Uluslararası Toplumun Suriye’yle İlgili Hoş Olmayan Seçenekleri

Posted on 02/29/2012 by admin

BARIN KAYAOĞLU

29 Şubat 2012

[For the English version, click here]

Yabancı güçlerin tekmelediği topun üzerinde "Suriyeli kanı" yazıyor. Uluslararası camia bu görüntünün gerçeğe dönüşmemesi için dikkatli olmak zorunda.

Rusya’nın ve Çin’in Birleşmiş Milletler Güvenlik Konseyi’ndeki vetolarının ardından uluslararası toplum Suriye Devlet Başkanı Beşar Esad’ı devirmek için yeni yöntemler aramaya başladı. Geçen hafta Tunus’ta toplanan “Suriye’nin Dostları” toplantısı da düzinelerce irili ufaklı gruptan oluşan Suriye Ulusal Konseyi’ni bütünlüğü olan bir cephe haline getirmeyi amaçlıyordu. Yabancı güçler bu yolla Konsey’e önümüzdeki günlerde “sürgündeki Suriye hükümeti” olarak tanımayı düşünüyor olabilir. Ancak Suriye’nin dostlarının yapmaları gereken daha çok şey var.

Diğer seçenekler BM gözetimi altında Suriye’de “güvenli bölgeler” oluşturmak ve nizami Suriye Ordusu’ndan kaçan askerlerin oluşturduğu Özgür Suriye Ordusu’nu silahlandırmak. Bu açıdan da Türkiye’nin “bütün seçenekler masada” tehdidini de “güvenli bölge” oluşturmak, hatta daha fazlasını yapma eğilimi olarak okumak gerekiyor.

Uluslararası camianın Suriye konusunda artık ciddi şekilde harekete geçmesi gerektiği kesin. Suriye ayaklanması başlayalı bir yıl geçti ve 8 bin insan öldü. Ancak uluslararası camia “güvenli bölgelerin” ya da Özgür Suriye Ordusu’na daha fazla silah ve mühimmat vermenin sorunu çözeceğine inanıyorsa kendisini kandırıyor demektir. 1990’larda Bosna-Hersek’te ve Ruanda’daki insani harekatlar, “güvenli bölge” kavramının başarısızlığını ortaya koydu. Daha da kötüsü, güçlü bir barış gücünün yokluğu saldırgan tarafı daha çok insanı öldürmeye teşvik edebilir.

Bu da demek oluyor ki yabancı devletler kapsamlı bir askeri harekatla Suriye’de barışı tesis edip edemeyeceklerini ciddi şekilde düşünmeye başlamalılar.

Ancak “askeri harekat” ibaresini hayata geçirmek, cümle içinde kullanmaktan çok daha zor. Halihazırda Rusya ve Çin, Batılı devletlerin, Turkiye’nin ve Arap Birliği’nin “Suriye’nin içişlerine” karışmalarını istemediklerini belli ettiler. Benzer şekilde, İran’ın da kaynaklarını (bkz. Hizbullah) Şam’daki müttefiklerini korumak için çok daha etkin bir şekilde kullanacağından emin olabiliriz. Ayrıca Batı’da, Türkiye’de ve diğer Arap ülkelerinde kamuoyunun Suriye’ye kapsamlı bir askeri müdahaleye ne kadar destek verecekleri de meçhul.

Eğer uluslararası camia Suriye’de Baas rejimini ortadan kaldırma konusunda kararlıysa, Esad sonrasında en çok tehlike arz eden noktayı da görmek zorunda: Suriye’nin çok mezhepli yapısı göz önüne alındığında yabancı müdahale – tıpkı Irak’taki gibi – dini çatışmaları alevlendirebilir. Bu da Suriye halkının durumunu şimdikinden bile daha kötü bir hale sokar.

Suriye’deki trajediyi gönülsüz siyasi nutukların çözemeyeceği aşikar. Ancak kararlı bir askeri müdahale de çözüm olmayabilir.

—

Barın Kayaoğlu, Amerika’da Virginia Üniversitesi’nde Tarih Bölümü’nde doktora adayıdır ve her türlü yoruma, soruya ve fikir alışverişine açıktır. Kendisiyle bağlantıya geçmek için buraya tıklayın.

Ayrıca kendisini Twitter’dan (@barinkayaoglu) ve Facebook’tan (BarınKayaoğlu.com) da takip edebilirsiniz.

Print Friendly

Posted in Global, Syria, Turkey-Foreign Relations / Türkiye-Dış Politika, United States-Foreign Relations | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

The International Community’s Unpleasant Options in Syria

Posted on 02/27/2012 by admin

BARIN KAYAOĞLU

27 February 2012

[Yazının Türkçesi için buraya tıklayın]

"Syrian blood" kicked around by foreign countries. The international community should be careful to prevent that image from becoming a reality.

