ChristiansUnite Forums

Turkish FM warns Israel not to repeat flotilla 'mistake'
 jpost.com

In 'Sydney Morning Herald' interview, Turkish foreign affairs minister discusses new Turkish flotilla and a potential Taliban office in Istanbul.

In an interview on Monday in the Sydney Morning Herald, Turkish Foreign Affairs Minister Ahmet Davutoglu issued a warning for Israel as a second Gaza-bound flotilla is planned.

''We urge Israel not to repeat the same mistake," he said, referring to last year's raid on Mavi Marmara. "It is Israel's responsibility not to implement [a blockade] against Gaza. A fact-finding mission of the UN declared that this … is illegal."


Davutoglu also reiterated his belief that the incident on the Mavi Marmara occurred in international waters. "The Meditteranean does not belong to any nation," he said.

During the interview, Davutoglu also confirmed that Turkey was considering hosting an office for the Taliban in Afghanistan.

According to Davutoglu's statements in the article, Afghan President Hamid Karzai was fully supportive of the idea. "Of course we support him," Davutoglu said of Karzai during the interview. "If there is anything Turkey can do, we will not hesitate to contribute."

According to Davutoglu, Turkey had been approached by former Afghan President Burhanuddin Rabbani to create offices for several groups, not just the Taliban. The Taliban request was, ostensibly, The Sydney Morning Herald reported,  to "give them a base from which to hold negotiations for an end to the war."

The revolution’s missing peace – or piece?
Tuesday, April 26, 2011
BURAK BEKDİL  (Opinion Column in Turkish newspaper)

 Cordially speaking, President Abdullah Gül thinks the missing element of the Arab spring is a sustainable Arab-Israeli “peace.” But he in fact means that the revolution’s missing element is “a piece of Israel.”

President Gül was right when he wrote, “Whether the uprisings (in the Middle East and north Africa) lead to democracy and peace, or to tyranny and conflict will depend on forging a lasting Israeli-Palestinian peace agreement and a broader Israeli-Arab peace,” in an article that appeared in the New York Times on April 21.

One could even praise President Gül for offering Turkey’s capacity to facilitate constructive negotiations: “Turkey, conscious of its own responsibility, stands ready to help,” he wrote in the same article. But Mr. Gül’s chicly worded opus was a polite threat rather than a genuine, impartial peacemaking effort. I never thought Gül would rush to confirm what this column argued only nine days before the president’s New York Times editorial.

“The difference between the rhetoric of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu is that the Iranian talks about ‘no Israel’ in plain language while the milder Turk talks about a ‘smaller Israel’ in subtle language. To achieve the goal of ‘no Israel, the radical Mr. Ahmadinejad resorts to bombs he says he is not building. For his ‘smaller Israel,’ the moderate Mr. Davutoğlu resorts to politics,” I said in my article published in the Daily News on April 12.

President Gül proposes “serious consideration” of the Arab League’s 2002 peace initiative, which proposed a return to Israel’s pre-1967 borders and fully normalized diplomatic relations with Arab states. I am not sure if re-proposing the Arab League’s proposal makes Turkey a fair broker in the Arab-Israeli conflict. But, perhaps, given his ideological genetics, the Israelis should be grateful to President Gül for not proposing a return to Israel’s pre-1948 borders, which probably will be the next Arab League proposal if Israel agrees to the first. Probably to be followed by a proposal to return to Israel’s pre-1897 borders…

President Gül wrote: “Sticking to the unsustainable status quo will only place Israel in great danger. History has taught us that demographics are the most decisive factor in determining the fate of nations. In the coming 50 years, Arabs will constitute the overwhelming majority of people between the Mediterranean Sea and the Dead Sea.” Now, this is problematic…

What kind of danger does Mr. Gül think Israel will face if it sticks to the status quo? More suicide bombers? More rockets? More sophisticated warheads over Israeli soil? An Iranian nuke? Will the Arabs collectively attack Israel when they believe their population has grown sufficiently? Are the Arabs not already an overwhelming majority in the lands where they are in conflict with Israel?

In such bold context, Mr. Gül further “warned Israel,” that it “cannot afford to be perceived as an apartheid island surrounded by an Arab sea of anger and hostility.” Mr. Gül should have checked his facts. Sorry to remind you, Mr. President, but Israel was surrounded by an Arab sea of anger and hostility even before 1967 (and even in 1948).

It’s about the holy books, Mr. Gül, not where borders are drawn. And, Your Excellency, you should know this better than anyone else, as evinced by the Israel-hatred among your Islamist comrades back in the 1960s when secular Turks were not part of “that Arab sea of anger and hostility.”

The president also prophesized, “It will be almost impossible for Israel to deal with the emerging democratic and demographic currents in the absence of a peace agreement with the Palestinians and the rest of the Arab world.” Peel away the layers of diplomatic courtesy in that line, and you will get what the president actually wanted to say: Agree to “our” (Arabs’) terms or you’ll regret and pay for that in the future when the Arab population is big enough to drown you in a sea of hatred and hostility.

