The conflict in Syria has raised many questions about international intervention. Critics from the right and left alike have berated President Obama for staying America’s hand and thus preventing any form of intervention. Indeed without US capabilities, as much as other states like France and the UK would like to intervene, they are unable to.

The Obama administration came under media fire especially when its self-imposed catalyst for intervention was reached: the use of chemical weapons by the regime. Obama’s red line was discovered to be more hazy than expected and the press cartoonists had a field day.

However, it is not unusual for democracies to display incoherent foreign policies given the political representatives’ dependence on popularity with the public. Other countries do not face the same level of scrutiny and Russia has been particularly coherent throughout the length of this conflict and even throughout the past decades. Vladimir Putin has himself drawn lines in the sand before, the difference being he tends to keep them. The West might want to borrow a few lessons from Putin’s playbook.

Chechnya

The first indicator of such an attitude was Chechnya. In the primordial days of Vladimir Putin’s top level political career, the PM was touted by President Boris Ieltsin as a prodigal son to bring order to Russia. The most distinctive legacy of Vladimir Vladimirovich’s first stint as PM was undoubtedly the 2^nd Chechen War. Under his premiership Russia adopted a very clear policy of rejecting any secession that was not based on the territorial precedents of the USSR administrative divisions. The Russian Federation itself, while the self-proclaimed successor state of the SU, based its legitimacy for independence on self-determination for all the Soviet Socialist Republics.

Until then there was no consensus or doctrine on where the limits for self-determination should be drawn and Moscow had even briefly recognised the Chechen Republic. At the end of the first Putin government, Chechnya was subdued and Russia’s territorial integrity was no longer a matter for debate.

Missile Defence

With the internal front consolidated, Putin turned to foreign affairs. Unlike what Russian leaders had always pleaded, NATO progressively encroached into Eastern Europe by extending membership and similar agreements to central and Eastern European states. Russian leaders claimed that Eastern Europe should be left as a neutral buffer zone but Moscow was politely ignored and given the NATO-Russia Council as a reassurance.

In the 2000s, with Putin now President and Russia reeling in considerable oil profits, the tone changed and soon enough so did the actions: NATO’s plans to establish a missile defence system for Europe which was partly based in Poland, the Czech Republic and Romania met with considerable Russian resistance and counter-pressure. Russia still maintains its Cold War nuclear armed intermediate-range missile deterrence, which makes Russian diplomatic outrage somewhat bewildering (as NATO’s limited systems could never hope to best Russian capabilities) but even if only motivated by Moscow’s preference to keep Eastern Europe as unimportant for NATO as possible, this has however been a battle that Vladimir Putin has chosen to fight.

L-39s seem to be a weapon of choice in small scale civil wars and certainly prominently featured in the Arab Spring in both Libya and Syria

It is difficult to assess whether it is being won since NATO’s system is yet to be made operational but officially the deployment continues. Will Russia’s threat to redirect the targeting of its own ballistic devices towards Eastern European sites be fulfilled and will it persuade NATO to recede? It would seem Moscow is attempting to put forth objections to further fading of the geostrategic neutrality of Eastern Europe but given these countries inclusion into NATO, it is too late for that.

Georgia

Another important red line was that drawn against the colour revolutions which Putin has now succeeded in reversing in practically every country they struck: the Orange coalition is out of power in the Ukraine, the Tulip revolution’s leaders were driven from Bishkek and then there was Georgia, the original sin. The Rose revolution was the first in which a Russophobe pro-Western regime came to power through civil society pressure. Saakashvili wasted no time in switching allegiances and soon found himself at loggerheads with Moscow. These tensions would eventually culminate in the 2008 Ossetian War, trade embargoes declared against Georgia, Russian occupation of Abkhazia and South Ossetia and finally Saakashvili’s own defeat in Georgia’s national elections.

Moscow was thus conveying a clear message: while Russia’s advanced Warsaw Pact buffer zone was now lost, the new buffer’s politically neutral integrity is sacrosanct. In other words, regardless of regime or leadership, no European state east of the ‘near abroad’ curtain – east of Belarus, Ukraine and Moldova – has permission to adopt an anti-Russia geopolitical positioning.