In the aftermath of the Russian and Chinese vetoes at the United Nations Security Council, the international community is looking for new means to oust Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. The “Friends of Syria” meeting held in Tunisia last week aimed to remake the Syrian National Council – a coalition comprising dozens of different opposition groups – into a more cohesive front. It’s quite possible that foreign governments are laying the groundwork to recognize the Council as a “government-in-exile” in the near future. But Syria’s friends have a long way to go.

Another option is to arm the Free Syrian Army, a militia group primarily composed of soldiers who have deserted the regular army.

Turkey, which has increased its profile in the Middle East in the last ten years and was a close partner of President Assad until the uprisings began, has invoked the “all options are on the table” threat. The Free Syrian Army is already using Turkish territory for its activities and the Turkish government’s statements should be read as establishing “safe areas” and perhaps more.

There is no question that the international community has to do something about the tragedy in Syria. It’s been a year and over 8,000 dead Syrians since the uprisings have begun. But the international community will be fooling itself in thinking that “safe areas” or giving more arms and ammo to the Free Syrian Army will accomplish anything. Humanitarian missions in Bosnia-Herzegovina and Rwanda in the 1990s amply demonstrated that “safe areas” are half-hearted attempts that do not succeed. More important, the absence of a strong international force only emboldens the aggressor to kill more – something that the international community is supposed to prevent.

As such, the international community has to think about whether it should and could make peace through a full-scale military intervention in Syria.

Talking the talk about military intervention is easier than walking the walk. Russia and China have already demonstrated that they do not want Western countries, Turkey, and the Arab League in Syria. It is almost certain that Iran will mobilize its resources and assets (read: Hezbollah) to shore up its allies in Damascus. It is equally doubtful whether public opinion in the West, Turkey, and Arab countries will support full-scale military action against Syria.

If the international community is really determined to overthrow the Baath regime, it has to see the biggest risk about post-Assad Syria: given its multi-confessional nature, foreign intervention may very well exacerbate religious discord in Syria (à la Iraq). That will put the people of Syria in a situation even worse than the present.

Half-hearted political talk will certainly not solve Syria’s tragedy. But determined action may not be the answer either.

—

Barın Kayaoğlu is a Ph.D. candidate in history at The University of Virginia. He welcomes all comments, questions, and exchanges. To contact him, click here.

You can also follow him on Twitter (@barinkayaoglu) and Facebook (BarınKayaoğlu.com).

Print Friendly

Posted in European Union / Avrupa Birliği, Syria, Turkey-Foreign Relations / Türkiye-Dış Politika, United States-Foreign Relations | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Democracy, Peace, and Prosperity in the Middle East: Victims of the War against Iran

Posted on 02/19/2012 by admin

BARIN KAYAOĞLU

19 February 2012

An attack against Iran will have several disastrous results.

Given the Iranian government’s threats about closing off the Straits of Hormuz in the event of an attack on its nuclear facilities, hostilities that last even for a few days could shoot the price of oil through the roof. To be sure, the United States and the European Union are trying to prevent that outcome by cutting off Iran’s oil exports and goading other oil-exporting countries to increase their production. That way, the U.S. and European countries hope to offset possible shortfall before it occurs.

But if a war does break out and Iran manages to destroy even a few of its Gulf neighbors’ (especially Saudi Arabia) oil facilities, the surge in prices could become somewhat permanent. Even if the rise in oil prices were to last for a few months, it could destroy the prospects of global economic recovery in this decade. It can be argued that the flashpoint for the global economic downturn occurred in May 2008 when the price of oil reached $150 / barrel. The price of oil is about $120 / barrel these days. In short, we are not too far off from the tipping point. A war in the Persian Gulf that wrecks oil production facilities will push the world economy down the drain.

But even if an attack against Iran does not cause economic meltdown, its long-term consequences would certainly be disastrous. The Iranian government will retaliate against Israel and perhaps other U.S. allies in the region (several Iranian officials have already threatened Turkey and informed observers argue that Saudi Arabia would be targeted as well).

Although hostilities might die down relatively quickly, societies in the region would be militarized for the visible future. For example, an attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities will convince its leaders beyond any doubt that they need nuclear weapons to deter future aggression. An attack aiming to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons will lead to the opposite result sooner or later. Worse, it will lead Iran’s neighbors to pursue “The Bomb” as well.

A permanent cold war in the Middle East – especially one that involves a nuclear arms race – will not even be the most disastrous result of an attack against Iran. That honor (!) will go to the forceful end to Middle Eastern peoples’ demands to live more dignified lives. In the aftermath of an attack against Iran, it will be very easy for the authoritarian rulers in the Middle East to thwart demands for democracy at home by raising the specter of war abroad. Democratization efforts will be hurt not only in countries being swept by the Arab Spring, but also in Turkey and Iran, where democracy has suffered significant setbacks in the past few years. In Israel, where democracy is also under threat, the peace camp could be silenced for good.