How many more lives must be taken so that Mr. Davutoğlu and his comrades can pray at the al-Aqsa Mosque “in the Palestinian capital (Jerusalem)

Activists: New Gaza flotilla in final planning stages 

haaretz.com

Pro-Palestinian activists said on Tuesday that they are in the final stages of organizing their sea convoy to the Gaza Strip, which is planned to be much bigger than last year's flotilla, which was raided by Israeli forces.

Eight Turks and one Turkish-American died in the botched commando operation on a Turkish boat, the Mavi Marmara, that was part of the flotilla on May 31, 2010. The incident drew world attention to the humanitarian situation in Gaza and plunged ties between former allies Israel and Turkey to a new low.

Huseyin Oruc, a spokesman for the group that operates the Mavi Marmara - said this time an international coalition of 22 non-governmental groups hopes to send 15 vessels with up to 1,500 people. Last year, six ships and about half that number participated.

The target date for departure of the new flotilla is the first anniversary of the raid, but it could be delayed, partly because it clashes with Turkish election campaigning. Organizers say the new effort includes activists from Europe, the Middle East, Southeast Asia, Latin America, Canada and the United States.

On being returned to Turkey in August, the Mavi Marmara was renovated by activists for the new flotilla. The boat has since become an icon for the IHH, which hands out small plastic models of the ship, emblazoned with the Turkish and Palestinian flags, to visitors at its headquarters.

"Everybody is getting ready," Oruc said in an interview with The Associated Press at the Istanbul office. He predicted that Israel, mindful of negative fallout from last year's raid, would not try a similar operation this year.

Israeli military officials say naval forces have been busy preparing for the new flotilla for weeks. They said the navy is taking the flotilla very seriously, but plans to use different tactics this time around. They declined to elaborate, but said the goal is to stop the flotilla while avoiding casualties.

The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because of the secrecy of the operation.

Yigal Palmor, spokesman for the Israeli Foreign Ministry, said a recent conference of donors to the Palestinians had called on all parties to send any humanitarian aid through land crossings.

"People coming by sea are doing it as a provocation and are looking for violent confrontation. We call on all relevant parties to display responsibility and shun violence," said Palmor, noting aid for the region is provided by the United Nations, international groups and through the Palestinian Authority.

Espen Goffeng, an activist in Norway, said the target for departure of the new flotilla was early summer, and that activists might finalize the date at a meeting in Europe in early May.

"It's not like a march up the street," he said by telephone. "We need to buy boats, we need to buy cargo, we need to move people around, we need hotel rooms, we need food."

Turkey holds parliamentary elections on June 12. IHH, which says it plans to send 100 to 150 people on the flotilla, is inclined to launch its ship after the vote for fear any controversy could disrupt the election debate. The group communicates closely with the Turkish government, but says it does not need permission to send its boat to Gaza.

It would seem that they want to start a war, and they just might get it done. I think that Israel should give the flotilla very few choices, NONE being close to what they want.

I do too.  It is said that Israel has one of, if not the strongest military forces in the world.  Turkey is one to watch in bible prophecy.  Although they have been friendly with Israel and the U.S. in the past, it is exactly that; the past.  According to Walid Shoebat and others, the antichrist can be expected to come out of Turkey and not the EU.  Turkey is also Muslim and friendly with other muslim countries now.

I looked up Walid Shoebat and bookmarked his web page for study when I get the time. I think that I've heard him speak before. I'm open-minded in looking at other entities than the revived Roman empire for the emergence of the Anti-Christ. Regardless, we appear to be on the edge of big things happening. Thanks for the information and sharing the articles.

You've got to get the "Islamic Antichrist" by Joel Richardson!  Fancinating!
Also, "God's War on Terror" by Walid Shoebat.
Or go to YouTube and look these guys up and listen to them!

Let me know.

I was just listening to a radio interview of Walid Shoebat by Simon Conway and I find it interesting that the President of Turkey Abdullah Gul's name means 'Slave of Allah the Beast'.

"On May 19th Walid did radio interview with Simon Conway drive time talk show host with WHO in Des Moines Iowa. In this interview Walid predicts that Hamas will recognize Israel because Turkey will arrange and pressure Hamas to do so. This will be a ruse by both Turkey and Hamas to help the world pressure Israel to divide the land and will lead to the covenant of death mentioned in Isaiah 28 which G-d will not let stand. Predicting the exact time frame is not productive but we believe that this treaty will be arranged over next two to five years possibly sooner."

Some more interesting reading:

http://www.shoebat.com/blog/   "By Peace They Will Deceive The World"

Thanks for the reminder. I had this site bookmarked and wanted to do some serious reading there. I forgot all about it until now. Things are blunt, to the point, and "interesting" from an informed perspective.