The US, the French and the Germans understood and backed off; Georgia’s and Ukraine’s accession to NATO was indefinitely postponed. It is not as if they could do much seeing as how their forces were not only tied in the Middle East but the campaign in Afghanistan actually depended on Russian air routes.

So far Putin has successfully drawn 2 out of 3 red lines against the West. There are those who would criticise Putin for his anti-Western stance and actually accuse him of anti-Western bias. Secretary Brzezinski notably stated as much last April in Bratislava, outraged that Moscow cannot see its interest in cooperating with the West against more dangerous foes like China. Putin however is flexible and has a keen strategic mind. Putin only cooperates with China as long as it is the West trying to encroach on Moscow’s sphere of influence; China on the other hand, attempts nothing of the kind. Putin probably does not believe that Russia can rely and trust in Beijing ad eternum, or even that Russia’s culture should be viewed as Eastern rather than Western, he however understands that were China to make any menacing moves towards Siberia, it would be as much a Russian interest to fight back as it would be a Western interest in general.

Syria

Syria is Putin’s latest attempt at drawing a line in the sand. This time Putin is not securing its domestic legitimacy or its hegemonic sphere of influence, this time Russia is claiming back a chief role in world affairs. Russia would never attempt something similar in Latin America, Africa or Southeast Asia. The Mashreq though is of vital importance to a number of Russian strategic and geoeconomic interests. Russia is then drawing a line in which world affairs it perceives itself to be too weak to influence and those where it simply cannot allow its stakes to be overlooked by ultra-voluntaristic Western forces.

If Putin succeeds it will have proven once again that the new Russia is not to be trifled with. If he doesn’t, he will understand he overstretched his country’s projection abilities.

For the time being however, Russia’s actions cannot be criticised since the West rhetorically entrapped itself into being unable to negotiate with the Syrian regime. The time to negotiate was when the regime was on the defensive, but last year the West was too busy making arrogant demands for Assad to step down and surrender unconditionally. Now it may be too late.

If Putin can be accused of making mistakes, then the S-300 delivery to Syria would be one of them. If this actually takes place rather than being used as a bargaining chip, then Putin will be escalating the strategic implications of the conflict by risking that Syria delivers such systems to its patron Iran. This would incur the rightful wrath of both Israelis and Westerners and would unnecessarily broaden the conflict.

One reason why the US has stayed its hand is because Barack Obama prioritises Iran and China over small sideshows like Syria. While defeating Assad would deal Iranian projection a severe blow, it would do nothing against the Iranian regime and its nuclear programme. Syria is also very much a regional power game rather than a global one. For the US to intervene would be to ask the Chinese to drop their cooperative diplomatic attitude in the UNSC.

Democracy is Geostrategy-adverse

One of the sad conclusions of the whole ‘red lines’ affair is once again that democracy does not deal well with long term planning. In a way, it is precisely because Russia has kept the current leader in place for over a decade, that such red lines can be drawn and successfully implemented. As much as liberal democracies would like to do the same, their emphasis on soft power undermines their red lines, as do their ever-changing geopolitical doctrines. There is much to be said for stability and coherence. Putin is not a firebrand, quite to the contrary he has remained remarkably steady in the course he set for himself and for Russia, and done so in the face of explosive interventionism by the West as well as unforeseen shifts like the Arab Spring.

Last years, new movements have emerged from north-african countries and more recently in Turkey. There aims are to fight for political democracy, personal liberties and social justice.

As point it out by Gene Sharp, mostly since de 80´s, non-violent movements have collapsed and furthered these movements toward democratisation, namely in Eastern Europe but also in South America and Asia. Although some non-violent movements have occurred, some did not manage to end dictatorship but has he argue “they have exposed the brutal nature of those repressive regimes to the world community and have provided the populations with valuable experience with this form of struggle.” The Tiananmen episode is the perfect example.

