has slowed but not crashed, unlike others in the Mediterranean.

    »Erdogan’s counterproductive ambition

    It was no surprise when AK won a third term of single-party rule in June 2011. Yet a year on Mr Erdogan is being tested as never before. Setbacks include an alleged bout with cancer, a row with the powerful Muslim Gulenist group, escalating Kurdish violence and the war in Syria. He has grown increasingly authoritarian, his judgment perhaps clouded by an ambition to be elected president when the term of the incumbent, Abdullah Gul, ends in 2014.

    It is this ambition that critics say is undermining Mr Erdogan’s promises to deliver a new democratic constitution. A parliamentary committee supposed to produce a draft text appears designed to fail. It needs unanimous approval from all its members for every article. “Are the nationalists going to agree to the Kurds’ demands for Kurdish-language education? Of course not,” says Levent Gultekin, a pro-Islamic commentator. Many suspect Mr Erdogan wants the AK party to produce its own blueprint that would boost the powers of the presidency, enabling him to keep running the country after the party’s rules require him to step down as prime minister. Since he does not have a two-thirds majority in parliament, a new constitution would need to be put to a referendum; most polls give AK a big lead.

    Still, he is not taking chances. Over the past year he has been increasingly hawkish over the Kurds, scrapping secret talks with the separatist Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) to end their bloody 28-year insurgency. He has reverted to force and the mass arrests of thousands of Kurdish activists. “The bond between Turks and Kurds is growing weaker by the day,” warns Selahattin Demirtas, leader of the pro-Kurdish Peace and Democracy Party.

    Media bosses fearful of losing government contracts have sacked critical journalists. At least 80 journalists are in jail, many of them Kurds accused of PKK membership. The government’s intolerance extends to students, 2,824 of whom are in prison, almost a quarter of them charged with “membership of a terrorist group” for calling for free education and other “sins”.

    Mr Erdogan’s secular opponents accuse him of reverting to his Islamist roots. Calling for a “more religious youth”, he has proposed to restrict abortions and has reintroduced imam hatip (clerical-training) middle schools. A new curriculum includes optional Koran and Arabic-language classes. Mr Erdogan’s embrace of pious nationalism is calculated to appeal to the far right and to conservative voters. But he may be overplaying his hand. The army’s battle against the PKK has had little effect. Scores of soldiers have been killed this year and the rebels have carried their battle from the mainly Kurdish south-east as far west as Izmir.

    Mr Erdogan has taken to blaming the Syrian president, Bashar Assad, for the renewed violence. Mr Assad has ceded control of Kurdish towns along the border to a Syrian Kurdish group affiliated to the PKK. Yet critics point to Turkey’s overt support for the Syrian rebels, which has antagonised not only Mr Assad but also Iran. With scores of generals jailed on coup-plotting charges the army has been cowed into silence. But even Mr Erdogan’s supporters are questioning his Syrian gamble. His gibes at Turkey’s Alevi minority, which has spiritual bonds with Mr Assad’s Alawite sect, have not helped.

    With America distracted by its presidential election, Europe bogged down in the euro crisis and the EU membership talks stuck, Turkey’s Western friends have little sway. A recent poll suggests that only 17% of Turks now believe they can join the EU. Many fear their country may be sucked into a regional war. Mr Erdogan is a master at scenting the public mood, but his popularity is falling. His priority ought to be putting his house in order, with a constitution that supports all Turkish citizens rather than his presidential aspirations.

    from the print edition | Europe

    via Turkish politics: Erdogan’s counterproductive ambition | The Economist.

  • Erdogan harbors ambitions for Istanbul

    Erdogan harbors ambitions for Istanbul

    By Daniel Dombey, Published: August 31

    ISTANBUL — From the top of Istanbul’s highest hill, amid teahouses and television towers, throngs of local residents look down on the spectacular city they call their own.

    But the view that opens up before them — with the Bosporus Strait shimmering silver and blue as it flows between the Asian and European continents — is set to change, at the initiative of Recep Tayyip Erdogan, Turkey’s commanding prime minister.

    To the north, beyond the two bridges that span the Bosporus, a third is soon to be constructed. Farther into the distance, near the Black Sea, is the site of what will be Istanbul’s third airport, which the prime minister recently announced will handle 100 million passengers a year. Closer by is the city’s heart, Taksim Square, which will be dramatically remodeled.

    And on Camlica itself, the 885-foot-high hill from which the whole panorama can be surveyed, Erdogan intends to build a giant mosque, a 160,000-square-foot building that he says will be “designed to be seen from all parts of Istanbul.”

    The mosque, the bridge and the airport, together with the remodeling of Turkey’s most iconic square, signal the scale of Erdogan’s ambitions for a city that, despite its grandeur, has long suffered from a lack of planning.

    Although Istanbul ceded the position of capital to Ankara with the formation of the Turkish republic in 1923, it is easily Turkey’s biggest city and increasingly the seat of government and diplomatic, as well as commercial, activity.

    But critics accuse the prime minister of building monuments to himself and say they fear his plans are being pushed through with insufficient scrutiny.

    The debate has become more charged as Erdogan positions himself for a run for the country’s hitherto mostly ceremonial presidency and presses for changes to the constitution beforehand to invest the post with executive powers.

    “The theme I see here is the presidential election in 2014 and the prime minister’s efforts to consolidate his power in symbolic ways,” said Soli Ozel, a professor of international relations at Istanbul’s Kadir Has University.

    The prime minister’s ties to Istanbul run deep. A former mayor, he keeps a house just below Camlica hill and spends much of his time in the city, working out of an office in the Dolmabahce Palace, where the Ottoman sultans lived and where Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, the founder of the modern Turkish republic, died.