Polls show support for ruling AK Party near 50 percent  
todayszaman.com
 
Turkey's ruling Justice and Development Party (AK Party) is on course for a third consecutive election win on June 12, with support at around 50 percent, according to surveys published on Wednesday.
 
A survey by pollsters Konsensus published in Habertürk newspaper put support for Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan's party at 48.6 percent, which would mark an increase from the near 47 percent which it achieved in the 2007 vote.

A separate survey by Sonar showed support for AK Party at 50.93 percent, according to the polling company's website.

A day earlier a survey by lesser known polling company DORInsight had shown support for Erdoğan's party at 39 percent, well below the 45-50 percent level recorded by better known pollsters.

The success of the AK Party, an economically liberal but socially conservative party, has been driven by strong economic growth in near nine years in power.

The Konsensus poll was conducted between May 18-28 and based on 3,000 voters. The published details did not include a margin of error or specify how many provinces the voters came from.

Support for the opposition Republican People's Party (CHP), which is under new leadership, was at 28.3 percent of the vote and the Nationalist Movement Party (MHP) at 11.6 percent, above the 10 percent threshold needed for a party to enter parliament.

Sonar's poll was conducted between May 24-31 and based on 3,000 voters. The published details did not include a margin of error, but it said the voters came from 39 provinces.

CHP support was seen at 25.78 percent and MHP at 12.45 percent, Sonar said.

The polls suggested there had been little impact for the ultra-nationalist MHP from a sex video scandal which led to the resignation of 10 leading party members.

If his party wins a strong mandate, Erdoğan has promised to overhaul Turkey's constitution, written in the 1980s after a coup. However, the latest poll indicated it would not have the two-thirds majority in parliament needed to change the constitution without going to a referendum.
 

CHP (The Republican People’s Party) : created in 1923 by Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, is now led by Mr. Kemal Kilicdaroglu. It has been a stronger centre-left party since its fusion, in February 1995, with the then main left-wing party SHP. The fusion has however prompted many ex-SHP politicians to defect from the CHP party and join the DSP ranks. Many blamed the former for not being left-wing enough: Mr. Baykal, leader of CHP until May 2010, was indeed in favor of liberal economic policies and of the Customs Union in general. Following the general elections of April 1999, CHP - which obtained only 8.7% of the votes - disappeared from the Parliament for the first time in its history. ex-leader Mr. Baykal was seen as the responsible of this defeat and he lost the control of the party after the Extraordinary Grand Congress of CHP and he resigned. During the elections of 2002, ex-leader Mr. Baykal re-gained his seat and they were able to get 19.39% of the votes, thus became the second and the main opposition party in the parliament. In 2007 they joined their forces with DSP and got 20,88% of the votes, bringing in 112 deputies. After the elections, members from DSP have left the party and returned to their original party.

MHP (National Action Party) : ultra-nationalist party (also known as the Grey Wolves, from the name of it's youth movement) founded in 1969 by the late Alparslan Türkes. Structured as a typically para-military organization, MHP was largely responsible for the escalation of violence in the late seventies. MHP was dissolved after the 1980 coup while Türkes and others were convicted in the early 80’s for the murder of several public figures. In 1995, Türkes is allowed to reconstitute MHP and take part in the elections which earned the party 8.5% of the vote. Türkes’ funeral in april 1997 drew 300.000 people including politicians of all parties. Türkes has been succeeded by Dr. Devlet Bahceli, in spite of the opposition inside the party of Tugrul Türkes, son of the party's founder. MHP became the second Turkish political party after the April 1999 general elections and got 129 seats in the Assembly. It's new leader Bahçeli is drawing a different profile than earlier leaders and bringing a new line for their politics different from their past. During the elections of 2002 they got only 8.34% of the votes and couldn't go to the parliament. But in 2007 they've got 14,27% of the votes and managed to bring 70 deputies in the National Assembly.

AKP (Justice and Development Party) : Founded in 2001 as a pro-Islamist party by Mr. Erdogan and Mr. Gul, AKP gradually gained higher votes in each local and general elections surprising other political parties. In 2002 they won 34,3% of the total votes and became as the first party from the polls, with Abdullah Gül first as the Premiere, then Tayyip Erdogan after his political ban ended. All three coalition parties eliminated. CHP emerged as main opposition. For the first time in almost two decades, AKP ended up forming a single-party government. AKP rejects the "Islamist" label and claims that it is a pro-Western mainstream party with a "conservative" social agenda but also a firm commitment to liberal market economy and European Union membership. In the elections of 2007 they got 46,58% of the total votes and won the elections for the second time, bringing in 341 deputies.

Europe’s Neighborhood: Can Turkey Inspire?