The point I would like to make here is, that the Arab spring is the 21´st century inverse of Inquisition. Do not be mistaken, the Inquisition was imposed by the ruling elites to the people, which differs from today political landscape in the Arab world. What we are witnessing is the inverse, society is  claiming more fundamental rights to their elites. These non-violent movements originated from internet connections.

The power of social tools, namely facebook and twitter in the the Arab society, contributed to create political awareness and triggered  non-violent movements to claim more political democracy, personal liberties and social justice.

These episodes can be described as non-violent cybercracy, people sharing same political anxiety decided to start a “revolution”, first into the virtual world, mobilising the people online to, on a second stage, start their own revolution in the squares. Squares remain the symbol of unity, from the ancient Greek “Agora”, the birthplace of good will and politics among society.

The countries concerned are facing a transition period, tension remains and lack of self-confidence among societies is still triggered by fear. Syria, felt under a more powerful ruling elite that will keep in power until the last moment, the devastation and human bloodshed.

What kind of world would it be without squares?

June 13, 2013

 Syrian Apocalypse? Must look and feel like it on the ground.

First there was a riot, a kind of street fight with the police. Killings led to a sit-in that led to power changing hands. No one took issue with the hangman’s noose swinging symbolically at the maidan, though the riots were supposed to be silmiyyah. The killers never hanged in the end, and no one took issue with that. Only the rioters vowed to take revenge unless the courts hanged someone, but when the courts said not guilty it was all they could do to start a new fight. And in every new fight more rioters were killed. It became something of a national fetish to riot, and riots sprang up everywhere in the country, sometimes for no reason at all, often because no one was hanged.

In the meantime the tourists stopped coming, people stopped making money, the police grew timorous, criminals and fundamentalist nutjobs ran amok, and power ended up with religious rulers so unused to having it that electricity, fuel and water became scarcer than they ever had been. But it was all they could do to talk about the importance of religiosity, the new rulers. And that is how Culture came to be attacked in time, because they also believed Culture and religion (much like “driving and alcohol”, as President Morsi famously put it, in his very own English) “don’t mix”.

Now in the middle of all this was a person called Intellectual, left-wing and knowledgeable by birth, whose life depended on Culture; let’s say it was a male person. Wisely, Intellectual never actually risked his life in the riots, but the fetish played beautifully to his long suppressed desires, and he made a big show of taking part in them. He was very keen on power changing hands, not wisely. Intellectual went to great lengths in fact to make the story of the street fight sound like a heroic epic and a prophesy of utopia. Utopia would of course include him because he had been against the old rulers and he took part in the sit-in, he said. He said it was not the old rulers that he had worked for but the State they once hijacked. The State belonged to everyone and he had tried to serve it honestly despite its being in illegitimate hands. Now that the riots brought it to legitimate hands, he looked forward to serving it honestly.

He turned a blind eye to the country looking more dystopian than ever before now that power had changed hands, insisting that the riots were a good thing. What Intellectual forgot was that, since by birth he was irreligious, the State in legitimate hands would threaten his life.

The State being but a rhetorical device in reality, Intellectual was at a loss what to do. He had pretended to support the new rulers because it was the riots that brought them to power, though in the past he had cheered when the old rulers crushed religious power seekers. Now, to justify threatening his life, the new rulers accused him of being in the service of the old. Was he going to admit that, by supporting the riots, he actively brought death upon himself?

Occasionally he did, but most of the time he tried to prove that the riots were more like Culture than religion, or that religion and Culture do mix. He wasted inordinate time and energy on arguing with fundamentalist nutjobs.

In reality Intellectual had no idea what he was doing. By the looks of it he never had any idea that there was a culture bigger than his life, more widespread and powerful, real and subject to change; let’s call that other culture society. Intellectual had no idea by the looks of it that, if it was to be more than a rhetorical device like the State, his Culture must be one with society, society must be at least as keen on Culture as it is on religion and power.

Though they made a great show of supporting Culture, to the delight of Intellectual, the old rulers also encouraged religious power seekers and especially nutjobs to spread religiosity outside the political sphere (because if they could spread their message peacefully, they were less likely to blow up tourists or threaten to take over power).

