Turkiye – Informed Comment https://www.juancole.com Thoughts on the Middle East, History and Religion Sat, 14 Dec 2024 22:38:56 +0000 en-US hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=5.8.10 Türkiye reaches 18.7 GW Photovoltaic Capacity, shows how Solar can meet Growing Air Conditioning demand https://www.juancole.com/2024/12/photovoltaic-capacity-conditioning.html Sat, 14 Dec 2024 05:15:53 +0000 https://www.juancole.com/?p=222029 Ann Arbor (Informed Comment) – One of the paradoxes of human-made climate change is that as we heat up the planet by burning gasoline, coal and fossil gas, it makes the summers hotter. These torrid months impel people to run the air conditioner nonstop, which requires burning more coal or fossil gas, which causes it to get hotter. It is a vicious circle.

Türkiye is suffering from increasing summer heat waves, especially in the western part of the country, creating dramatic increases in electricity use from ACs.

But the country has also showed that there is an alternative to this constant ratcheting up of the temperature. According to the energy think tank Ember, 2/3s of the increased demand for electricity, mostly caused by the sweltering temperatures of the summer of 2024, was met by new solar installations. Turkish energy production from solar was up 40% in the first half of 2024, year over year.

By putting in new solar installations, Türkiye in 2024 avoided 16 gigawatts of dirty electricity produced by fossil fuels. All of those fossil fuels would have been imported, since Türkiye is poor in these resources, resulting in a big import bill. That expenditure was also avoided.


“Solar Golden Horne,” Digital, Dream / Dreamland v3 /Clip2Comic, 2024 >

Türkiye reached 16 gigawatts of installed solar capacity this summer, which is 14% of the country’s installed power capacity. It has already risen to 18.7 gigawatts in December. The government wants to increase solar capacity to 22.6 gigawatts in the next twelve months.

A little over half of the country’s electricity is produced by coal-fired and fossil gas-fired plants on a year-round basis, but the government has plans to invest heavily in renewables toward a zero-carbon electric grid over the next little over a decade. It plans 89 gigawatts of new solar and wind capacity by 2035, with plans to invest $108 billion in the transformation.

Greening the Turkish grid is made difficult not only by the extra air conditioning use in increasingly hot summers, but also by the economy’s continued expansion. It is one of the fastest-growing countries in the world economically, which creates vast additional electricity demand.

Türkiye is also going for 14.8 gigawatts of wind generation by the end of next year.

Turkish electric vehicle sales are also surging by 39% this year. The country produces the Togg, for which it is seeking increased Chinese partnerships, and plans to export it to Europe starting next year. The Togg is helping drive EV sales domestically and creating local jobs, showing how green technology can help power clean industrialization.

Türkiye, a member of NATO, is the world’s 17th largest economy, making it a member of the G20, with a projected 2024 nominal GDP of $1.3 trillion. It has a population of 87 million, just a little bit more than that of Germany.

]]>
The Turkish Role in Assad’s Downfall: By supporting the rebels who overthrew the Syrian leader has Ankara bitten off more than it can chew? https://www.juancole.com/2024/12/downfall-supporting-overthrew.html Sat, 14 Dec 2024 05:08:06 +0000 https://www.juancole.com/?p=222023 By |

( Foreign Policy in Focus ) – After tenaciously holding on to power for more than a decade of war, the government of Bashar al-Assad crumbled in two weeks of limited fighting. Overwhelmed by a surprise blitzkrieg assault, the Syrian army seemed to melt away in the face of a surprisingly well-armed and well-organized coalition of disparate “rebel” forces that rapidly conquered Aleppo, Hama, and finally Damascus, sending Assad and his family into exile in Moscow.

Assad’s sudden downfall has drastically shifted the facts on the ground in the Middle East. It has compromised the interests of Russia, Iran, and Hezbollah (Syria’s primary protectors over the past decade), while bolstering the positions of the three states that stand most to gain from Assad’s fall: the United States, Israel, and Turkey, whose leaders were quick to celebrate —and take some credit for—Assad’s fall.

The United States, which has sought regime change in Syria since the first Obama administration (if not far longer), has clear reasons to cheer the removal of an ally of Moscow and Tehran—as does Ukraine, which reportedly provided modest support to anti-Assad forces. Israel, for its part, has long sought the overthrow of Assad, and has been accused of partnering with various opposition forces over the years. Having finally achieved their objective, Israel wasted no time initiating a massive bombing campaign to destroy Syrian army equipment, while grabbing more territory in Syria’s southwestern Golan region, an unprecedented seizure of territory that has been reported as “indefinite.” With Syria having been an important conduit for weapons, cash, and materiel for Hezbollah, Israel has also won a tactical victory against the political party and military force with which it had signed an (almost immediately violated) ceasefire deal just prior to Assad’s overthrow.

Although the interests of the United States and Israel in Assad’s ouster are apparent, the role of Turkey is more complex, and arguably more consequential. All evidence points to Turkey having played an integral role in the operation that overthrew Assad’s government, with the Turks likely providing training and material support to at least two of the main rebel forces: The Syrian National Army (SNA) and Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), a Sunni Islamist group  that had previously been aligned with al-Qaeda. That the assault on Assad’s government began out of Idlib province, which has been under Turkish protection since the start of the Astana Process in 2017, has given further credence to claims of significant Turkish involvement, with accusations proliferating online that many of the rebel forces crossed into Syria from the Turkish border.

In the initial days of the assault, Turkish officials initially denied, and then downplayed, their country’s involvement. Nevertheless, speculation immediately flooded both traditional and social media that this was a Turkish-backed regime change operation—speculation that became difficult to discount after the fall of Aleppo, as Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan publicly called for the rebels to march on to Damascus and topple Assad. Though the full truth of Ankara’s involvement may never be known, the belief that Turkey— with American and Israeli support—was substantially involved appears to be widespread in the Middle East and beyond.

Longstanding Relationship

Under Erdogan, Turkey has had a complicated relationship with Assad’s Syria, training anti-Assad forces early in the civil war and later sending its military into Syria for multiple campaigns against Kurdish, Islamic State, and Syrian government forces. Having repeatedly called for Assad’s ouster in the 2010s, however, Erdogan had recently appeared to take a more conciliatory tone with Damascus, calling for new negotiations with Assad (though these overtures were allegedly rebuffed) and expressing “hope” for improved ties as recently as three weeks ago.

