The confessions of the Turkish prime minister

The prime minister recently spoke on Al Jazeera, saying, “If there is no Turkish support for the Syrian people, then how did they defend themselves? Would they have been able to defend Aleppo? If today there is an actual moderate Syrian opposition, this is because of Turkey’s support. If today the regime cannot control the entire territory of the country, this is due to Turkey’s and some other states’ support.”

The prime minister’s words point to Turkey’s responsibility for the situation in Syria today.

First, let us reiterate that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad was a dictator who killed his own people, committed humanitarian crimes and suppressed the opposition. 

However, we also have to say that even though he was a bloody-handed dictator, he was the leader of the country called Syria, recognized by the international community.  

The prime minister is openly admitting that Turkey, together with certain other countries, has responsibility in disrupting this country’s territorial integrity, dragging it into civil war, forcing more than 4 million people to leave their homes and causing the death of more than 400,000 people.  

The prime minister may think these expressions will not cause any legal consequences, which is true. The point we’ve reached today may look like this debate is now a thing of the past. 

The prime minister said that if there was a “moderate” opposition in Syria, this was thanks to Turkey.

He said “there is,” but they have fallen off the map now. 

He is in an illusionary world. Apparently he does not remember the difficulties with the “train and equip” program and how, after training and equipping them, the “moderate” opponents sent to Syria barely saved their lives after handing their weapons to al-Nusra. 

And, we are expecting this group to see the facts in the entirely wrong Syrian policy and correct its mistakes. 
It looks as if we will be waiting for a long time.

Climate change 

In a police operation in southeastern Gaziantep, several books were “seized” in a search of suspects’ homes. These books were published during the period when the “resolution process” was popular. Provincial governor’s offices and the military were ordered to not disrupt the resolution process, while the outlawed Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) was busy stockpiling weapons. 

This was the climate and no prosecutor found any terror propaganda in those books. Now, the climate has changed and the writers of these books are prosecuted. 

And they expect us to believe that justice is independent and impartial.

Rule of law? 

A circular issued by the prime minister’s office demanded public employees associated with organizations which pose a risk to national security should be punished. The prime minister said civil servants who were assisting terror organizations would be fired from their posts. 

Any citizen, a public employee or not, is already published if they commit a crime; this is why we have courts. 

Why is there a need to issue a circular? 

There is only one reason for this: To be able to fire public employees who defend undesired opinions based on claims that are difficult to prove in court.  

Obviously, they want to start a period resembling the McCarthy era in the U.S. This is exactly a situation that should not happen in a state with rule of law.