By failing economically, the old rulers forced people to work in rich neighbouring countries, where religiosity was stronger and where it influenced them and their families, especially as it became associated with lack of need. By abusing power, they gave those countries’ emissaries, often the selfsame power seekers, credibility at home. They allowed the nutjobs to operate satellite channels and were pleased when the power seekers filled in the gaps that they, the old rulers, had left in basic services in the provinces. They let them persecute people who wrote sensibly on religion. They were even happy to crush Culture within the State on their behalf, on the rare occasion when it came in conflict with them; and Intellectual, fearing for his life or his livelihood, could never seriously object.

Though he never stopped stressing his Role and the Value of his existence, Intellectual made no connection between religiosity and the old rulers. Except for occasionally complaining about the way society was changing, he made no connection between the old rulers and himself.

Intellectual saw both power-seeking and nutjob religiosity socially, as Backwardness: bad; or he saw them politically, as Resistance to the world order that supported Israel and the old rulers: good. But, whether from within or outside the government – and Intellectual had a foot in each space – he did very little to see, confront or, Allah forbid, imagine changing society: culture, reality, the world as it becomes were of no interest to him, so long as his own Culture was happening, however isolated it must remain from the vast majority of people.

Evidently Intellectual felt no need to think beyond changing the rulers, which he could imagine well enough and had sometimes attempted in the distant past. In fact he spoke of riots changing rulers, what he had taken to calling the glorious Revolution, as if it was enough for society to change. For it is an eternal and indubitable truth that Culture must support Revolution, that it must even support religious power seekers pitted against old rulers in Revolution’s aftermath, arguing with fundamentalist nutjobs on satellite talk shows while it did so. It came to Intellectual as a surprise that by following his script he put his life on the line, evidently.

And having done all this, finally, so long after the riots – at a point in time when disinherited agents of the old rulers, disillusioned rioters and many, many others plan to change the rulers yet again without a clear idea of who might replace them; when shortages make life unbearable for Intellectual himself as much as anyone, however right-wing and ignorant; when nutjob religiosity runs amok and the rulers do nothing to ward off very major threats to national security, including the availability of drinking water – what does Intellectual do?

Intellectual stages a protest at the Ministry of Culture.

Intellectual has not been producing much Culture since the riots because he was too busy theorising about them, and with time on his hands he now decides to occupy the office of the newly appointed minister. Now it is true that this minister has been firing long-standing ministry officials in preparation for carrying out the religious rulers’ policies of making ministry activities halal, threatening Culture within the State. And that, in theory, is worth protesting against. But what about the fact that Culture within the State has always succumbed to religious pressure anyway, that nothing of any importance has ever come out of the ministry in recent memory, that the ministry has always been corrupt and ineffectual? And, since the cabinet of which the ministry is part was appointed by the new rulers, what on earth does Intellectual expect?

Never mind, it is important for Intellectual to take a stand. And he takes a stand not on national security, not on power cuts, not on the cabinet, not on Culture within the State as an outdated and ineffectual concept, but on the completely dispensable person of the minister, never mind who on earth might replace him under the circumstances, or how to stop the new rulers from carrying out their policies with or without such a terrible excuse for a cultural authority figure.

Intellectual, I am told, brought up and discussed all such questions during the sit-in at the ministry, amid food, conversation and appropriately revolutionary music – the usual risk-free gathering of friends. But he has not come up with answers. No? So what – so what if society or a large portion thereof fails to understand the Role and the Value of the existence of Intellectual? So what if the culture fails to understand Culture. Intellectual will defend Revolution. He will protect the State against alien incursions by evil religion mongers whom society just happens to be duped by. How dare anyone criticise Intellectual at such a time?

