Connect with us

Latest

News

Staff Picks

The Failed Coup Attempt – or the Dawning of Sharia Law in Turkey?

The defeat of the coup in Turkey threatens Turkey’s conversion from a secular national state into a Muslim Sunni federation.

Can Erimtan

Published

on

4,376 Views

Elton John’s song proclaims that “Saturday Night’s Alright for Fighting” but a certain section of Turkey’s Armed Forces did not heed these words and prematurely staged a coup attempt on Friday Night . . . and quite predictably, these soldiers failed and Recep Tayyip Erdoğan (aka the Prez) and his ruling Justice and Development Party (or AKP, led by the hapless PM Binali Yıldırım) have now emerged stronger than ever.

On Friday, 15 July 2016, a number of soldiers in Turkey apparently decided that the time was ripe for staging an armed insurrection to bring a halt to the increasing power wielded by the Prez and his AKP, bent on turning the country into a pious Muslim nation inhabited by docile believers ready to act in accordance with the wishes of their political and religious leaders. Around 11 PM, heavily armed soldiers closed down access to the two main bridges across the Bosphorus in Istanbul. All the while, low-flying military jets were hovering overhead. About an hour later, the state broadcaster TRT was seized by members of the junta and proceeded to have a written statement read on air by the newscaster Tijen Karakaş: the “Turkish Armed Force have taken over the control in order to restore constitutional order, democracy, maintain human rights and freedom again.”

Karakaş declared that the country had been taken over by the ‘Council for Peace in the Country’ (or the “Yurtta Sulh Konseyi,” a clear reference to one of Atatürk’s many well-known phrases). The statement read by Karakaş made clear that the coup plotters regard the AKP-led government as having eroded the democratic and secular rule of law in the country: the ‘Council for Peace in the Country’ has “completely taken over the administration of the country to reinstate constitutional order, human rights and freedoms, the rule of law and general security that was damaged.”

The statement also added that the ‘Council for Peace in the Country’ would respect the freedom of Turkey’s citizens, irrespective of religion, race or language. But the Prez and his AKP henchmen were not going to take this lying down, and as the coup plotters neglected to shut down other media outlets or even the internet, the hapless PM and his boss proceeded to communicate directly with their base, urging their supporters to ignore a curfew and take to the streets. In addition, the AKP-led government also mobilized the network of mosques throughout the country to spread the word via their sound systems. While these events were taking place, the Prez himself was in the south-west holiday resort of Marmaris. And, using the latest technology available, he made a televised address, via his mobile phone. Next, Tayyip Erdoğan flew on to Istanbul, saying that his residence in Marmaris had been bombed after he left.

The Prez Strikes Back

In response to these words of encouragement, AKP supporters started flooding the streets, imbued with a religious zeal and unperturbed in their love for Tayyip Erdoğan. The conscripts manning the tanks patrolling the streets and guarding strategic points were hesitant and unwilling to shoot their fellow citizens. One such soldier, manning a tank on the Bosphorus Bridge surrendered only to have his throat slit by zealous AKP supporters, shouting “God is great” (or ‘Allahu Akbar’), as reported by the independent media outlet Odatv.

At the same time, on social media messages displaying pictures of captured soldiers allegedly being subjected to torture in mosques were also doing the rounds. Meanwhile in Ankara, the nation’s capitals, various MP’s, including members of the opposition, congregated in the TBMM (or Parliament). In response, F-16 jets proceeded to bomb the structure on three separate occasions, with the politicians inside seeking refuge in the underground shelter. This unprecedented action left the public-at-large speechless, as Turkey’s parliament building had never before been subject to a military strike. When his plane got to the airport in Istanbul, the Prez declared the following: “What is being perpetrated is a treason and a rebellion. They will pay a heavy price.”

On Saturday, 16 July, the BBC stated that the Commander of the First Army now appointed acting Chief of General Staff “Ümit Dundar said [that] 104 coup plotters had been killed and 1,563 arrested in a night of gunfire and explosions in Ankara, Istanbul and elsewhere. A further 90 people died and 1,154 people were injured as thousands of Turks heeded President Erdogan’s call to rise up against the coup-plotters. It is not known who was behind the attempted putsch.” The hapless PM Yıldırım then went on to announce the establishment of a no-fly zone above Ankara, adding that army commanders, including Chief of Staff Hulusi Akar, are on duty working to stop the “illegal military action.”

The Prez himself was also quite buoyant on Saturday, happily disseminating an sms text message to mobile phones all across the nation: “Valuable Children of the Turkish nation. This movement has usurped the state’s armed vehicles and weapons in Ankara and in Istanbul, [executed] by a narrow cadre, acting like in the 70s [and executing] an uprising against the nation. Take hold of your democracy and your well-being noble Turkish nation. I am calling upon you to get out on the streets and take possession of your nation against the action of this narrow cadre, that thinks that the Turkish people will accept [their movement]. Take hold of your state [and] nation.” At the same time, the police has shut down a number of thoroughfares in Istanbul, with a view to thwarting any possible movement by the Armed Forces.

A Coup that was No Coup

The hapless PM declared on television that “[s]ome people illegally undertook an illegal action outside of the chain of command.” This statement seems to imply that the coup plotters are nothing but a bunch of frustrated officers and their hangers-on, acting outside the bounds of the military system and lacking any serious support. And, as if providing Yıldırım with a helping hand, the White House quickly issued a statement, indicating that “[t]he president and secretary agreed that all parties in Turkey should support the democratically-elected government of Turkey, show restraint, and avoid any violence or bloodshed. The secretary underscored that the State Department will continue to focus on the safety and security of U.S. citizens in Turkey.”

In this way Barack Obama and John Kerry all but underlined the fact that the July, 15 attempted coup had been undertaken with no previous American support, coordination or even knowledge. In direct contrast to the 12 September 1980 coup, which was undertaken by General Evren with the full support and knowledge of the United States. As I wrote some time ago, Fuat Avni tweeted as long ago as Thursday, 23 June 2016, that “[a]ctions will be taken that will bring the country to the edge of a civil war. Explosions, conspiracies, the burning of vehicles will follow one another.” At the time, I brought this tweet in connection with the triple suicide attack on the Istanbul Atatürk Airport . . . But the anonymous whistleblower might very have been tweeting about this military putsch-gone-wrong. Particularly, if one considers the timing.

At the beginning of next month, the High Military Council of Turkey (or YAŞ, in acronymized Turkish) is set to convene, and, it is expected that a large number of officers will be made redundant then. In other words, the Turkish state is set to engage in a cleansing exercise, removing any and all opponents of the AKP-led government. This coup-that-was-no-coup then provides ample ammunition for a thorough culling of the ranks, only to have these replaced by a cadre of officers more amenable to the AKP . . . and, as such, the Prez as well Hapless have been pointing the finger across the Atlantic at the shadowy figure of Fethullah Gülen and his supposed terror organization FETÖ (Fettullahçı Terör Örgütü or Fethullahist Terror Organization), insinuating that the coup plotters are part and parcel of this shadowy, clearly elusive, and possibly even non-existent, organization. Already on Friday night, at 22:46, the AKP MP for Afyon, Ali Özkaya took to twitter to denounce Gülen and his nefarious organization for having brought about this coup attempt to topple the democratically elected AKP-led government.

Still, there are those who regard the whole coup attempt as an orchestrated affair, aimed at benefitting the Prez and his AKP-led government. A most unlikely commentator like the American Neo-Nazi and white supremacist Andrew Anglin put it like this: “In short, the whole thing could [not] have been better arranged for Erdogan himself, who now looks like a hero of the people.” And, is has to be said that in the aftermath of this failed coup attempt the AKP support will undoubtedly surge to previously unknown heights and the polarizing figure that is Recep Tayyip Erdoğan will start enjoying even higher approval ratings.

In fact, Erdoğan is now also being referred to as Turkey’s Commander-in-Chief, which would indicate, among other things, that he regards the attempted coup as a personal attack on his figure. One could argue that, whatever the coup plotters’ motives might have been, the end-result of their actions will be an even more wholehearted and enthusiastic acceptance of Tayyip Erdoğan’s policy of Sunnification and possibly a rather swift dismantling of the nation state that is Turkey . . . . to be replaced by an “Anatolian federation of Muslim ethnicities, possibly linked to a revived caliphate,” as well as possible return of Shariah to Turkey. Whether these conditions would be in line with Atatürk’s well-known dictum “Peace at Home, Peace Abroad” is anyone’s guess however . . . 

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

avatar
  Subscribe  
Notify of

Latest

Clinton-Yeltsin docs shine a light on why Deep State hates Putin (Video)

The Duran – News in Review – Episode 114.

Alex Christoforou

Published

on

Bill Clinton and America ruled over Russia and Boris Yeltsin during the 1990s. Yeltsin showed little love for Russia and more interest in keeping power, and pleasing the oligarchs around him.

Then came Vladimir Putin, and everything changed.

Nearly 600 pages of memos and transcripts, documenting personal exchanges and telephone conversations between Bill Clinton and Boris Yeltsin, were made public by the Clinton Presidential Library in Little Rock, Arkansas.

Dating from January 1993 to December 1999, the documents provide a historical account of a time when US relations with Russia were at their best, as Russia was at its weakest.

On September 8, 1999, weeks after promoting the head of the Russia’s top intelligence agency to the post of prime minister, Russian President Boris Yeltsin took a phone call from U.S. President Bill Clinton.

The new prime minister was unknown, rising to the top of the Federal Security Service only a year earlier.

Yeltsin wanted to reassure Clinton that Vladimir Putin was a “solid man.”

Yeltsin told Clinton….

“I would like to tell you about him so you will know what kind of man he is.”

“I found out he is a solid man who is kept well abreast of various subjects under his purview. At the same time, he is thorough and strong, very sociable. And he can easily have good relations and contact with people who are his partners. I am sure you will find him to be a highly qualified partner.”

The Duran’s Alex Christoforou and Editor-in-Chief Alexander Mercouris discuss the nearly 600 pages of transcripts documenting the calls and personal conversations between then U.S. President Bill Clinton and Russian President Boris Yeltsin, released last month. A strong Clinton and a very weak Yeltsin underscore a warm and friendly relationship between the U.S. and Russia.

Then Vladimir Putin came along and decided to lift Russia out of the abyss, and things changed.

Remember to Please Subscribe to The Duran’s YouTube Channel

Here are five must-read Clinton-Yeltsin exchanges from with the 600 pages released by the Clinton Library.

Via RT

Clinton sends ‘his people’ to get Yeltsin elected

Amid unceasing allegations of nefarious Russian influence in the 2016 presidential election, the Clinton-Yeltsin exchanges reveal how the US government threw its full weight behind Boris – in Russian parliamentary elections as well as for the 1996 reelection campaign, which he approached with 1-digit ratings.

For example, a transcript from 1993 details how Clinton offered to help Yeltsin in upcoming parliamentary elections by selectively using US foreign aid to shore up support for the Russian leader’s political allies.

“What is the prevailing attitude among the regional leaders? Can we do something through our aid package to send support out to the regions?” a concerned Clinton asked.

Yeltsin liked the idea, replying that “this kind of regional support would be very useful.” Clinton then promised to have “his people” follow up on the plan.

In another exchange, Yeltsin asks his US counterpart for a bit of financial help ahead of the 1996 presidential election: “Bill, for my election campaign, I urgently need for Russia a loan of $2.5 billion,” he said. Yeltsin added that he needed the money in order to pay pensions and government wages – obligations which, if left unfulfilled, would have likely led to his political ruin. Yeltsin also asks Clinton if he could “use his influence” to increase the size of an IMF loan to assist him during his re-election campaign.

Yeltsin questions NATO expansion

The future of NATO was still an open question in the years following the collapse of the Soviet Union, and conversations between Clinton and Yeltsin provide an illuminating backdrop to the current state of the curiously offensive ‘defensive alliance’ (spoiler alert: it expanded right up to Russia’s border).

In 1995, Yeltsin told Clinton that NATO expansion would lead to “humiliation” for Russia, noting that many Russians were fearful of the possibility that the alliance could encircle their country.

“It’s a new form of encirclement if the one surviving Cold War bloc expands right up to the borders of Russia. Many Russians have a sense of fear. What do you want to achieve with this if Russia is your partner? They ask. I ask it too: Why do you want to do this?” Yeltsin asked Clinton.

As the documents show, Yeltsin insisted that Russia had “no claims on other countries,” adding that it was “unacceptable” that the US was conducting naval drills near Crimea.

“It is as if we were training people in Cuba. How would you feel?” Yeltsin asked. The Russian leader then proposed a “gentleman’s agreement” that no former Soviet republics would join NATO.

Clinton refused the offer, saying: “I can’t make the specific commitment you are asking for. It would violate the whole spirit of NATO. I’ve always tried to build you up and never undermine you.”

NATO bombing of Yugoslavia turns Russia against the West

Although Clinton and Yeltsin enjoyed friendly relations, NATO’s bombing of Yugoslavia tempered Moscow’s enthusiastic partnership with the West.

“Our people will certainly from now have a bad attitude with regard to America and with NATO,” the Russian president told Clinton in March 1999. “I remember how difficult it was for me to try and turn the heads of our people, the heads of the politicians towards the West, towards the United States, but I succeeded in doing that, and now to lose all that.”

Yeltsin urged Clinton to renounce the strikes, for the sake of “our relationship” and “peace in Europe.”

“It is not known who will come after us and it is not known what will be the road of future developments in strategic nuclear weapons,” Yeltsin reminded his US counterpart.

But Clinton wouldn’t cede ground.

“Milosevic is still a communist dictator and he would like to destroy the alliance that Russia has built up with the US and Europe and essentially destroy the whole movement of your region toward democracy and go back to ethnic alliances. We cannot allow him to dictate our future,” Clinton told Yeltsin.

Yeltsin asks US to ‘give Europe to Russia’

One exchange that has been making the rounds on Twitter appears to show Yeltsin requesting that Europe be “given” to Russia during a meeting in Istanbul in 1999. However, it’s not quite what it seems.

“I ask you one thing,” Yeltsin says, addressing Clinton. “Just give Europe to Russia. The US is not in Europe. Europe should be in the business of Europeans.”

However, the request is slightly less sinister than it sounds when put into context: The two leaders were discussing missile defense, and Yeltsin was arguing that Russia – not the US – would be a more suitable guarantor of Europe’s security.

“We have the power in Russia to protect all of Europe, including those with missiles,” Yeltsin told Clinton.

Clinton on Putin: ‘He’s very smart’

Perhaps one of the most interesting exchanges takes place when Yeltsin announces to Clinton his successor, Vladimir Putin.

In a conversation with Clinton from September 1999, Yeltsin describes Putin as “a solid man,” adding: “I am sure you will find him to be a highly qualified partner.”

A month later, Clinton asks Yeltsin who will win the Russian presidential election.

“Putin, of course. He will be the successor to Boris Yeltsin. He’s a democrat, and he knows the West.”

“He’s very smart,” Clinton remarks.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

Latest

New Satellite Images Reveal Aftermath Of Israeli Strikes On Syria; Putin Accepts Offer to Probe Downed Jet

The images reveal the extent of destruction in the port city of Latakia, as well as the aftermath of a prior strike on Damascus International Airport.

Published

on

Via Zerohedge


An Israeli satellite imaging company has released satellite photographs that reveal the extent of Monday night’s attack on multiple locations inside Syria.

ImageSat International released them as part of an intelligence report on a series of Israeli air strikes which lasted for over an hour and resulted in Syrian missile defense accidentally downing a Russian surveillance plane that had 15 personnel on board.

The images reveal the extent of destruction on one location struck early in attack in the port city of Latakia, as well as the aftermath of a prior strike on Damascus International Airport. On Tuesday Israel owned up to carrying out the attack in a rare admission.

Syrian official SANA news agency reported ten people injured in the attacks carried out of military targets near three major cities in Syria’s north.

The Times of Israel, which first reported the release of the new satellite images, underscores the rarity of Israeli strikes happening that far north and along the coast, dangerously near Russian positions:

The attack near Latakia was especially unusual because the port city is located near a Russian military base, the Khmeimim Air Force base. The base is home to Russian jet planes and an S-400 aerial defense system. According to Arab media reports, Israel has rarely struck that area since the Russians arrived there.

The Russian S-400 system was reportedly active during the attack, but it’s difficult to confirm or assess the extent to which Russian missiles responded during the strikes.

Three of the released satellite images show what’s described as an “ammunition warehouse” that appears to have been completely destroyed.

The IDF has stated their airstrikes targeted a Syrian army facility “from which weapons-manufacturing systems were supposed to be transferred to Iran and Hezbollah.” This statement came after the IDF expressed “sorrow” for the deaths of Russian airmen, but also said responsibility lies with the “Assad regime.”

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu also phoned Russian President Vladimir Putin to express regret over the incident while offering to send his air force chief to Russia with a detailed report — something which Putin agreed to.

According to Russia’s RT News, “Major-General Amikam Norkin will arrive in Moscow on Thursday, and will present the situation report on the incident, including the findings of the IDF inquiry regarding the event and the pre-mission information the Israeli military was so reluctant to share in advance.”

Russia’s Defense Ministry condemned the “provocative actions by Israel as hostile” and said Russia reserves “the right to an adequate response” while Putin has described the downing of the Il-20 recon plane as likely the result of a “chain of tragic accidental circumstances” and downplayed the idea of a deliberate provocation, in contradiction of the initial statement issued by his own defense ministry.

Pro-government Syrians have reportedly expressed frustration this week that Russia hasn’t done more to respond militarily to Israeli aggression; however, it appears Putin may be sidestepping yet another trap as it’s looking increasingly likely that Israel’s aims are precisely geared toward provoking a response in order to allow its western allies to join a broader attack on Damascus that could result in regime change.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

Latest

“Transphobic” Swedish Professor May Lose Job After Noting Biological Differences Between Sexes

A university professor in Sweden is under investigation after he said that there are fundamental differences between men and women which are “biologically founded”

Published

on

Via Zerohedge


A university professor in Sweden is under investigation for “anti-feminism” and “transphobia” after he said that there are fundamental differences between men and women which are “biologically founded” and that genders cannot be regarded as “social constructs alone,” reports Academic Rights Watch.

For his transgression, Germund Hesslow – a professor of neuroscience at Lund University – who holds dual PhDs in philosophy and neurophysiology, may lose his job – telling RT that a “full investigation” has been ordered, and that there “have been discussions about trying to stop the lecture or get rid of me, or have someone else give the lecture or not give the lecture at all.”

“If you answer such a question you are under severe time pressure, you have to be extremely brief — and I used wording which I think was completely innocuous, and that apparently the student didn’t,” Hesslow said.

Hesslow was ordered to attend a meeting by Christer Larsson, chairman of the program board for medical education, after a female student complained that Hesslow had a “personal anti-feminist agenda.” He was asked to distance himself from two specific comments; that gay women have a “male sexual orientation” and that the sexual orientation of transsexuals is “a matter of definition.”

The student’s complaint reads in part (translated):

I have also heard from senior lecturers that Germund Hesslow at the last lecture expressed himself transfobically. In response to a question of transexuallism, he said something like “sex change is a fly”. Secondly, it is outrageous because there may be students during the lecture who are themselves exposed to transfobin, but also because it may affect how later students in their professional lives meet transgender people. Transpersonals already have a high level of overrepresentation in suicide statistics and there are already major shortcomings in the treatment of transgender in care, should not it be countered? How does this kind of statement coincide with the university’s equal treatment plan? What has this statement given for consequences? What has been done for this to not be repeated? –Academic Rights Watch

After being admonished, Hesslow refused to distance himself from his comments, saying that he had “done enough” already and didn’t have to explain and defend his choice of words.

At some point, one must ask for a sense of proportion among those involved. If it were to become acceptable for students to record lectures in order to find compromising formulations and then involve faculty staff with meetings and long letters, we should let go of the medical education altogether,” Hesslow said in a written reply to Larsson.

He also rejected the accusation that he had a political agenda – stating that his only agenda was to let scientific factnot new social conventions, dictate how he teaches his courses.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

JOIN OUR YOUTUBE CHANNEL

Your donations make all the difference. Together we can expose fake news lies and deliver truth.

Amount to donate in USD$:

5 100

Validating payment information...
Waiting for PayPal...
Validating payment information...
Waiting for PayPal...
Advertisement

Advertisement

Quick Donate

The Duran
EURO
DONATE
Donate a quick 10 spot!
Advertisement
Advertisement

Advertisement

The Duran Newsletter

Trending