After September 11, the Bush administration had embarked on an ambitious plan to democratize the “Greater Middle East” and hoped to use the invasion of Iraq to create a ripple effect in the region. Recent events demonstrate that the region’s peoples are the best agents for democratic and peaceful change in the Middle East. An attack against Iran will end all that.

—

Barın Kayaoğlu is a Ph.D. candidate in history at The University of Virginia. He welcomes all comments, questions, and exchanges. To contact him, click here.

You can also follow him on Twitter (@barinkayaoglu) and Facebook (BarınKayaoğlu.com).

Print Friendly

Posted in Global, Iran, United States-Foreign Relations | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

“Let’s See What Happens Next” in Turkey

Posted on 02/14/2012 by admin

BARIN KAYAOĞLU

14 February 2012

[Yazının Türkçesi için buraya tıklayın]

I sentence you to...life on trial!

Recently, Turkey boasted a Chief of General Staff as a member of Ergenekon – a far-right nationalist network of military officers, policemen, academics, and journalists – who allegedly planned to overthrow the AKP government in 2005-07. Now, the country’s spy chief, Hakan Fidan, the Undersecretary of the National Intelligence Organization (Milli İstihbarat Teşkilatı – MİT), is alleged to be a member of KCK, the political wing of the Kurdish group PKK, which is designated as a terrorist organization by Turkey, the United States, and the European Union.

If this legal mishmash had occurred in another country, Turks would be laughing themselves to the floor. Unfortunately, it’s all very serious, very sad, and very real.

The current trend of legal absurdity really began when 34 Turkish Kurds, four of whom were PKK members, came back to Turkey from Camp Mahmur in Northern Iraq in October 2009. The 34 were part of a few thousand Turkish Kurds who had taken refuge in Northern Iraq during the intense fighting between Turkish government forces and the PKK in the mid-1990s.

The return of the “Mahmur group” turned into a circus at once. Public prosecutors questioned the four PKK activists at Habur border crossing. Even though the activists expressly said that they never regretted being PKK members, the prosecutors decided not to press charges against them because they “expressed regret” under a law that pardons PKK members who have not engaged in violence and “express regret” upon their return.

Meanwhile, tens of thousands of PKK sympathizers showed up at the border gate and treated the Mahmur folks as if they had won Turkey’s Super League. At first, the state and the AKP government tried to downplay the commotion. But as public backlash built up, state prosecutors initiated legal proceedings against the Mahmur 34. Frustrated and unwilling to spend time in jail, a majority of them went back to Northern Iraq.

The episode is indicative of the cluelessness that has become the Turkish legal system. The arrest of hundreds of politicians, journalists, policeman, and soldiers for being part of KCK, Ergenekon, and affiliated groups is another example of the state of (in)justice in Turkey. Especially puzzling is the arrest of the journalist Nedim Şener for being a member of Ergenekon. Mr. Şener had uncovered Ergenekon’s connection to the murder of the Armenian Turkish journalist Hrant Dink in 2007. Also puzzling is the case of police chief Hanefi Avcı, who has been in prison since 2010 for allegedly leading a leftist terror group called “Revolutionary Headquarters” (Devrimci Karargah). Mr. Avcı had spent years of his career chasing leftist groups.

Ergenekon, KCK, and related cases have been pending since 2007 and have not resulted in convictions or acquittals. Hundreds of people have been away from their families since forever. That is unacceptable even by Turkish standards.

So what does the title of this post have to do with all that? Well, it actually comes from one of the most famous short stories by Turkish political satirist Aziz Nesin.

Once upon a time, a rich sheik settled in Istanbul. Soon, he fell in love and married the beautiful yet very gullible daughter of a religious family. One day, the man came home from work and asked his wife how her day went. The girl related:

-          I went to the movie theater. Even though the hall was empty, a man sat right next to me.

Curious, the sheik commented: “let’s see what happens next.” The wife continued:

-          The movie ended, I left the cinema. But the man kept following me.

“Let’s see what happens next,” the sheik repeated.

-          Well the man not only followed me to the apartment – he also let himself in.

-          Let’s see what happens next.

Then the girl revealed how it all ended:

-          Well, nothing happened. He and I ended up playing that funny game that you and I play every night.

The sheik, perfectly aware of his poor wife’s naiveté, left the matter at that. It’s better, he thought, to let bygones be bygones.

Those who wonder what will happen to Turkey are similar to the poor husband who kept asking “let’s see what happens next.” It’s obvious which way Turkey is headed. The question is, who is going to put a stop to it and how.

—

Barın Kayaoğlu is a Ph.D. candidate in history at The University of Virginia. He welcomes all comments, questions, and exchanges. To contact him, click here.