Apart from Erdogan’s public statements, there were other reasons to doubt that Turkey would actively push for regime change in Syria. Among these, a primary factor was the aforementioned Astana Process, which had set up a series of “de-escalation zones” in Syria, each of which would be under the protection of the Process’ three signatories: Iran, Russia, and Turkey. Under the terms of the agreement, there was to be “no military solution to the Syrian conflict” and Syrian sovereignty and territorial integrity were to be respected. Although numerous problems arose after 2017, Russia, Iran, and Turkey had remained committed to the terms of Astana. Indeed, mere weeks before the start of the assault, at a scheduled meeting for Astana Process states in Kazakhstan, Turkey reaffirmed its commitment to Syrian “sovereignty” and “territorial integrity.”

Turkey’s apparent violation of its Astana Process obligations, with no prior warning, has almost certainly enraged both Moscow and Tehran, both of which have spent much of the past decade protecting their interests there and fighting to keep Assad in power. Given both countries’ central role in the BRICS economic union, furthermore, Erdogan’s actions in Syria may have jeopardized Turkey’s bid for BRICS membership.

Perceptions of Turkish involvement may pose serious problems for Erdoğan’s domestic standing, too. Most Turks are deeply opposed to Israel’s actions in Gaza, which many view as a genocide. Should Erdogan be perceived domestically as having aided the aims of Israel and America, the sincerity of his increasingly bellicose rhetoric towards Israel will be further questioned, with many Turks highly critical of Ankara’s reluctance to take more forceful action against Tel Aviv.

Given the risks to his own domestic standing and to Turkey’s historically close relations with Russia in particular, what could have motivated Erdogan to push for regime change in Syria, going against both his own public statements and his government’s official policy?

Explaining Turkish Moves

Turkey hosts more than three million Syrian refugees, which has created significant, and sometimes violent, socioeconomic tensions between refugees and native Turks. With a turbulent and highly inflationary Turkish economy, that is suffering from years of ballooning prices and insufficient government support, these tensions have coalesced into a substantial problem for Erdogan’s government, pushing it to seek ways of repatriating Syrians to their home country. With Assad gone, Erdogan almost certainly hopes to have more control over Syrian affairs, allowing him to send Syrians out of Turkey.

A second likely reason for heightened Turkish involvement in Syria concerns the Kurds. The largest ethnic minority group in Turkey, Kurds have had an infamously difficult relationship with the Turkish state since its founding in 1923. Since then, there has been a sizable minority of Turkish Kurds—most notably the members of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK)—who have sought not only greater rights and recognition but a nation-state of their own. In the eyes of the Turkish state, the U.S.-backed Kurdish forces in Syria, presiding over a large swath of territory along the Turkish border, constitute an existential threat to Turkish sovereignty.

The Kurdish issue is made more salient by the coming inauguration of Donald Trump. Just last week, the president-elect strongly stated that the United States should not get involved in events on the ground in the Syria, giving further credence to past reports that Trump intends to pull U.S. forces out of Syria, which Trump had previously stated were there primarily to extract Syrian oil. Should Trump make good on his promises, it would leave the U.S.-backed Kurdish forces unprotected by the presence of American boots on the ground.

The possibility that Trump will indeed remove U.S. troops may have been pivotal to Ankara’s calculations. Indeed, just a few weeks before the assault on Aleppo, Turkish media reported top officials in Erdogan’s government predicting a Trump-led withdrawal, suggesting that this could open up new opportunities for driving out Kurdish forces near the Turkish-Syrian border. Driving out Kurdish forces poses risks for Turkey’s relations with the United States and the broader West, where Kurdish militias have been positively represented throughout the Syrian war. But Erdogan may be expecting that, under Trump, the United States will not get in his way.

Erdogan may also see an opportunity to expand Turkey’s borders, which many in his base see as having been unfairly drawn after the fall of the Ottoman Empire. Perhaps Ankara will attempt to make its foothold in northern Syria permanent and expand that area by taking over areas currently held by the Kurds. Yet Turkey’s presence in the north, along with its close relations with HTS and SNA, provides Erdogan with leverage in future negotiations with various regional players—including Russia, which is surely scrambling to negotiate the future of its military bases in Syria.

Whatever the motivations, Turkey will now be expected to take a central role in whatever government emerges out of the current chaos. Success in repatriating Syrians from Turkey back to Syria will be a critical test for Erdogan’s approval at home, as will be how he navigates the expanded Israeli occupation of Syrian territory. Abroad, Erdogan’s ability to maintain relations with Moscow and Iran will likewise be critical for the future of Turkey’s application to both BRICS and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization. Yet with a frustrated population at home, a multitude of nation states and non-state actors jostling for power in and around Syria, and a potentially difficult-to-control political force in charge of Syria, Erdogan may have this time bitten off more than he can chew.

 

Philip Balboni is an anthropologist of global politics and economy. He holds a PhD in Cultural Anthropology from the University of California, Berkeley, and teaches at Northeastern University. His writing can be found at philipbalboni.substack.com.

Foreign Policy in Focus

———–

Bonus Video added by Informed Comment:

“US and Turkish-backed forces clash in northern Syria” | DW News

]]>
Iranian Leader Blames Assad’s Downfall On U.S., Israel, And Turkey https://www.juancole.com/2024/12/iranian-leader-downfall.html Thu, 12 Dec 2024 05:06:33 +0000 https://www.juancole.com/?p=221990 ( RFE/ RL ) – Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, in his first public comments since Syrian President Bashar al-Assad was ousted, accused the United States and Israel of orchestrating the rebel uprising that toppled the regime over the weekend.

Khamenei on December 11 also implicitly blamed Turkey for the lightning push of Syrian rebels who reached Damascus from their strongholds in the northwest with little resistance.

“It should not be doubted that what happened in Syria was the product of a joint American and Zionist plot,” he said.

“Yes, a neighboring government of Syria plays, played, and is playing a clear role…but the main conspirator, mastermind, and command center are in America and the Zionist regime,” Khamenei added.

The U.S.-designated terrorist organization Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) and its allies — some of whom are linked with Turkey — ousted Assad on December 8, less than two weeks after launching their offensive.

Syria under Assad served as a crucial part of a land corridor connecting Iran to the Levant, which was considered the logistical backbone of the so-called axis of resistance — Iran’s loose network of regional proxies and allies.

Iran spent billions of dollars and sent military advisers to Syria to ensure Assad remained in power when civil war broke out in 2011.

Russia — where the ousted Syrian leader has been granted political asylum — also backed Assad, while Turkey has supported rebel groups who aimed to topple the regime.

A Khamenei adviser once described Syria as the “golden ring” in the chain connecting Iran to its Lebanese partner, Hezbollah. With the ring broken and Hezbollah’s capabilities degraded after a devastating war with Israel, experts say the axis has become severely weak.


“Foiled,” Digital, Dream / Dreamland v3 / Clip2Comic, 2024

Khamenei said only “ignorant and uninformed analysts” would assess that the axis has become weak and vowed that its reach “will expand across the region more than before.”