Psychosis is defined as loss of contact with external reality. And, where external reality consists of a dysfunctional government, nutjob fundamentalism and purposeless rioting – a country well on its way to becoming Afghanistan – will anyone but a complete psycho think to show concern for the future of ballet? But of course! Whoever calls Intellectual a psycho for so nobly, so patriotically and selflessly sacrificing his time at the ministry must be utterly mad, a philistine and a traitor to the cultural community…

Well, at least now you know that traitor’s side of the story.

Despite a litany of close friends who suggest the opposite, Libertarians and Obama opponents regularly say that Bashar Al-Assad, the dictator of Syria,  is a force for secularism and a reformer. Officials in the Obama Administration, most notably Hillary Clinton, actually said similar things in the early days of the Syrian Uprising…although their rhetoric changed as the body count rose in Syrian cities. If my challenge to a debate is accepted, I will offer up my own research and analysis on Syria because I am tired of hearing fallacies devoid of facts and kept out of the way of scrutiny. Even Michael Savage — a conservative who broadcasts right here in the Bay Area — has jumped on the bandwagon that declares Assad is “fighting Al-Qaeda” in Syria and that he is in a battle against religious extremism. I would like a chance to debunk this and set the record straight on who Assad and his allies are, and what their victory over the opposition would mean for the region and the world.

If any of you have contacts at Infowars or Prison Planet, please tell them of my request. Whoever you might agree with, your support is greatly appreciated.

There is a theory in international relations called the linchpin theory….basically, it is an occurrence, a small occurrence, that could explode into a society ending situation……a couple of good examples are WW1 and the Arab Spring…..

First linch pin was on 20 June 1914 a Bosnian student assassinated one of the heirs to the Austr0Hungarian empire in Sarajevo, Bosnia……after the killing there was a period of back and forth diplomatic adventures….and it slowly broke down to an alignment of countries that lead to the first great war of the 20th century…..July of 1914 the Austro-Hungarians decided to punish Serbia for the act of assassination….the Russians could not chance losing their influence in the Balkans decided to come to the rescue of Serbia…..then like dominoes countries fell into the trap of war……France, then Germany, then England and the Turks and much later the USA……in the end it changed the face of Europe forever……and in the end the Ottoman Empire was gone…..imperial Russia gone…….Austro-Hungarian collapsing….and all with a total of about 3 million dead……..because of one minor situation……the assassination was the linchpin needed…..

My second example is the recent Arab Spring of a year ago……The term “Arab Spring” was an invention by the media to conjure up visions of the revolt by Eastern European countries against the authority of the USSR……the revolts across North Africa and the Middle East encompassed almost every country in the region….Tunisia, Algeria, Libya, Egypt, Jordan, Iraq and to a lesser extent in countries like Bahrain, Oman even the authoritarian state like Saudi Arabia was not exempt….there were many things that added fuel to the fire of revolt….unemployment, economic inequalities, extreme poverty, political corruption and human rights violations…….. but it all began with the actions of one man…….

The catalyst for the current escalation of protests was the self-immolation of Tunisian Mohamed Bouazizi.  Unable to find work and selling fruit at a roadside stand, on 17 December, a municipal inspector confiscated his wares.  An hour later he doused himself with gasoline and set himself afire.  One seemingly minor situation and the man became the face of a region ripe for change……..he was the linchpin that started a region on a path to revolt and change…….

Now in today’s world where high unemployment, austerity, corruption, class divisions getting deeper, I believe it is only a matter of time before there is a global situation and it will begin with a single seemingly unimportant occurrence…….and I believe it will originate in the Middle East…….

I have been an observer of the situations in the ME for over thirty years….first as a student then as an participant in the region and now I research every aspect of the area daily for hours….and in my research I have found a couple of areas that could be the linchpin I search for……the Middle East is one, most accurately, the area around Southeast Syria, Lebanon, Israel and the Occupied Territories….it is a volatile region and could be the linchpin….but it is also too damn obvious…..but the area that I feel could be the best chance of being the linchpin that starts a war of no end and total destruction…….