    His favored projects — particularly the mosque, whose construction he announced in late May — could bind his name to the city’s for generations.

    The hills of the old city of Istanbul are crowned by mosques built by the sultans of the past, and the skyline is dominated by the Suleymaniye, erected by Suleiman the Magnificent, the ruler whose troops reached the gates of Vienna. The mosque that Erdogan plans for the opposite, Asian side of the strait could overshadow them all.

    Many of the government’s initiatives for Istanbul are geared toward alleviating the legendary traffic problems of a city with 3 million privately owned cars.

    Some moves have received widespread praise, such as a new, 13.6-mile-long metro line opened by the prime minister in August.

    Others appear to be on the back burner, notably the prime minister’s self-styled “crazy, ambitious” plan to build a canal to divert oil tankers from the Bosporus, announced during his successful campaign for reelection last year.

    But critics say that overall, too many projects are imposed on the city from Ankara, the capital.

    “The municipality came out with a city plan in 2009, with no third bridge and a new airport in a different place,” said Akif Burak Atlar of Istanbul’s Chamber of Urban Planners. “And then, suddenly, Ankara came up with the third bridge. That is not how planning works.”

    Atlar says the bridge and the airport will infest much of the Belgrade forest to the city’s north with urban sprawl, despite government protestations to the contrary.

    His organization is trying to prevent the mosque from being built on Camlica, a protected area. “Who is it for?” he asks, noting that the hill is sparsely populated and that the city has a profusion of mosques.

    But visitors and residents on the hill were supportive of the project. “As Muslims, we think it would be great to have a big mosque here — it’s like what the Ottomans did,” said Turba, a medical student visiting Camlica.

    Mehmet, a minibus driver, took a pragmatic view. “It will bring in tourists and Arabs,” he said. “And shopping centers.”

    — Financial Times

    via Erdogan harbors ambitions for Istanbul – The Washington Post.

  • Turks to European Union: No, Thanks

    Turks to European Union: No, Thanks

    By Emre Peker

    ISTANBUL — There was a time when joining the European Union was Turkey’s most-prized goal. Now, Turks don’t want to go anywhere near the bloc.

    Support for joining the EU has dropped to a record low of 17% from 34% last year, according to a survey published Tuesday by the Turkish European Foundation for Education and Scientific Studies, or Tavak. What’s more, almost 80% of the 1,110 people polled in eight cities across Turkey in June said they didn’t believe Turkey would join the 27-nation bloc.

    OB UI866 Merkel E 20120829094642

    European Pressphoto Agency

    German Chancellor Angela Merkel and Turkish Premier Recep Tayyip Erdogan on Nov. 2, 2011. Before that meeting, in a newspaper interview Mr. Erdogan accused Germany of blocking Turkey’s entry to the EU.

    At the heart of it is Turkey’s strong economic growth, contrasting with the EU, which has seesawed in and out of recession amid a financial crisis during the past three years, said Faruk Sen, chairman of Tavak. Also fueling sentiment against joining the EU are repeated snubs from EU leaders against Turkish entry to the bloc and a feeling that the union is anti-Islam, he said in an interview on Wednesday.

    “From now on, the EU will have to coddle Turkey, be more hands-on. Turkey is developing alternatives,” Mr. Sen said. “Think of it this way, a man doesn’t think of an alternative to a wife he very much loves, but if the woman withdraws, then the husband looks for alternatives.”

    Analogies of failed marriages aside, Turkey has indeed been deepening trade ties with the Middle East and North Africa in the past five years. While the EU is still Turkey’s biggest export market, its share of the pie is falling fast.

    As Turkey’s sales abroad have been growing at a healthy clip — reaching a record $135 billion in 2011 — the EU’s share shrunk to 46% in 2011 from 56% in 2007, according to the state statistics agency. As of June, Turkish businessmen had cut their sales to the EU to 39% while boosting exports to the Middle East and North Africa to 36%, up from 28% in 2011.

    Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan had made EU membership a priority after his party came to power in 2002 and clinched accession talks with the bloc in 2005. At the time, support for joining the union had peaked at 78%, Tavak’s Mr. Sen said, citing another survey.

    However, the thrust behind membership negotiations cooled as Mr. Erdogan grew more confident on the back of an average annual economic growth rate of 5.5% in the past decade, increased Turkey’s clout in the Middle East after spats with Israel, and used EU reforms to remove the military’s iron grip on politics.

    Indeed, of the 35 chapters that must be negotiated to complete Turkey’s accession only 13 have so far been opened. And, for the past two years, there has been no progress, according to the EU’s enlargement website. Turkey’s EU Affairs Ministry wasn’t immediately available for comment.

    However, despite waning enthusiasm in Turkey to join the EU, lack of progress in negotiations and the bloc’s shrinking importance as an export market, trade and investment ties will remain large, said Robert O’Daly, a senior analyst at the Economist Intelligence Unit in London.

    “Things have definitely changed since the negotiations started. While Turkish support to join the EU is extremely low, it’s not surprising given the problems in Europe and Turkey’s greater self confidence, both economically and politically,” Mr. O’Daly said Wednesday.

    Still, after years of work toward a union, the EU and Turkey are unlikely to pull the plug on the negotiations, regardless of low public support, according to Mr. O’Daly. “I don’t think it is the end of the road … the talks will officially remain in place, and on-and-off there are going to be stronger contacts, but I don’t see any real progress being made.”

    via Turks to European Union: No, Thanks – Emerging Europe Real Time – WSJ.