You can also follow him on Twitter (@barinkayaoglu) and Facebook (BarınKayaoğlu.com).

Print Friendly

Posted in Turkey-Domestic Politics / Türkiye-İç Politika | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Türkiye’de “Du Bakali Nolcek” Diye Sormak

Posted on 02/11/2012 by admin

BARIN KAYAOĞLU

11 Şubat 2012

[For the English version, click here]

Ercan Akyol, Milliyet

Artık sadece Ergenekon’a üye olduğu iddia edilen bir Genelkurmay başkanımız yok. Şimdi de KCK bağlantılı olduğu söylenen bir MİT müsteşarımız var.

Böyle bir adli abukluk kendi ülkemizde değil de başka bir yerde geçse komik olurdu. Ama maalesef durum böyle değil.

Aslında işlerin bu noktaya geleceği Ekim 2009’da Kuzey Irak’taki Mahmur kampından gelen vatandaşlara hem örgüt sempatizanlarının hem de devletin gösterdiği muameleden belliydi. Mahmur grubu arasındaki PKK’lılar örgüte üye olmaktan pişman olmadıklarını belirttikleri halde “pişmanlık yasası”ndan faydalandırılarak göstermelik bir sorgulamadan sonra serbest bırakılmışlardı. Karşılamaya gelen vatandaşlar da Mahmurluları sanki Süper Lig’i kazanmışlar gibi bağırlarına basmışlardı. Devlet ve AKP hükümeti bu görüntülere ilk önce ses çıkarmadı. Ancak diğer kesimlerden gelen tepkiler üzerine Mahmur’dan gelenler hakkında PKK üyeliğinden tekrar soruşturma açılmıştı. Gruptan birçoğu Mahmur’a geri döndü; bazılarının hapse girmesi söz konusu.

Yüzlerce siyasetçinin, gazetecinin, askerin, polisin ve akademisyenin KCK’ya, Ergenekon’a ya da başka bir örgüte üye oldukları iddiasıyla tutuklanmaları adalet sistemindeki keşmekeşe daha da iyi bir örnek. Bu isimler arasında Hrant Dink cinayetinde Ergenekon bağlantılarını ortaya çıkaran ve Ergenekoncu olduğu iddiasıyla tutuklanan Nedim Şener ve yıllarını sol örgütlerle mücadele ederek geçirmiş ancak bir buçuk yıl önce aşırı sol “Devrimci Karargah” örgütünün lideri olduğu iddasıyla tutuklanan emniyet müdürü Hanefi Avcı var.

2007’den beri süren davalarda ne mahkumiyet ne de beraat kararının çıkmamış olması Türkiye koşullarında bile utanç verici bir görüntü.

Peki bu yazının başlığının bütün bunlarla ne alakası var? Başlık, Aziz Nesin’in en meşhur hikayelerinden birinden geliyor.

Zamanında zengin bir Arap şeyhi İstanbul’a yerleşir. Daha sonra da dindar bir ailenin çok güzel ama bir o kadar da saf kızıyla hayatını birleştirir. Bir gün işten eve gelen şeyh, karısının gününün nasıl geçtiğini sorar. Kızcağız başlar anlatmaya:

-          Sinemaya gittim. Salon bomboş olduğu halde bir adam geldi yanıma oturdu.

Şeyh merak içinde “e du bakali nolcek?” der, karısı anlatmaya devam eder.

-          Film bitti, sinemadan çıktım. Adam beni takip etmeye başladı.

Şeyh “e du bakali nolcek?” der yine.

-          Adam beni eve kadar takip etmekle kalmadı, bir de içeri girdi.

-          Du bakali nolcek?

Kızcağız en sonunda bütün saflığıyla “canım birşey olmadı, seninle her gece oynadığımız oyunu adam da benimle oynadı” der. Şeyh ise karısının saflığından dolayı üstelemez. Zaten yapacak birşey yoktur – olan olmuştur bir kere.

Bugünlerde Türkiye’de olanların nereye vardığından emin olmayanlar da “du bakali nolcek?” diyen zavallı kocanın halini andırıyor. Türkiye’nin başına gelecek olan belli de bu gidişe kimin ne şekilde “dur” diyeceği çok meçhul.

—

Barın Kayaoğlu, Amerika’da Virginia Üniversitesi’nde Tarih Bölümü’nde doktora adayıdır ve her türlü yoruma, soruya ve fikir alışverişine açıktır. Kendisiyle bağlantıya geçmek için buraya tıklayın.

Ayrıca kendisini Twitter’dan (@barinkayaoglu) ve Facebook’tan (BarınKayaoğlu.com) da takip edebilirsiniz.

Print Friendly

Posted in Turkey-Domestic Politics / Türkiye-İç Politika | Tagged , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment