The US's problem with Erdoğan

We had said that we can say the AK Party has by now lost its in-power opposition discourse within the country. Because by now, at the national level, the centers of power that look down on the people and regard themselves as above the law have been dissolved, and their power has been completely demolished. From this point on, there is no center of resistance within the country to which excuses could be pointed for things that needed to be done but could not be. The existing opposition has now reached a level that can be taken on by debating to the very end in a democratic debating environment and by settling accounts in elections. I think there is no need to say that this is in itself a great gain for Turkey.

But as the AK Party's opposition discourse was drawn back to its normal limits within the country during its second period, what is the result of its having continued to increase at the global level? Has the AK Party discovered the political profitability of the rhetoric we criticized for years, that the seven powers are against us and that we are surrounded by enemies? Moreover, is drawing attention to external centers a rhetoric of excuse for covering up failures within the country?

First of all, everyone will appreciate that, with its successful development achievements in government from the very beginning, the AK Party has never needed an excuse to explain what it could not do. From education to health, from transportation to social services, from the defense industry to general industrial production, from housing to urban transformation and the level of national income, it made Turkey live a complete development revolution without pause.

But these developments in Turkey were taking place while other developments were unfolding in the world and around us, and although Turkey was always in a constructive attitude, within these developments we found ourselves facing hostile moves targeting Turkey. The Arab Spring process was not a process that Turkey started, but it was a development it welcomed with respect as a reflection of the will of peoples. These processes placed Turkey, unintentionally, at the center of the greatest change of the century. Together with the inhuman counter-revolution coups carried out against it, a hypocritical axis, initially undeclared, formed against Turkey. What this axis represents in the world today, and which values, is clear. Coups, massacres, human rights violations, the saw: the name of every kind of intrigue, occupation and corruption order in the Islamic world. And this order does its business without any problem with either the USA or the EU countries.

While Turkey was advancing on its own path, it was subjected to several coup attempts in which the head of this system, the USA, and other countries took part as financiers. In the USA it is said that Recep Tayyip Erdoğan's popularity has declined because he is too authoritarian. Is it really because of that? When has the USA ever had a problem with dictators?

Why does it have no problem with Sisi, who massacred three thousand people from his own people in one day in the most savage way and established the most despotic government the world may ever have seen from the hour he came to power?

Why does it have no problem with an MBS who displayed the savagery of having his own citizen cut to pieces with a saw by his assigned killers in his own country's consulate in Istanbul? It is very clear that the USA's problem with Erdoğan is different. Frankly, it is precisely because Erdoğan is a result of the functioning of real democracy in Turkey that he creates no satisfaction in the USA. Because the will of the people emerges from this democracy, and the will of the people will not turn a blind eye to the USA developing a terrorist organization into a threat against Turkey, which the USA had promised was an ally, by supporting it. The USA did this in the nineties. It ran the same process in northern Iraq, and for years no one from Turkey could raise a voice against it. But now neither is Turkey the Turkey of the nineties, nor is there in Erdoğan a personality that would turn a blind eye to this.

Meanwhile, because a speech Joe Biden made months ago has only just leaked to the press, the AK Party is almost to be blamed. Truthfully, I too only just saw it. Nothing could be more natural. In terms of timing, what difference can there be between criticizing this 7 months ago and criticizing it today? Biden has reflected very well a perspective that will not be passed over idly and will not change from one day to the next, and has also explained very well a series of policies understood to stem from that perspective.

Biden gave a speech that is like a confession of how America looks at Erdoğan and what it will do to overthrow him, and also of what it has done so far. Did he say something we did not know? No. The USA that supports FETÖ inside us, and also PKK, YPG, PYD, has them carry out whatever operations it wants whenever it wants, and tries to disrupt Turkey's stability. The USA that, by supporting Israel unconditionally, has put into effect the plan of completely annexing Jerusalem, and an Erdoğan who opposes it.

Here, is the subject and target Erdoğan, or Turkey?

If you like, let us also ask this: Instead of Erdoğan, would the USA or the EU prefer a more democratic government in Turkey, or a real dictator who has shut his ears to the voice of his people and who has no problem with Turkey moving away from its model that inspired the Arab revolutions, with the region, Turkey included, being further fragmented and divided, and with the Turkish Blue Homeland in the Mediterranean being plundered?