Turkey Squeezed by Russian-backed Offensives in Syria
The cessation of hostilities was to begin in Syria on February 19. As was the case with the late 2011 and mid-2012 ceasefire efforts, this one is likely to fail. Instead of halting fire, the Syrian government is currently trying to isolate and assert dominion over the rebel-held portion of Aleppo, and, just as importantly, to block armed opposition supply lines extending down from Turkey. The Syrian government and its Russian and Iranian allies want to impose surrender terms on the armed opposition, not negotiate a compromise political deal.
Not only is the battle for Aleppo sending tens of thousands of desperate people fleeing toward Turkey, but the fall of the rebel-held city would deliver a major blow to Ankara’s Syria policy.
Gonul Tol, director of MEI’s Center for Turkish Studies, delivered the following testimony at a hearing of the U.S. House of Representatives’ Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Europe, Eurasia, and Emerging Threats on February 3, 2016. Click here for video of the hearing.
Mr. Chairman, members of the Committee, it is an honor to be invited to speak with you today about the political trends in Turkey in 2016.
Has Jordan Acquiesced to Assad Regime Offensive in Southern Syria?
Jordan is yet to react publicly to a fresh land assault by Syrian regime forces, backed by Hezbollah and Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps fighters, against rebel-held towns in southern Syria.
Turkey Should Avoid Getting Involved in the Saudi-Iran Row
Turkey’s reaction to the latest spat between Saudi Arabia and Iran spells more trouble for Ankara at a time when it is already at loggerheads with many of its neighbors. Initial remarks by Deputy Prime Minister Numan Kurtulmus criticizing both sides were an attempt to keep Turkey out of the rift. He was upstaged, however, by Turkey’s foreign ministry, which followed up with a statement singling out Iran for condemnation.
Washington and Ankara are in yet another difficult phase in a relationship cycle that runs from very good to very bad. American public opinion about another country forms slowly, but persists through time once set. As Turkey changes, we keep trying to fit new evidence into the old paradigm. At some point, the contradictions are too obvious to explain away, and the new narrative emerges. Right now, Americans are caught in that dilemma regarding Turkey. Unless we have a better idea of which Turkey we are dealing with, we are certain to make bad choices.
Mega Projects and the Limits of Urban Planning in Megacities: The Case of Istanbul in the AKP Era
This essay examines the politics of the Istanbul Master Plan, which was created by the Istanbul Metropolitan Planning and Urban Design Center (IMP), focusing on the role of non-governmental organizations. The essay addresses three main questions. First, to what have NGOs been involved in the formulation, implementation, and oversight of the Istanbul Master Plan? Second, what form has their activism taken and what has been the response of the AKP government? And third, what are the prospects for achieving the balance between conservation and development originally envisioned by the Istanbul Master Plan?
According to the UN’s World Urbanization Prospects 2014, there are 28 “megacities” worldwide (i.e., urban agglomerations with populations in excess of 10 million). By 2030 another dozen will likely be added to their ranks.
Since the early days of the republic, Turkey’s deep state has been seen as the clandestine defender of the Turkish establishment and the secular and nationalist ideology established by Turkey’s founder, Mustafa Kemal Ataturk.
Only a few authors have works that can be found on both floors of the Oman Library at The Middle East Institute, and fewer still that have a personal connection to both the institute and the history of the region. The late Ambassador Richard B. Parker can claim this status, having served 31 years in the Foreign Service and as the third editor of The Middle East Journal. He was also a longtime MEI scholar-in-residence.
In a stunning electoral comeback that has surprised everyone, including its own legislators, Turkey’s ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) captured almost 50 percent of the votes, but well over 50 percent of parliamentary seats, in Sunday’s elections. There are many lingering questions. Considering that even the pro-government pollsters did not foresee such a victory, many have asked whether the elections were free and fair. If so, how did the AKP manage to reverse its electoral fortunes in just five months in a country that has been mired in chaos and violence during that time?
The Turkish electorate is going to the polls on Sunday for the second time in just over five months. After 13 years in power, the ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) failed to secure enough votes in June to form a majority government. In the hope another vote could deliver a parliamentary majority to his party, President Recep Tayyip Erdogan called for snap elections. But polls indicate that Erdogan might not get what he wants.
Turkish Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu is at the United Nations in New York, making another push for Turkey’s long-standing demand for a safe zone in northern Syria, while President Recep Tayyip Erdogan seems to have realized that it might be a long shot given recent developments.
A recent public opinion poll conducted by Ipsos suggests that the Turkish public is supportive of foreign aid, with around 45 percent of those surveyed indicating that Turkey should spend 3 to 10 percent of its national budget on such assistance. Material and ideological factors rather than moral imperatives play a role in this opinion.