Since the Arab Spring dawned,Turkey’s potential value as an inspiration for and facilitator of reform in the Middle East and North Africa has been a heated topic of discussion. Critics have been concerned that this debate would both work against Turkey’s EU integration by distracting intellectual and political attention and complicate domestic political dynamics through overemphasis on Turkey’s Muslim identity — in essence making Turkey more Middle Eastern rather than spreading reform and open society.
 
Though Turkey’s intensified engagement in the MENA region is inevitable, the shape of Turkey’s influence is not predetermined. The concentration of the debate should already be on how to make Turkey’s influence a positive one, while mitigating potential risks.

Recalling the significant role that interaction between Turkish and European civil society played in driving Turkey’s positive change raises the question of whether Turkey’s civil society development and related institutional transition experiences are transposable to the EU’s southern neighborhood. Looking more closely at the concrete example of Turkey’s experiences in adapting European approaches to women’s rights can shed light on the feasibility of this notion.

Given vested interests and strategic limitations, Turkey’s official approach to democratization in the region is expected to involve contradictions and may on occasion strain relations with the Western alliance as well as with counterparts in the neighborhood. Ankara’s diplomatic efforts to counsel democratic reform in the region (with an initiative ongoing in Syria currently) have so far yielded little or no results. In contrast, Turkish civil society may be able to play a more consistent and active role in assisting neighbors who venture on the longterm endeavor of building a culture of democracy. For this to materialize, there is a need for synergy between Turkish and European counterparts, as well as an informed demand from Turkey’s respective neighbors. The continuation of Turkey’s Europeanization journey will also be important for Turkey’s far-reaching contribution to positive change among its neighbors.

Turkey’s Not-so-Unique Formula

The freedoms and opportunities enjoyed in Turkey that set it apart in Europe’s neighborhood have largely been a function of Turkey’s Europeanization. Over recent decades, Western literature and interaction with European counterparts played an important role in building awareness among Turkish journalists, activists, and intellectuals. Benchmarking of European standards by NGOs and EU leverage — particularly after candidacy was achieved in 1999 — played a central role. This was distinctly the case in bringing about revolutionary legal reform progressive state policies towards gender equality. Though these European influences have taken on a life of their own in Turkey, some of the most challenging steps lie ahead.

Turkey and the Muslim Middle East share traditions and structural economic challenges that obstruct women’s equal standing in public life and trap women in controlling social networks. Social services and public administration fall short of compensating for these socioeconomic realities. These problems do not mean Turkey is regressing. In fact, many of today’s challenges can be characterized as transition pains. Breaking through the current plateau in women’s empowerment requires holistic policy design, political will, and continued socioeconomic change

Just as the problems are not Muslim, neither are the solutions. The wheel needs neither to be re-invented, nor adapted to a Muslim context. Spain, also traditionally patriarchal, lagged behind Europe in gender equality and violence until recently. It has, over the past two decades, not only caught up, but surpassed most other European countries in terms of gender parity — with relevant legislation, strengthening of law enforcement institutions, and allocation of resources to this end. To the extent that Turkey takes Spain as a model, so can a country like Egypt take Turkey as one. In short, for more effective regional democracy inspiration and assistance, Turkey needs to deepen and consolidate its Europeanization journey, not stall mid-stream.

Dissecting Soft Power — The Place of Islam

Turkey’s potential influence in the Arab world is a function, among other things, of shared religion and the related cultural affinity. The Turkish Prime Minister’s high-profile defiance of Israel, and his defending various controversial Muslim leaders on Western platforms arguably compounded Turkey’s popularity on the Arab street. In fact, Turkey’s secularism and good relations with the West are seen as obstacles to Turkey serving as a model in the Middle East by a sizeable proportion of Arab societies. Should we conclude that it is mutually exclusive for Turkey to intensify its Eastern and Western engagement? Not necessarily.

The kind of engagement that empowering intellectuals in the Arab world calls for is not the same kind of populistic engagement that arousing the Arab street involves. Turkey’s having a seat at Euro-Atlantic tables and raising its democratic and development levels are important pillars of its traction in the neighborhood.

Informed choices by opinion leaders and politicians of the respective recipient neighboring countries will determine which aspects of the Turkish experience are utilized. Ultimately, the liberal young political activists of Tunisia who are cautious about alienating conservative voters can, for example, point to the legal framework in Turkey while advocating that equal rights for women does not mean a split from Islamic conviction. In their long struggle lobbying conservative parliamentarians for progressive reform, Turkish women’s movement activists have in the past also justified their demands by drawing on examples from other Muslim countries. Developing the relatively weak ties between Turkish human rights advocates, journalists, dissidents, youth movements, women’s civil society organizations, and civil society organizations in the common neighborhood of Turkey and the EU is important.

Turkey’s experiment with using faith to promote progressive change may also be relevant for some Muslim reform advocates. For example, in order to promote girls’ education, besides infrastructure development, monetary incentives, and penalties for families that withhold their daughters from school, Turkish Imams have been tasked with delivering supportive messages in Friday prayers across the country. Another case in point is the ongoing scholarly review of hadiths (sayings and traditions attributed to Prophet Muhammad), with a view to weed out the suggestions of women’s secondary status. Promoting progressive interpretation of religion can arguably empower women’s struggle against discrimination in conservative environments. However, such initiatives can not replace, but only supplement, law, effective enforcement, protection mechanisms, civic mobilization, and political will. Over-rating the role of Islam in solutions to basic problems that require strong institutions, civic participation, and economic development would be a mistake. Along the same lines, while Turkey’s Muslim culture can reinforce its inspirational strength, substantiating this influence will require more concrete engagement with the needs of the people.

 cont....

Europe’s Neighborhood: Can Turkey Inspire?   cont...

Seeking Synergy

There is no clean-cut model for the winds of change in the neighborhood stretching from North Africa to Central Eurasia. Not only is each society in the region very different from the other, but they are also presented with a wide range of competing examples. Given how polarized Turkey is domestically, it should come as no surprise that different groups from Turkey itself attempt to export disperate so-called Turkey-models to prospective recipients. One need only look at Azerbaijan, to which ethnic nationalist networks and Muslim brotherhood networks from Turkey have been advocating contrasting visions for two decades. From that example, one can conclude that if there is a risk, it is that the West-oriented liberal democrats in Turkey — who have played the biggest role in Turkey’s own transformation — risk falling behind in the race to influence neighbors. Neighbors motivated by the liberalization phase of Turkey’s complex evolution need to play a proactive role to engage these segments of Turkish society.

While Turkish women’s NGOs have experience working in social settings defined by tribal structures in Eastern Turkey, European women’s NGOs have valuable experience gained by East European EU accession. On issues such as utilizing social media, the transmission may very well be reversed; Turkish social movements have much to learn from some of their neighbors’ more active use of such Internet resources. The United States may be most influential in spreading values and activism through education, while Georgia has the most recent example of radical reform of police force.

Rather than assuming Turkey possesses an upper hand on the basis of popularity among neighboring masses, more modesty is called for to find synergy. To get plugged into the causes of reformists in the region and to play a more active role in their affairs, Turkish civil society and media is already benefitting from the language skills, sources, experiences, and funding of their Western counterparts.

Until recently, those in Turkey with a Western-oriented outlook largely neglected Eurasia and the Middle East; vice versa, Turkish groups with networks and advocacy among Eastern neighbors were not plugged in to the Western policy community. This is slowly changing but to find synergy between Turkish and European civil society in a more substantial and lasting way, adaptation of visions, resources, and structures will be important.

Conclusion

The argument that Turkey does not need Europe because it possesses stand-alone regional power is misplaced, but it has been seeping into the Turkish mainstream. Turkey’s EU vocation is still critical not only for strategic reasons but also for more effective use of soft power and to be a stronger role model. Turkey is yet to prove that it can sustainably overcome some of the major problems it shares with its Eastern neighbors. How Turkey deals with the challenges ahead will also be critical in determining whether Turkey can continue to inspire its neighbors — Muslim or otherwise.

Though Turkey’s transformation itself is a work in progress, it is precisely because similar problems with its neighbors still exist that Turkey’s example is perceived to be “within reach.” That being said, Turkey needs to be moving forward on the challenging fronts in order for this element of inspiration to be sustained. Even though Turkey’s progress can be seen as a sign that a Muslim country can overcome these hurdles, the flipside is that a stalling or regression on the part of Turkey can perpetuate perceived civilizational divides.

69 percent of Turkish public supports EU membership, survey finds
todayszamen.com

Sixty-nine percent of Turks support Turkey's European Union membership, although relations with the EU are stagnant, and Turks regard relations with the EU as the country's most important foreign policy issue, according to a recent survey.
 
The survey “Foreign Policy Perceptions in Turkey,” conducted on Dec. 6-14 last year by KA Research and the Turkish Economic and Social Studies Foundation (TESEV) with 1,000 respondents, found that the most supportive region for the country's EU membership is southeast Anatolia with 91 percent of those polled, followed by east Anatolia with 87 percent. The lowest support for the country's EU membership comes from central Anatolia with 58 percent.

“Support for Turkey's EU membership in these regions can be explained by looking at political and economic factors. These two regions will gain from increased welfare and they will significantly benefit from Turkey's democratic transformation on the path to EU membership,” the report said.

“It is noteworthy that EU membership is still considered one of the most important foreign policy issues, even though it is not on the agenda during the election process in Turkey,” said TESEV Board of Directors Chairman Can Paker, referring to the upcoming June 12 elections, at a press conference on Wednesday.

Paker added that since Turkey is on the brink of creating a new constitution, it is important to stress the EU criteria and the EU membership of Turkey, 60 percent of whose trade is with European states.

 

When asked why they want Turkey to be a member of the EU, 22 percent of the respondents said “easing visa restrictions,” 21 percent said “economic benefits,” 13 percent said “for democracy,” 8 percent answered “job opportunities, decrease in unemployment” and 7 percent said “increased living standards.”

Of the 26 percent of the respondents who did not support Turkey's EU membership, the most common reason given was that Turkey was strong enough on its own, with 21 percent, while 10 percent of the respondents stressed the differences between the moral and cultural values of Turkey and the EU, 8 percent said that the EU did not want Turkey and 6 percent of the

respondents stated they did not want Turkey to become an EU member because Turkey is a Muslim country. Financial crises faced by the EU states have not gone unnoticed, as 6 percent of the respondents said that the EU is failing.

When asked when they thought Turkey would become a member of the EU, 49 percent of the respondents said that Turkey would become a member of the EU within the next five to 20 years, while “never” was the most popular answer with 30 percent. On the other hand, there are some optimists -- 16 percent -- who think that Turkey will accede to the EU within the next five years. According to 20 percent of the respondents, Turkey will become a member within the next five to ten years.

In the survey, when asked to list the biggest obstacle to Turkey's EU membership, the most common answer given by the respondents was xenophobia/Islamophobia, with 22 percent. Other answers included the unwillingness of the EU countries with 7 percent, Turkey's population with 4 percent and terror, also 4 percent. Only 3 percent of the respondents stated that the biggest obstacle to Turkey's membership was the Cyprus issue.

“These responses are consistent with the view that the EU is making it harder for Turkey to become a member for religious and cultural reasons, a sentiment that is becoming increasingly widespread in Turkey,” stated the report, written by TESEV's Mensur Akgün, Sabiha Senyücel Gündoğar, Aybars Görgülü and Erdem Aydın.

Akgün indicated that a peaceful, compromise-based solution within the framework of the UN parameters in Cyprus was supported by 31 percent of the respondents. In the survey, 8 percent of the respondents wished to see the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (KKTC) -- which is located south of Turkey on the northern part of Cyprus -- become part of Turkey, while the 6 percent who want the KKTC to remain independent are a distinct minority.

When asked about Turkey's most important foreign policy issues, relations with the EU was the most common answer with 14 percent, while relations with Israel are second with 7 percent, followed by the United States with 5 percent and the Cyprus issue with 4 percent.

The survey results indicate that those who think the US is unfriendly towards Turkey are 52 percent while those who think that the US is friendly account for 27 percent of those polled.

“The fact that 33 percent of the respondents see the US as the second most unfriendly country towards Turkey after Israel is important, as it shows that the majority of people in Turkey have a negative view of the US's approach to their country,” Senyücel said.

When asked to evaluate US President Barack Obama, 80 percent of Turkish respondents have a positive opinion of his election but when asked to comment on President Obama's performance as of December 2010, 67 percent of the respondents evaluate his performance positively, representing a 13 percent drop. As a result, Senyücel said that although the Obama presidency has not fully satisfied the expectations of Turkey's public, it is still regarded positively.

Evaluating at a panel yesterday, Mustafa Aydın from Kadir Has University referred to the results of the Pew research, which was conducted in May this year and found that only 10 percent of those polled viewed the United States positively, compared to 77 percent who viewed the country negatively. He indicated that the results of the Pew research were not so different in the previous year, making Turks those with the most negative evaluations of the US in the world.

 

69 percent of Turkish public supports EU membership, survey finds   cont...

Senyücel and Akgün pointed out that the way the Pew research asks questions comes to the fore when comparing its results with the research done by KA and TESEV. They also said that the timing of the Pew research is important as the public uprisings in the Middle East have intensified since December, when the KA and TESEV survey was done, increasing negative sentiments toward the US.

They also added that most survey results show there is not a structural anti-Americanism in Turkey and if the US would like to see more sympathy from the Turkish public, Washington D.C. should strengthen its contacts with Ankara and take Turkey's interests and warnings seriously in the area of foreign policy.

TESEV researchers also pointed out positive trends in Turkey-US relations, as 53 percent of the survey respondents see the future of the relations positively, and the respondents from the Southeast of Turkey were the most optimistic in that regard (60 percent).

Meanwhile, 82 percent of the respondents believe that Turkey can be a cultural model for the countries of the Middle East, 80 percent believe it can be an economic model and 72 percent say it can be a model politically.

The researchers also indicated that the Turkish public embraces peaceful solutions, which are stressed in Turkish foreign policy, as 75 percent of the respondents support Turkey's efforts for mediation in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, 50 percent support rapprochement with Armenia and 58 percent support sending peace forces to Lebanon. Of the respondents, 52 percent also indicate satisfaction -- versus 31 percent dissatisfaction -- with the way foreign policy decisions are made.

Twenty-five percent of the respondents also regard the prime minister, and another 25 percent the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, as the most important actor in foreign policy making, while only 5 percent think that Parliament is most important, while 2 percent say that the army is most important.

Turkey Leads The Way For The Coming Islamic Caliphate
by Joel Richardson
wnd.com

Several years ago, I began publicly stating that the world will witness the rise of a Neo-Ottoman Caliphate. With the Islamist party in Turkey poised to win yet another sweeping election victory next week, now is another appropriate moment to revisit the subject.

The first thing that the West must understand concerning the concept of the caliphate is that it is somewhat of a blank canvas for Muslims. To the Muslim socialist, it is through the concept of the caliphate that a socialist utopia will become a reality. For the moderate Muslim, it is in the idea of the caliphate that a tolerant Muslim empire will arise. For the radical Muslim, the caliphate is the means by which Islam will arise to supremacy in the earth. The point is that the dream of reviving a caliphate is a wide-ranging vision and is certainly not restricted to the radicals.

Second, the West must come to terms with the tectonic shift that has only recently taken place in the Middle East, beginning in 2003 in Turkey.

But first, let's define the old order of the region. This old order saw the Middle East divided up primarily between the Arab block and the Iranian block.

Imagine a random Arab Sunni Muslim (Sunnis comprise 85-90 percent of Muslims) who has long desired to see the unification of the Islamic world under a caliphate. In yearning for someone to rise up and lead the Islamic world, this Sunni Muslim first turns his eyes toward the leaders of the Arab block (Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Egypt). On one hand, he identifies with the fact that they are both Sunni and Arab. But they are also either corrupt monarchies or dictatorial autocrats and hopelessly compromised through their relationship with Israel and/or the United States. To the average Muslim, these nations are led by MINOs (Muslims in name only). Frustrated, this Muslim shifts his attention to Iran. On one hand, the Iranians are seen as courageous, bold and assertive. They thumb their noses at Israel, the United States and any who would defy them. This is admired, but there is still the gaping sectarian divide. In other words, being Shia, they are essentially heretical. Without hope, this Sunni Muslim lets out a long sigh and prays that Allah will soon raise up a genuine Muslim leader capable of reviving Islam's former glory.

This was the old order of the Middle East for the past 30 years.

But suddenly, this has all begun to change. Through the rise of the Turkish AK party over the past several years, the Middle East has experienced a political shift of tectonic proportions.

Let's briefly summarize what Prime Minister Erdogan's Islamist party has achieved in just the past few years. First, they were able to gain control of both the presidency and the seat of prime minister. They also gained a large majority in the parliament. After they win the elections on June 12, they are set to pass a bill authorizing them to literally rewrite the Turkish Constitution. This will give them far greater control over both the judiciary and the military, the two entities that have historically served as the greatest check against an Islamist takeover of government. Not surprisingly then, through two manufactured conspiracies, the ruling AK party has effectively decapitated the secularist leadership of the Turkish military, arresting nearly 200 top military officials. Instead of a military coup to remove the Islamist party, the Islamist AK party has successfully taken over the military. And they were masterfully successful.

Erdogan has also filled the courts with his own judges. Over 70 percent of the police are also Islamists. And finally, the Islamists have gone after the media. Erdogan's son now runs one outlet, while a second company was hit with a $2.3 billion fine. There are more Turkish journalists in prison than any other nation in the world.

We are now nearing the conclusion of a perfectly executed plan to purge Turkey of its secular Kemalist system and ensconce the Islamists in power indefinitely. In the name of democracy, the Islamists have toppled what was once a shining beacon of hope for the Middle East. And behind it all is the architect, Prime Minister Erdogan, who once projected, "Democracy is like a streetcar. You use it to get you where you wish to go, and then you get off."

Today, Turkey has a thriving economy as well as the largest army in the region. And of course, only Turkey has a proven track record of ruling the Middle East. Now place yourself back in the shoes of the Sunni Muslim. None of these facts are missed by those who have been looking for a viable Islamist strong horse to get behind. And it is precisely for this reason that Erdogan is now the single most popular leader in the region. The starry-eyed Islamists of the Muslim world have solidly fixed their hopes on Turkey.

Finally, it is absolutely essential to understand Turkish Islamist methodology. Since 9/11, Ankara has been all too willing to portray themselves as the most natural counterbalance and answer to al-Qaida and radical Islamism globally. For the past decade, the Turks have pursued the methodology of the world's most powerful Islamist group, the Fethullah Gulen Movement, of which Prime Minister Erdogan and President Gul are both students. The goal of the Gulen movement is quite simple really. They want to be endorsed. Through the use of outreach, they have successfully branded themselves as paragons of religious tolerance. While radical groups such as al-Qaida have utilized terror to achieve their goal of a caliphate, Turkish Islam has championed the approach of presenting itself in a form specifically custom-tailored to win the hearty approval of the West. But their ultimate goal is the same: the unification of the Islamic world, the revival of the caliphate. And to date, we have fully fallen for their ploy.

The Turkish goal of regional influence has progressed steadily and deliberately. Seven years ago, only myself and a few others were warning of these realities. And when we suggested such, we were mocked. Seven years from now, we'll all be looking back, asking ourselves how we could have been so blind not to have seen it sooner. 

Preparing The Hordes of Magog - Why Is The Largest Army In The Middle East About To Double Its Size?
prophecynewswatch

With Prime Minister Erdogan's Islamist AK party having seized its third landslide election victory in Turkey, many throughout the international community have been watching to see what will be next on the Turkish agenda.

Now there are strong indicators in the Turkish media that Turkey is planning on literally doubling the size of its army – this coming from the nation that already has the largest army in Middle East and the second-largest army in NATO, second only to the United States. Presently, Turkey's army has over 500,000 troops. Its army is larger than France, Germany and England combined. And now Turkish media are reporting that they are planning on adding another 500,000 paid soldiers.

According to Egemen Bağış, a state minister and Turkey's chief EU negotiator, the purpose of the army is to kill two birds with one stone, overcoming two of Turkey's biggest challenges: terrorism and unemployment. This move would create half a million new jobs for Turkey while answering once and for all Turkey's problem with Kurdish separatist terrorists in the southeast.

Bağış spoke to journalists at the Turkish ambassador's office in Brussels. "The government is prepared to hire 500,000 people. ... This structural change will also contribute to our struggle with unemployment," he said.

Turkey's nation defense minister, Vedci Gonul, stated that the new army is "the future of Turkey." But he also said that the actual number of paid soldiers is yet to be determined pending a government study. According to Gonul, the creation of such a large army could take several years to complete.

A poll conducted shows that 80 percent of Turks support the idea while only 9 percent are opposed.

Despite the government's claims that the purpose of the army would be to address terrorism, skepticism concerning such a massive force is well-deserved. First of all, creating an army this size merely to address Turkey's terrorism problem, primarily from the PKK, a Kurdish separatist group in the southeast, would be like trying to kill an ant using a nuclear warhead. Secondly, such a move certainly will only reinforce the concerns of those who believe that Turkey has broad-ranging neo-Ottoman regional aspirations.

The silence of the Western media has been surprising. Imagine Israel announcing an expansion of its forces by 500,000 men to address its Palestinian terrorism problem. Yet the Western media has yet to comment regarding Turkey's grandiose plans.

Such an expansion would be particularly concerning in light of the Turkish government's recent swing toward Islamist political alliances. They have worked to significantly reinforce strategic alliances with both Iran and Syria, two of the most well-established state sponsors of terrorism globally, while significantly cooling its relationship with Israel and the United States. Despite this, the Obama administration this past January, sold the Turkish Air Force 100 F-35 Lightning II fighter jets. Turkey already manufactures it's own F-16s.

It is also essential to once again remind ourselves of the recent accomplishments of the Islamist AK party under Prime Minister Erdogan's leadership. In just the past several years, the AK party has edged ever closer to establishing a full-blown dictatorship, all in the name of democracy. Since 2002, they have managed to accomplish the following:

•occupy the presidency;
•occupy the seat of prime minister;
•gain a large majority of seats in the parliament;
•fill the judiciary with Islamist-leaning judges;
•behead the top echelons of the military;
•infiltrate the police force (over 70 percent of officers are members the Islamist Gulen movement);
•intimidate and imprison Turkish journalists (there are more Turkish journalists in prison than any other nation in the world – more than China or Iran).

The nation's leadership is now working toward a bill authorizing them to rewrite the Turkish Constitution, giving them far more sweeping powers over the military and judiciary.

In last month's victory speech, Prime Minister Erdogan couldn't have made his regional ambitions any clearer:

"Believe me, Sarajevo won today as much as Istanbul, Beirut won as much as Izmir, Damascus won as much as Ankara, Ramallah, Nablus, Jenin, the West Bank, Jerusalem won as much as Diyarbakir."

In a follow up commentary piece, J.E. Dyer, a retired U.S. Naval intelligence officer asked how the world would take it if Nicolas Sarkozy had proclaimed that a victory for him was a victory for Moscow as much as Paris, for Washington as much as Lyon, for Ankara as much as Marseilles. Dyer then very appropriately reminded us that such comments are, "imperialist at worst, absurdly arrogant at best – to speak of your electoral victories as conferring benefits on foreign humanity – especially on those once occupied by your nation in its days of empire."

For years, several others and I have been warning of Turkey's neo-Ottoman dreams and regional ambitions. And for just as many years, the compliant left-wing media has mocked the notion. Within the next several years, with doubling of the Turkish army, it appears as though there will be 500,000 more reasons to worry about Turkey's regional ascension.

Interesting and timely article - thanks!