…..(insert drum roll and trumpet blasts)………

The area between the two seas……the Black sea and The Caspian……

Why?  This region is full of hatred for one group or another…..Chechens hate Russians, Armenians hate Turkey, There is South Ossetia within the borders of Georgia wanting independence, there are Kurds within the borders of most of the area’s countries and they have an argument with Turkey, then within Russian there is Dagestan that is a smoldering problem waiting for more fuel, Russia has had its nose disjointed by what they called an Azerbaijan snub, plus the government is cracking down on the press and other civil liberties…..very little of this region can be called stable and there is the rub…

This is the area that could produce the next history altering conflict….it bears watching.

First published in Bolander Lifestyle & Property, Wednesday, June 12, 2013

Thirty seven years ago Monday at about midday, a shot rang out, which was to have as much effect on South Africa, as the shot that took the the life of Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria in Sarajevo, almost 62 years earlier to the day, on June 28, 1914. That shot, fired by a policeman into a crowd of justifiably angry school children on a Soweto street on June 16, 1976, took the life of Hector Pietersen, as he protested with fellow pupils against the imposition of Afrikaans as the medium of instruction in all black schools, by the Bantu Education Department.

The shot that killed Archduke Franz Ferdinand tipped the world into the maelstrom of the Great War. The shot that killed 12 year-old Hector Pietersen set in motion a train of events that would bring the mighty edifice of apartheid – Daniel Francois Malan’s infernal vision of social engineering perfected and written into law under the aegis of its chief architect Hendrik French Verwoerd – crashing down, just 46 years after its conception.

The image of Mbuyisa Makhubo carrying Hector’s lifeless body with his sister, Antoinette running alongside, captured so poignantly, and with immense courage, by The World photographer Sam Nzima, will forever be burned into the psyche of the nation because of what it represents – the tragedy of wasted youth.

Nineteen years after the onset of democracy, in the very year that the “born-frees” – South Africans born free of the shackles of apartheid – look forward to voting for the very first time, it is perhaps appropriate to consider what it means to be part of the youth of South Africa.

“Almost 85% of children in South Africa are African and a quarter live in KwaZulu-Natal. An estimated 3,6 million children are either maternal, paternal or double orphans.”

“Less than a third (32%) of South African children live with both their biological parents and a quarter of children do not live with either of their biological parents.”

“Almost 60% of youth ages 15-24 years live in households with a monthly per capita income of less than R555 per person.”

“Approximately a quarter of  youth live in households without any employed household members, whilst 27% of youth headed households have no one who is employed.”

These shocking statistics are from a StatsSA report laconically titled “Social profile of South Africa, 2002 – 2009”. They show just how parlous is the state of the 10,1 million young people in the age cohort 15 – 34, but it gets worse.

According to StatsSA third quarter figures for 2012, 71% of the unemployed are aged 25 – 34, and the unemployment rate of the youth (15-34 age cohort) is 36%, significantly higher than the national official unemployment rate of just over 25%. I’d hate to be part of the youth of today.

So, I ask you, precisely what do the youth have to celebrate on National Youth Day? Oh sure, ANC bigwigs will attend rallies all over the country, and sing the praises of the youth for their contribution towards the slaying of the dragon of apartheid, while reminding them that they are free because of the Party’s efforts, and give unctuous assurances that they will all get jobs sooner or later. But none of that will translate into actual job opportunities in the short term, nor will it put food on the table in an impoverished child-headed household.

The inconvenient youth who used to remind us just how desperate is the plight of the youth, is no more, consigned to political oblivion by his erstwhile masters, so the cries of injustice and simmering anger are now muted.

But with no solution on the horizon, and a rapidly growing cohort of unemployed (and unemployable) youth growing increasingly restive, the assertion that the equivalent of an Arab Spring is impossible in South Africa, must ring hollow even to the top leadership of the Tri-Partite Alliance. It is time for all of us to be afraid, to be very afraid.

09 Jun 2013

By Katya Foreman

Worlds away from the big bang productions of the major fashion capitals, the 5th edition of Fashion Week Tunis – titled Spring is Here to Stay – was marked by a strong community spirit with figures from the local art, fashion and music scenes pulling together to make it happen on a limited production budget.