Reza Alijani, an Iranian political analyst based in France, told RFE/RL’s Radio Farda that Khamenei’s comments were more “trash talk” than anything else.

“The axis may not have been defeated, but it has suffered a serious blow and the Islamic republics arms in the region have been deal major hits,” he said.

Alijani argued that factions within the Islamic republic’s core support base may be starting to question Khamenei’s policies and vision after the recent setbacks, which he said is a cause for concern among the clerical establishment’s top brass.

With reporting by Hooman Askary of RFE/RL’s Radio Farda

Via RFE/ RL

Copyright (c)2024 RFE/RL, Inc. Used with the permission of Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty

]]>
The sectarian Risk: Turkiye’s Syrian Mission https://www.juancole.com/2024/12/sectarian-turkiyes-mission.html Mon, 09 Dec 2024 05:06:02 +0000 https://www.juancole.com/?p=221951 by Dr Binoy Kampmark

( Middle East Monitor ) – Turkiye’s Recep Tayyip Erdogan must be delighted about what is unfolding in Syria, though it is a feeling bound to be tempered by swiftly changing circumstances.  Iran’s Shia proxies have been weakened by relentless Israeli targeting and bombing.  Russia’s eyes and resources are turned towards war in Ukraine.  With reports that Syrian rebel groups are now fighting on the outskirts of the capital Damascus, the Assad regime looks frail, its leader either in hiding or evacuated.

In the salad mix of jihadis, nationalists, and run of the mill mercenaries, Turkiye’s hand looms large.  Its intervention in Syria’s conflict was motivated by two main goals: the containment, if not elimination of Kurdish militants in northern Syria, seen as indistinguishable from their PKK (Kurdistan Workers’ Party) counterparts in Turkiye itself, and creating conditions of stability or “safe zones” that would enable a return of Syrian refugees when feasible.

Since August 2016, Turkiye has made three incursions seizing parts of Syria’s north, imposing an occupation using regular troops and auxiliary forces including the Syrian National Army (SNA) and a coalition of groups comprising former Free Syrian Army (FSA) fighters.  In 2018, the Military Police was established by both Turkish authorities and the Syrian Interim Government (SIG), a force ostensibly intended to protect the civilian population.  Instead, this period of Turkish rule has been marked by brutality, repression and sheer neglect.

In its February 2024 report, Human Rights Watch documented instances of abductions, arbitrary arrests, unlawful detentions (these include children), sexual violence and torture.  The perpetrators spanned elements of the SNA, the Military Police, members of the Turkish Armed Forces, the Turkish National Intelligence Organisation (Milli İstihbarat Teşkilatı, MİT), and various military intelligence directorates.  To this colourfully gruesome range of cruelties can be added the abuse of property rights, looting, pillaging, confiscation of property, extortion and the absence of any consistent system of restitution.

The group enduring the heaviest burden of suffering are Kurdish residents, notably those that had received protection from the US-backed Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) comprising the People’s Protection Unit (Yekineyen Parastina Gel, YPG), and the Women’s Protection Unit (Yekineyen Parastina Jin).  These forces proved crucial in countering the Islamic State (ISIS) group.  In October this year, Erdogan reiterated the long held view that such Kurdish protective units were merely “the Syrian branch of the PKK terror group, destined to be abandoned, left isolated.”  Arabs and other groups seen as having links to the SDF and the Autonomous Administration of Northeast Syria (AANES) have also been targets of Turkish-led ire.

The SNA is no friend of the headline grabbing Islamist outfit, Hayat Tahrir-al Sham (HTS), the primary spear in the lighting operation against the Assad regime.  HTS has marketed itself as a self-sufficient, modern, more considered group, less fire and brimstone from its al-Qaeda and al-Nusra iterations and supposedly more tolerant to other religions, sects and views.  Its leader, Abu Mohammad Al-Jolani, has managed to receive praise and plaudits in the Western media for that change, despite his listing by the US State Department as a “Specially Designated Global Terrorist” worthy of a $10 million reward to anyone willing to offer information leading to his capture.

Even on the progress of HTS, Turkish influence cannot be discounted, despite Ankara eschewing open support for the group.  As Fuad Shahbazov, writing for the Stimson Center remarks, the recent advances of HTS “would have been unthinkable without Turkiye’s military and logistical backing, and provision of advanced weaponry.”  It has also been suggested that Ankara gave a nod of approval to the offensive led by HTS after it failed to secure a rapprochement with Assad.

Erdogan’s statements on the advance show a slippery mind in operation.  On December 6, he told reporters after Friday prayers that the target of the offensive was evidently Damascus.  “I would say we hope for this advance to continue without any issues.”  But he also expressed the view that these advances were “problematic” and “not in a manner we desire”.  While not elaborating on that point, it could be gleaned from the remarks that he is concerned about various “terrorist organisations” operating in the rebel forces.

OPINION: As predicted, the revolution in Syria has reignited

The next day, the Turkish President decided to be lofty in his assessment as the rebels entered the suburbs of Homs.  “There is now a new reality in Syria, politically and diplomatically,” he declared in a speech delivered in the southern Turkish city of Gaziantep.  “And Syria belongs to Syrians with all its ethnic, sectarian and religious elements.”

In keeping with the views of other leaders responsible for intervening in the affairs of another state, Erdogan spoke of Syrian independence as viable, the will of its people as inviolable.  “The people of Syria are the ones who will decide the future of their own country.”  He hoped that the country would “quickly regain the peace, stability, and tranquillity it has been longing for 13 years.”  He went on to remark that “responsible actors and all international organisations” should support the preservation of the state’s territorial integrity.

The audacity of such statements does nothing to conceal the sectarian and ethnic dangers unfolding at the end of this Ankara-sponsored mission.  The fall of Bashar al-Assad will imperil Shia communities and do even more harm to the Kurds, leaving the door open for Salafism.  The rebel groups, only united by the common cause of overthrowing Assad, may well find battling each other hard to avoid.  As for the territorial integrity Erdogan speaks of, Turkish officialdom and policy will never wear it short of any number of guarantees Ankara is bound to extort on hefty terms.  And as for refugees?  Expect many more to gush out in desperation.

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor or Informed Comment.

