Would they take Erdoğan seriously?
The German president’s words on democracy, human rights and the situation of the judiciary in Turkey have angered Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan. As a matter of fact, no extra effort is needed to make him angry. He can get angry, steamed up, or snap for any reason whatsoever.
Indeed, we are used to this but there is something called “diplomatic courtesy,” according to which it is not a sign of good manners to scold a foreign leader you are hosting.
The prime minister does not have to agree with everything the guest president says. He has the right to reply to those words that he does not agree with; that’s only normal. What is abnormal is the attitude he adopts when he is replying, the style he uses. He does this on purpose because he is aware that the Justice and Development Party (AKP) voter enjoys this type of bullying.
The average AKP voter, listening to the prime minister raging at the Germen president at home or at the coffee house, would say “well done,” there is no doubt about that. For this reason, the prime minister speaks with a style that he has no difficulty using because of his nature.
German daily Die Welt wrote that State Minister Michael Roth had said Erdoğan’s emotional statements were “not proportional either in content or in tone.”
They may be surprised, but we are not.
The same daily, in its interpretation of Erdoğan’s speech, wrote, “Even though you can do without it, courtesy is a virtue.” This is too subtle a sentence for our guys to understand.
Well, even though this matter seems to be related only to Erdoğan’s personality, because of its consequences it is a development that will profoundly affect our country.
How credible can he be when he says, on the one hand, “I will join the European Union,” while on the other hand he attacks the president of an EU country, who is defending EU values, like this? Erdoğan’s advisors may have difficulty replying to this, but let me answer: None.
He will not be credible. He will not be taken seriously. They no longer see Erdoğan as “the man trying to save democracy in an Islamic country.”
What they see is a provincial politician keen on authoritarianism, immersed in corruption claims, who does not care about democratic institutions and rules, and who is impolite.
Governor’s presence a security risk
Once more the Istanbul governor has declared a state of emergency for May 1. Ferry stations are being closed; it will not be possible to go to and from some districts. The reason for this is that the governor has received a tip off and two Kalashnikovs have been seized.
If May 1 is celebrated in Taksim, “the risk created by these long barreled weapons in the city” could damage our people!
If there is a risk created by long barreled weapons in the city then why are you occupying your position? What good is your police chief?
Why was there no incident at football championship celebrations in Taksim? There is only one reason: There was no police around. The same is true with the Newruz celebrations in Diyarbakır.
The police, which should normally assure by its presence that no incidents will happen, has come under the hands of the AKP government and the AKP governors.
If police is there, then your life is at danger. If there is no police, then there are no incidents, enjoy it, finish your rally and go home.
In other words, the security risk in this city is no longer related to the number of long barreled weapons. It is the police chiefs and governors themselves who create the security risk for the citizen.