Via Middle East Monitor

Creative Commons LicenseThis work by Middle East Monitor is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Bonus video added by Informed Comment:

France 24 English: “Syria at risk of ‘fragmentation’: Amid ‘scenes of popular joy’, Syrians worried about ‘what’s next’

]]>
Turkish Right celebrates Syrian Rebel Offensive, while Left Fears Partition and Turmoil https://www.juancole.com/2024/12/celebrates-offensive-partition.html Fri, 06 Dec 2024 05:15:35 +0000 https://www.juancole.com/?p=221915 Istanbul (Special to Informed Comment; Feature) – After four years of frozen conflict, Syrian rebels, mainly from the Islamist group Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) and the Turkish-backed Syrian National Army (SNA), launched a surprise offensive against President Bashar al-Assad’s government in northwestern Syria on November 27.

The rebels swiftly captured Aleppo, Syria’s second-largest city, marking the first time the city has changed control since 2016. After taking Aleppo, the rebels advanced southward, seizing villages, towns, and the key city of Hama on December 5.

The central city of Homs appears to be their next target.

Although Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan has denied any involvement in the rebel offensive and stated that the crisis in Syria is the result of Assad’s refusal to engage in political dialogue with the opposition, Syrian state media has accused Israel and Türkiye of supporting the insurgents’ advance.

The offensive occurred amid Türkiye’s attempts to normalize relations with the Syrian government. However, these efforts had stalled, since Assad demanded that Türkiye withdraw its military forces from northern Syria as a precondition for normalization — a condition Türkiye has refused.

The Complex Relationship Between Türkiye and HTS

HTS was officially formed in January 2017 as a merger of various Islamist and jihadist groups. HTS’s main component, Al-Nusra Front, was al-Qaeda’s affiliate in Syria before it claimed to sever formal ties to the organization in 2016.

HTS is widely regarded as a terrorist group by several countries, including the United Nations, the United States, and the European Union. Türkiye designated HTS as a terrorist organization in August 2018.

However, Türkiye has faced accusations of indirectly or covertly supporting HTS. Even if Türkiye was not directly involved in the rebel offensive, opposition sources in contact with Turkish intelligence have claimed that Türkiye gave the green light for the offensive, Reuters reported.

Journalist Fehim Taştekin notes that HTS’s agenda differs from Ankara’s goals and warns the Turkish government to abandon its “wishful thinking” about HTS. He added that HTS is cooperating with Türkiye pragmatically for now, despite considering its secular regime “un-Islamic.”

Despite the current cooperation between HTS and SNA, there have been several instances in the previous years where HTS and Turkish-backed SNA have clashed militarily, particularly in Idlib and other opposition-held areas.

Reactions in Türkiye

While Türkiye designates the HTS as a terrorist organization, the rhetoric of Turkish officials and pro-government media suggests approval, and in some cases, even celebration of the HTS offensive.

Some Turkish pro-government media outlets and social media accounts framed the offensive as a potential Turkish territorial expansion. Pro-government accounts circulated maps depicting expanded Turkish territories, including parts of northern Syria.

The Islamist newspaper Yeni Akit portrayed the symbolic raising of the Turkish flag over Aleppo’s citadel by Syrian rebels as a victory for Türkiye, stating, “The Turkish Flag Looks Very Fitting on Aleppo Citadel.” It further remarked, “Today, the Turkish flag waves over Aleppo Citadel, one of the city’s greatest symbols, which remained under Ottoman protection for approximately 400 years.”

Pro-government Yeni Şafak praised the rebel advance with the phrase ‘The children of Aleppo are returning home.’ while columnist and former Justice and Development Party (AKP) MP Aydın Ünal claimed that the “reconquest of Aleppo” upset opposition groups in Türkiye.

However, some pro-government pundits also claim Türkiye has no ties with HTS. Sabah newspaper columnist Okan Müderrisoğlu said: “HTS is recognized as a terrorist organization by Türkiye. For this reason alone, claiming that Türkiye has an organic relationship with HTS remains a crude accusation!”

Main opposition Republican People’s Party (CHP) leader Özgür Özel, a center-left secularist, urged Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, the head of the ruling pro-Islam Justice and Development Party, to avoid “plans to divide Syria” and called on Assad to open a dialogue with Türkiye to begin a new chapter for “the brotherhood of the peoples of Syria and Türkiye.”

Özel also stated, “The efforts of terrorist organizations like HTS to weaken the Syrian regime should be approached with great caution and rationality.”

What are Türkiye’s aims in Syria?

Veteran journalist Murat Yetkin claimed Ankara has three priorities in Syria.

According to Yetkin, the first goal is preventing a new wave of migration. The return of Syrian refugees to their home country has been a significant political debate in recent years and the high number of refugees has been a point of criticism for Erdoğan’s government.

This is why Turkish officials see the rebel offensive as an opportunity to facilitate the return of Syrian refugees. Interior Minister Ali Yerlikaya stated that 42 percent of Syrians in Türkiye come from Aleppo. He added, “If a safe and peaceful environment is established in Tel Rifat and Aleppo, there will be a strong inclination for people to return there.”

Türkiye’s second goal is to prevent pro-Kurdish forces from gaining new positions. On November 30, the Turkish-backed Syrian National Army (SNA) launched ‘Operation Dawn of Freedom’ against both the Syrian Army and the pro-Kurdish Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF). The core of the SDF, which is U.S.-backed, is the leftist Kurdish YPG (People’s Defense Units). The Turkish government makes no distinction between the YPG, a Syrian Kurdish militia, and the PKK (the Kurdistan Workers’ Party), an Anatolian-based guerrilla group that Turkey views as a virulent terrorist organization.

Türkiye’s state-run Anadolu Agency reported that the Sunni Arab SNA captured Tel Rifaat from the SDF Kurds, framing the offensive as part of efforts to disrupt the “PKK/YPG’s plan to create a terrorist corridor along the Tel Rifaat–Mare region.”

Yetkin said the third goal is resolving the crisis as much as possible through diplomacy and “proxy forces.”

To address the ongoing crisis in Syria, Iran, Türkiye, and Russia will meet in Doha for the Astana Summit. Several media outlets in Türkiye suggest that the rebel offensive will strengthen Ankara’s position in its normalization efforts.

CNN Türk reported that Ankara hopes Iran and Russia will pressure Bashar al-Assad to agree to negotiate with Türkiye following the meeting.

——-

Bonus video added by Informed Comment:

Voice of America: “Syrian rebels’ advances offer Turkey opportunity ”

]]>
Shiite Iraqi PM to Türkiye: Baghdad will not be a Mere Spectator as Sunni Radicals take Syria https://www.juancole.com/2024/12/shiite-baghdad-radicals.html Wed, 04 Dec 2024 05:15:09 +0000 https://www.juancole.com/?p=221872 Ann Arbor (Informed Comment) – Iraqi Prime Minister Mohammad Shia’ al-Sudani called Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan on Tuesday and read him the riot act about the lightning conquests in northern Syria of Sunni rebels.

Al-Sudani cautioned that “Iraq will not be a mere spectator to the grave repercussions of the events taking place in Syria, especially acts of ethnic cleansing of racial and religious communities there.” He emphasized that “Iraq in the past has been harmed by terrorism and by the consequences of the dominance of extremist organizations in regions of Syria, and would not permit any repetition of those episodes.” He stressed the importance of respecting the unity and sovereignty of Syria

Al-Sudani observed that “Islamic nations are not in need of internal partition, saying that “what is happening in Syria today is to the benefit of the Zionist entity [Israel], which had undertaken airstrikes on the Syrian Army in such a manner as to pave the way for the terrorist groups to establish dominion over further regions of Syria.” He denounced the Syrian Sunni rebels for having taken no position in support of “our people, the Palestinians,” and for having neglected to issue a frank denunciation of the [Israeli] aggression against Gaza.

The Iraqi PM office’s read-out ended by saying that the telephone conference was characterized by an emphasis on the importance of joint coordination between the two sides [Türkiye and Iraq], and on the necessity of supporting security and stability in Syria, since it directly affects the security and stability of Iraq and all the countries of the region [i.e. including Türkiye].

Al-Sudani’s cold fury with Erdogan comes through clearly in the read-out. It isn’t just the resentment by a Shiite leader of Erdogan’s Sunni triumphalism but also a sense that Ankara is being reckless and irresponsible in a way that could have dire consequences for Iraq.

Moreover, Al-Sudani was speaking as the prime minister of all Iraqis, and not simply as a Shiite head of state. He is getting enormous pressure from Iraq’s Kurds, who I figure are about 22% of the Iraqi population, and who see the particular rebels that took Aleppo as fundamentalist Arab radicals with a genocidal attitude toward Kurds. Northeast Syria is heavily Kurdish and Kurdish sources worry that the Kurdish population faces dire peril from the rebels.


Recep Tayyip Erdogan and Mohammad Shia’ al-Sudani, Digital, Dream / Cartoon v3 / Clip2Comic, 2024.

Many observers in the Middle East believe that Türkiye is at least to some extent behind the rapid conquest of Aleppo, Syria’s second largest city, by the Sunni Arab rebel groups, Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) and the Syrian National Army (SNA). The Sunni rebel forces in northern Syria have also long been supported by the US Central Intelligence Agency, though they shunned some groups with known al-Qaeda ties, which now form part of HTS. The excellent military equipment, smart battlefield tactics, and crisp new uniforms of the rebels point to significant foreign support.

Last weekend, as Turkish-backed factions of the Syrian National Army (SNA), allied with HTS or the Levant Liberation Council, launched offensives against the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) across various fronts in the broader Aleppo region, tensions escalated. Some of the cites below come from BBC Monitoring, for which, thanks.

The core of the Syrian Democratic Forces is the leftist Kurdish YPG paramilitary that was backed by the US in the fight against ISIL 2014-2018. Kurdish sources said that the SDF had established a humanitarian route to facilitate the safe evacuation of civilians to more secure zones. However, the Arab fundamentalists backed by Türkiye targeted and obstructed these evacuation efforts. So it was alleged by SDF commander Mazloum Abdi on “X”

Abdi wrote, “Events in northwestern Syria developed rapidly and suddenly, as our forces faced intense attacks from several sides. With the collapse and withdrawal of the Syrian army and its allies, we intervened to open a humanitarian corridor between our eastern regions, Aleppo and the Tal Rifaat area to protect our people [Kurds] from massacres. But attacks by armed groups supported by the Turkish occupation cut off this corridor. Our forces bravely defended our people in Aleppo, Tal Rifaat and al-Shahba. We are working to communicate with all actors in Syria to secure the protection of our people and safely evacuate them from the Tal Rifaat and al-Shahba areas towards our safe areas in the northeast of the country. While our forces continue to resist to protect our people in the Kurdish neighborhoods of Aleppo city.”

This statement was platformed by all major Kurdish media.

The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights alleged that some Syrian National Army fundamentalists had called for the beheading of Kurds in Aleppo. Video has also circulated of SNA fighters abusing Kurdish prisoners, according to BBC Monitoring.

To be fair, so far the fundamentalist Sunni Arab rebels do not appear to have committed atrocities of the ISIL type, and they aren’t ISIL.

The important thing is that neither the Iraqi Shiites, represented by Al-Sudani, nor the Iraqi Kurds are convinced that these fundamentalist Arab militias will treat Kurds and other minorities equitably.

Hoshyar Zebari of the Kurdistan Democratic Party in northern Iraq warned that some of the constituent groups of the HTS had been “incubators” for ISIL, though this allegation is historically not quite correct. The Jabhat al-Nusra or Succor Front derived from the Islamic State of Iraq, which had in turn derived from al-Qaeda in Mesopotamia. But it split with ISI, which became ISIL (the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant) in 2012. The Succor Front instead allied with Ayman al-Zawahiri’s al-Qaeda, which kicked ISIL out. Abu Muhammad al-Jolani, the leader of the Succor Front, distanced himself from al-Qaeda in 2016, turning against terrorism abroad to focus on taking territory inside Syria. None of this history can be very reassuring to leftist or liberal democratic Kurds, but it isn’t accurate to simply declare HTS to be the same as ISIL. Some of its constituents are branches of the Syrian Muslim Brotherhood. It isn’t that their rule would be good for women or minorities, but Sinjar-style massacres of Kurds may also not be their goal.

There is a sense in which al-Sudani leads what might be called the Sixth Iraqi Republic. The first four governments after the 1958 overthrow of the British-installed monarchy were nationalist, and headed by Sunnis.

They were:

    1. `Abd al-Karim Qasim’s nationalist government
    2. The first Baath government of 1963, which overthrew Qasim
    3. The Sunni Arab nationalist goverment of the `Arif brothers 1963-1968, which overthrew the Baath
    4. The second Baath government, 1968-2003

    The Fifth Republic was installed by the Bush Administration and its longest-lived leader was Nouri al-Maliki. It fell when the so-called Islamic State group (ISIL, ISIS, Daesh) took 40% of Iraqi territory in 2014.

    Subsequent Shiite prime ministers led the take-down of ISIL in alliance with Iran and the United States, rebuilding the Iraqi national army and welcoming the rise of Shiite paramilitary groups, the Popular Mobilization Forces. Together, and with the help of the US Air Force and the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps, the Sixth Republic reestablished Iraq as a unified state, even invading Kirkuk in 2017 to halt Kurdish subnationalist expansion.

    What has happened in Syria could threaten the very foundations of the Iraqi Sixth Republic, which was born in the struggle against Sunni Arab radicalism. For one thing, Al-Sudani clearly fears that developments in Syria could lead some Sunni Iraqis to rebel against Baghdad. He may be completely off-base on that view, but he is not the only one in Baghdad to hold it.

    So this perceived existential threat to the Sixth Republic is what led Al-Sudani to such vehement statements in his conversation with Erdogan, who won’t have agreed with any of al-Sudani’s fears. Erdogan sees the Syrian Sunni Arab rebels as political allies for Ankara and as far superior to the Baath government in Damascus.

    No one hated the secular Arab nationalist Baath Party more in history than the religiously-minded Iraqi Shiites, so it is ironic indeed that they should now be standing up for Baath leader Bashar al-Assad.

]]>
Will Washington pressure Ankara to reverse its anti-Israel actions? Turkey Turns Screws on Israel https://www.juancole.com/2024/11/washington-pressure-reverse.html Sat, 23 Nov 2024 05:04:30 +0000 https://www.juancole.com/?p=221665 By

( Foreign Policy in Focus ) – Since October 7, 2023, Turkey has occupied an awkward and uncertain role amid the ongoing Israeli war on Gaza and the cycles of escalatory violence that it has precipitated. A NATO member with long-standing military, economic, and diplomatic ties with the West, Turkey has been forced to accommodate vociferous domestic criticism of Israel’s actions in Gaza without jeopardizing access to Western largesse.

Up until now, Ankara has  Israeli actions while avoiding rocking the boat with Israel’s allies, particularly the United States. Although Turkey recalled its ambassador to Israel a month after October 7, Turkish diplomats continued to operate in Tel Aviv, even as other harsh critics of Israel, such as South Africa and Brazil, cut off diplomatic ties altogether. Likewise, although Turkey announced a trade embargo against Israel last May, Turkish-Israel trade has continued via loopholes, and Turkish ports have given safe passage to foreign ships headed to Israel, setting off a slew of protests by Turkish activists.

Turkey’s reluctance to move from rhetoric to action may be finally changing, however. Last week, Turkish president Recep Tayyip Erdoğan announced that his country would sever all diplomatic ties with Israel, heralding a new phase of tensions between Ankara and Tel Aviv. At the same time, Ankara has now declared that it will close embargo loopholes and will lobby the UN for a global arms embargo on Israel (a move supported by Beijing and Moscow). Last week, Ankara reportedly blocked top jets with Israeli officials from entering its airspace.

More than a year into the war, with Israel now bombing seven majority Muslim nations—Palestine, Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, Yemen, and Iran—Turkey’s changing stance towards Tel Aviv reflects the immense pressure from the Turkish public, a majority of whom are adamantly opposed to Israel’s actions in Gaza. But it also indicates that, should the war escalate further, Turkey would find it more and more difficult to avoid direct involvement—not least because of the huge number of refugees that would almost certainly be forced into Turkey should the bombing of Lebanon continue and plans for mass expulsions of Palestinians take effect. Given the intense socioeconomic tensions set off by the presence of 3 million Syrian refugees in Turkey, Erdoğan will be under enormous pressure as more Arab refugees move closer to Turkey’s borders.


“Erdogan v. Netanyahu,” Digital, Dream / Dreamland v3 / IbisPaint, 2024

The stronger line from Ankara coincides with an increasingly united front among Middle Eastern leaders, as old enmities have cooled in the face of the staggering human cost of Israel’s actions in the region, a toll that almost certainly exceeds the official casualty count. Indeed, news of Turkey’s decision came alongside major developments out of Saudi Arabia, with Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman throwing his support behind Iran and formally accusing Israel of genocide. Given the restoration of relations between Turkey and Saudi Arabia, and the strengthening of ties between countries and Tehran, the statements out of Riyadh and Ankara amount to a one-two punch.

Turkey’s severing of diplomatic ties with Israel is not just symbolic. Turkey is not Honduras, Brazil, or Bahrain, to list some of the dozen-odd countries that have likewise broken diplomatic ties with Israel. A NATO member with a critical geostrategic position in the region and one of the largest land armies in Europe, Turkey is also the conduit for as much as 40 percent of Israel’s energy, piped in from Azerbaijan via Turkey. Should Erdoğan decide to cut off or restrict Azeri oil, then Israel’s already flailing economy, along with its energy-hungry and increasingly disaffected military, could collapse.

The most important question mark surrounding the severing of diplomatic ties may concern Iran. Will Ankara’s tougher line on Israel translate into direct or indirect support for Tehran in the event of a war with a U.S.-backed Israel? Although Turkey’s direct involvement in any such conflict is unlikely as long as Turkey remains in NATO, anti-American and anti-Israeli sentiment has surged in Turkey. Should Israel attack Iran with American support, especially if Russia and/or China act to defend Tehran, Turkey could easily find itself pulled between historical loyalties to the West and growing ties with Eastern alternatives to the EU and NATO—namely, the BRICS economic union and the more defense-oriented Shanghai Cooperation Organization, both of which Turkey aims to join.

These developments are occurring in a radically changed geopolitical landscape in which Donald Trump will return to the White House in January 2025. Prior to the election, there was some hope in the Middle East that Trump, against all evidence, would move to deescalate tensions with Iran in line with his campaign promises to bring America out of foreign wars and prioritize “America first.” Trump almost immediately dashed those hopes, appointing a slew of pro-Israeli and anti-Iranian hawks to top positions in his incoming administration, which may have pushed Ankara and Riyadh to make their statements sooner than later. Seeing little hope for negotiation with the Trump team, Iran may now make good on promises to attack Israel in retaliation for Tel Aviv’s late October strike on Iran.

Should Ankara dial back the pressure on Israel, it will indicate that the United States can still influence Turkish policy, as it recently did in pushing Turkey to stop the sale of “military-linked goods” to Russia. But if Turkey and Saudi Arabia continue to up the ante, it will signal that the United States is losing control of countries once seen as, sincerely or under duress, deferential to Washington (and by extension Tel Aviv). With the world increasingly united against Israel’s U.S.-backed policies, Washington can ill afford any further defections.

Philip Balboni is an anthropologist of global politics and economy. He holds a PhD in Cultural Anthropology from the University of California, Berkeley, and teaches at Northeastern University. His writing can be found at philipbalboni.substack.com.

Foreign Policy in Focus

]]> Will Türkiye Stay Committed to the Kurdish Peace Process? https://www.juancole.com/2024/10/committed-kurdish-process.html Thu, 31 Oct 2024 04:15:06 +0000 https://www.juancole.com/?p=221283 (Istanbul: Special to Informed Comment; Feature) – On October 22, Devlet Bahçeli, the leader of the far-right Nationalist Movement Party (MHP) and an ally of President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, made an unexpected statement suggesting that Abdullah Öcalan, the imprisoned leader of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK), could be allowed to speak in the Parliament if he proclaims the dissolution of the PKK in exchange for the possibility of his release.

Given Bahçeli’s reputation for staunch Turkish nationalism and his opposition to any concessions for the PKK, his remarks have surprised many across the political spectrum.

The day after Bahçeli’s speech, a deadly terrorist attack occurred at the headquarters of Turkish Aerospace Industries (TUSAŞ), a state-owned aerospace and defense company near the capital, Ankara, leaving seven people dead, including two assailants. Turkish officials attributed the attack to the PKK, which claimed responsibility two days later, on October 25, asserting that the attack was not related to the latest political developments.

Despite the PKK attack in Ankara, the positive momentum surrounding the peace initiative has not yet been derailed.

Historical Background

The PKK was founded in 1978 during a period of widespread political violence between left-wing and right-wing factions in Türkiye. However, before the 1980 coup d’état, the PKK was a small group without significant military or operational capacity.

On September 12, 1980, the Turkish military, led by General Kenan Evren, staged a coup, citing severe instability as the reason. Following the coup, the military suspended the parliament, banned all political parties, and detained thousands of political activists. Political leaders were either arrested or barred from participating in politics.

From 1980 to 1983, Türkiye was under military rule. The military junta prohibited the use of the Kurdish language and restricted Kurdish cultural expression. The oppressive conditions under the military government led the PKK to launch an armed insurgency in 1984 in southeastern Türkiye in order to establish an independent Kurdish state. The first PKK attack on August 25, 1984, marked the beginning of a prolonged conflict.

The Turkish military launched an extensive counter-insurgency campaign. Many PKK members retreated to northern Iraq, particularly to the Qandil Mountains, which became a key base for PKK operations. Over the years, Türkiye has conducted numerous airstrikes and ground operations against PKK positions in northern Iraq.

Abdullah Öcalan was captured in Kenya in 1999 and initially sentenced to death; however, this sentence was later commuted to life imprisonment on İmralı Island in the Sea of Marmara. His capture marked a significant turning point in the ongoing conflict as Öcalan is viewed as the nation’s top security threat, much like how Osama bin Laden was perceived in the U.S.—a central focus of national security efforts.

According to pro-government Hürriyet, since 1984, the conflict has resulted in the deaths of more than 14,000 Turkish security forces, 6,000 civilians, and 46,000 PKK members.

Past Peace Initiatives

In the 1990s, a non-violent political movement advocating for Kurdish cultural and political rights began to form, as many Kurdish politicians saw the need for a legal political party to represent Kurdish interests within the Turkish political system. The People’s Labor Party (HEP), established in 1990, became Türkiye’s first pro-Kurdish party.

Since then, left-wing pro-Kurdish political parties have repeatedly faced legal restrictions, closures, and accusations of links to the PKK, resulting in a cycle of dissolution and re-establishment. The Peoples’ Equality and Democracy Party (DEM Party) is the most recent and prominent Kurdish-oriented party.

In the early 2000s, the Justice and Development Party (AKP) and then-Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan introduced reforms to improve Kurdish rights. In 2009, the AKP government launched the ‘Kurdish Opening,’ which paved the way for a gradual peace process. By 2013, direct negotiations between the Turkish government and the PKK resulted in a ceasefire and raised hopes for a political resolution.

However, tensions escalated after July 22, 2015, when PKK members killed two policemen in Ceylanpınar. The incident led to the collapse of the peace process, resulting in renewed violence and urban warfare in Kurdish-majority areas. In response, the Turkish government intensified military operations against the PKK in Türkiye and northern Iraq.

Türkiye also launched three ground operations into northern Syria between 2016 and 2019, targeting the People’s Protection Units (YPG). Turkish officials have consistently labeled the YPG/SDF as a PKK offshoot.

While many international media outlets frame Türkiye’s Kurdish issue as a straightforward “Erdoğan vs. the Kurds” conflict, this simplification overlooks significant nuances and obscures the full reality. Broadly categorizing the Kurdish population as a unified bloc opposing Erdoğan fails to recognize the political and ideological diversity within Türkiye’s Kurdish communities.

Erdoğan has frequently sought to divide the Kurdish electorate by appealing to conservative Kurds, as opposed to those who support secular, left-wing parties. This strategy weakens the DEM Party’s influence and bolsters his electoral base, particularly in regions with a significant Kurdish population.

Additionally, some conservative Kurdish groups maintain political ties with the AKP. Hüda-Par (Free Cause Party), a Sunni Islamist Kurdish party, openly supported Erdoğan in the 2018 and 2023 presidential elections and participated in the 2023 parliamentary election under the AKP list.

A New Peace Process?

In early October, rumors of a renewed peace process began circulating after a handshake between Bahçeli and members of the DEM Party during the Parliament’s opening on October 1. Speculation about a potential second peace process grew even further following Bahçeli’s statement regarding Öcalan.

Devlet Bahçeli has previously been a vocal advocate for the execution of Abdullah Öcalan. Notably, at a June 2007 election rally, Bahçeli targeted then-Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, stating, “Can’t you find a rope to hang him? Here, take this rope and hang him, then,” as he held up a rope to the crowd.

Bahçeli’s previous rhetoric makes his recent statements about Öcalan all the more striking.  In contrast, an ordinary citizen expressing views such as advocating for Öcalan’s release or suggesting he be allowed to speak in parliament would likely face prosecution or imprisonment.

As discussions about a renewed peace process were rekindled, Özgür Özel, the leader of the main opposition party, the Republican People’s Party (CHP), visited Selahattin Demirtaş, the jailed former leader of the pro-Kurdish People’s Democratic Party (HDP).

Özel also endorsed the government’s peace bid, stating: “I am offering a state to the Kurds. I am offering the Kurds, who do not feel they belong here, the opportunity to be the owners of the Republic of Türkiye. Let’s create a country where the Kurds do not feel like the “other”…”

Thus far, the main opposition and the DEM Party appear to welcome Bahçeli’s remarks. However, significant differences in outlook are evident. While Bahçeli claims that there is no “Kurdish question” in Türkiye, the CHP and DEM emphasize the need for greater democratization to achieve lasting peace in southeastern Türkiye.

As noted by a prominent expert on the Kurdish issue and professor of political sociology Doğu Ergil, a call made directly to the PKK via Öcalan could lead to a ceasefire but not to lasting peace. For genuine peace, there must be an agreement based on principles and conditions mutually accepted by the societies involved and secured by the rule of law. Moreover, such peace cannot be sustainable if it relies on short-term political interests.

—–

Featured Video added by Informed Comment:

Al Jazeera English: “Ankara attack on aviation facility: Turkish officials say 5 killed and 22 wounded”

]]>
Türkiye’s Hezbollah Dilemma https://www.juancole.com/2024/10/turkiyes-hezbollah-dilemma.html Wed, 02 Oct 2024 04:15:58 +0000 https://www.juancole.com/?p=220783 Istanbul (Special to Informed Comment; Feature) – As the conflict in Lebanon intensifies, Türkiye finds itself walking a diplomatic tightrope. While it has openly condemned Israeli airstrikes in Lebanon, Ankara has been careful to avoid statements that could be interpreted as direct support for Hezbollah.

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan has condemned Israeli airstrikes on Lebanon that killed Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah. However, in his official statement, Erdoğan did not directly mention Nasrallah or Hezbollah.

Instead, he criticized Israel’s actions, describing them as a “policy of genocide, occupation, and invasion.” Erdoğan also called on the United Nations Security Council to take immediate action, emphasizing Türkiye’s support for Lebanon. “We will continue to stand by the Lebanese people and government in these difficult days,” Erdoğan added.

Compared to the assassination of Hamas Political Bureau Chief Ismail Haniyeh, Turkish officials adopted a more cautious tone following the death of Nasrallah. Haniyeh’s assassination in July 2024 drew strong condemnation from Ankara, with officials referring to him as a “martyr.” Türkiye even declared a national day of mourning in Haniyeh’s honor.

This raises an important question: why has Türkiye been relatively quiet on Nasrallah’s assassination?

Background: Sectarianism and Syria

Türkiye’s desire to avoid statements that could be perceived as supportive of Hezbollah stems from sectarian differences and Hezbollah’s role in the Syrian Civil War.

Journalists Musa Özuğurlu, speaking on the pro-opposition channel Tele1, and Mehmet Ali Güller, from the pro-opposition newspaper Cumhuriyet, both highlighted the sectarian differences between Hamas and Hezbollah when discussing how Erdoğan distinguishes between the two organizations.

They both noted that Erdoğan is more supportive of Hamas than Hezbollah, as Hamas is a Sunni organization, while Hezbollah is primarily a Shia Islamist organization.

Additionally, with the start of the Syrian Civil War, Türkiye and Hezbollah found themselves on opposing sides. Hezbollah supported the Bashar al-Assad regime, while Türkiye supported Syrian opposition groups like the Free Syrian Army (FSA) seeking to overthrow Assad.

Hezbollah has occasionally clashed with Turkish-backed rebel groups in Syria, and during the Battle of Idlib, a rare direct confrontation between Türkiye and Hezbollah also occurred. At that time, Idlib was the last major stronghold of the Syrian opposition. Following the deaths of 34 Turkish soldiers in a Syrian-Russian airstrike on February 27, 2020, Türkiye launched ‘Operation Spring Shield.

Click here to donate via PayPal.

During the military operation, Turkish drones and artillery killed fourteen Hezbollah members. The Jerusalem Post reported that the IDF identified several Radwan operatives among the casualties and observed the battle to gather insights. Radwan Force is an elite unit within Hezbollah known for its highly trained operatives who operate in various theaters, including Lebanon and Syria.

While Erdoğan appears to keep his distance from Nasrallah and Hezbollah, he also has been striving to accelerate normalization talks with Damascus.

How does Türkiye view Hezbollah?

Although Ankara has been at odds with Hezbollah, it does not designate the group as a terrorist organization, unlike Türkiye’s Western allies.

In an interview with the state broadcaster TRT, Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan revealed that he met with Nasrallah in Lebanon shortly after October 7 under difficult conditions.

Fidan described Nasrallah as a major regional figure, noting that his death will leave a void that will be difficult to fill. He also called Nasrallah’s death a significant loss for both Hezbollah and Iran.

While Turkish officials adopted a careful tone, pro-government media harshly criticized Hezbollah’s role in the region.

On a program aired by A Haber, retired Colonel and security pundit Coşkun Başbuğ claimed that Nasrallah was working for Mossad and that Hezbollah’s leadership was “sold out.” Başbuğ argued that Hezbollah could have turned the Israeli border into a “hell” but did not due to its compromised leadership.

Başbuğ stated that Nasrallah and other Hezbollah leaders were discarded by those who used them. Additionally, he referred to Hezbollah’s missile attacks as mere “firework displays.”

Yeni Şafak columnist and a former Justice and Development Party (AKP) MP Aydın Ünal said the assassination of Nasrallah was met with joy and excitement by the oppressed Syrians.

Ünal said that Nasrallah, following orders from Iran, had brutally and mercilessly carried out massacres of Muslims.

“The removal of Hezbollah will not only ensure Lebanon’s stabilization but will also mean the elimination of the buffer, barrier, and obstacle in the Palestinian resistance,” Ünal said.

Solidarity with Lebanon

Erdoğan met Lebanese Prime Minister Najib Mikati on September 25 on the sidelines of the 79th UN General Assembly. He reportedly expressed Türkiye’s solidarity with Lebanon in the face of Israeli attacks. He emphasized the urgent need for the international community to implement a solution to halt Israel’s aggression.

As Israel intensified its attacks on Lebanon, Erdoğan stated on September 30 that if the UN Security Council fails to halt Israel’s actions in Gaza and Lebanon, the UN General Assembly should recommend the use of force, in accordance with a resolution it passed in 1950.

Hours after the Israeli ground invasion of Lebanon began, Erdoğan reiterated Türkiye’s support for Lebanon in an October 1 speech at the reopening of the Turkish Parliament following its summer recess.

He emphasized that Türkiye would support Lebanon with all its means. “After Lebanon, the next place he will set his sights on will be our homeland. Netanyahu is adding Anatolia to his dreams,” Erdogan added. Anatolia is a large peninsula in western Asia that makes up the majority of modern-day Türkiye.

Overall, Türkiye’s support appears to be directed more toward the Lebanese population and Lebanon as a state, rather than Hezbollah as an organization. Türkiye’s current foreign policy on Lebanon emphasizes humanitarian concerns, regional stability, condemnation of broader Israeli actions in the region, and criticism of Western support for Israel.

Note: Türkiye designates a separate Islamist group called “Kurdish Hezbollah” as a terrorist organization. This Sunni Islamist group operates primarily in southeastern Türkiye and is not connected to the Shia Lebanese Hezbollah. The two groups have distinct goals and ideological principles.

——-

Bonus Video added by Informed Comment:

Hindustan Times: “Turkey’s Erdogan Ups The Ante, Calls For UN To Use Force Against Israel Amid Lebanon, Gaza Conflict”

]]>