Setting the tone, the event opened with an intimate exhibition, “Perspectives,” at the Galerie El Marsa in La Marsa, a coastal town located northeast of Tunis, showcasing individual collaborations between Marios Schwab and the Tunisian designer Amel Esseghir with Tunisian visual artist Nja Mahdaoui, whose work is inspired by Arabic calligraphy. The show was designed by German installation artist Nini Gollong and included an exhibition of jewelry creations by Rome-based, Franco-Moroccan designer Bernard Delettrez in a darkened room on the site’s lower floor. His bewitching designs, such as articulated snake cuffs, were showcased in floating glass pyramids.

Faced with the constraints of post-revolution Tunisia, where the Arab Spring began more than two years ago, the event was hampered by production hitches, which meant tediously long waits between shows. Among the few designers weaving political messages into their creations was Ahmed Talfit, whose concise collection of curvaceous handmade gowns with strong shoulders and graphic leather lozenge inserts was titled ‘Apocalypse?’.  “The Tunisian woman has evolved across different civilisations, and has always been the most liberal of Arab women, whether it’s the first female doctor or the first female pilot [in the Arab world], who were both Tunisian women. I am questioning whether they will continue to evolve or whether it will be the apocalypse for Tunisian women due to certain circumstances that are being imposed on our lifestyle, the forces of extremism,” he said.

Esseghir, who participated in the “Perspectives” exhibition, later in the week at the Ennejma Ezzahra Palace presented a giant “Mega Dress” representing the Tunisian woman, constructed from an elaborate patchwork of traditional handmade textiles from across Tunisia assembled by the designer over 20 years.

Opening the doors to some of the region’s cultural gems, sites for the week’s fashion shows and peripheral events included the magnificent Acropolium in Carthage and La Marsa’s town hall, the latter decorated with traditional tiles and a giant dusty chandelier, with a stray cat hitting the runway – or make that catwalk – on one occasion.

Designers fell into two camps, with the more experimental, artisanal collections drawing approval from international editors and the locals going gaga for high glamour acts doused in sequins, chiffon and lace, which often felt like pastiches of established designers like Elie Saab or Roberto Cavalli. Miss Tunisia was perched front row at Ali Karoui’s show, where models clad in wispy gowns in digital tropical prints blew kisses to the audience, à la Victoria’s Secret. Rows of nipped and tucked ladies whooped as topless male models interspersed an exasperatingly endless run of caftan-clad models parading Rayhana’s semi-precious jewelry designs and decorative bags, one embroidered with colorful fish and shells.

In the artisanal camp, Zarrouki Dalila, a 3rd year student at L’Institut Supérieur des Métiers de la Mode de Monastir, presented a collection of organic dresses honed from woven and knitted raggedy strips of cotton, silk and wool, borrowing methods used for traditional rugs. Crude wooden mules typically worn in hammams completed the boho, rootsy vibe. The creations were hand colored using natural dyes including saffron, indigo, henna and prickly pear and scented with amber. “I wanted to pay homage to Tunisia’s rich patrimony,” said Dalila. Fellow student Rabeb Thaalbi channelled a more primitive vibe for her men’s collection, crafting fox-fur trimmed hooded capes from traditional materials including sheepskin, goatskin, hessian cloth and woven wool made using Berbère rug-making techniques. Long john-style pants were patchworked from hand dyed knits in earthy tones. Jewellery made from sheep’s jaws and horns added a wild edge.

Among a group of designers presenting in the terraced gardens of the Palais Ennejma Ezzahra overlooking the Gulf of Tunis, with threatening storm clouds and the haunting strains of musician Elyas Khan adding to the ambiance, Morocco’s Amine Bendriouich stood out as one-to-watch. Here he collaborated with London-based artist Hassan Hajjaj, taking the bright African fabrics that Hajjaj often works with – charged with prints normally used for religious and political propaganda – and putting them into a wearable context. Bendriouich, who is based between Casablanca and Berlin, cut sporty blazers out of the fabrics, breaking up their brashness with easy drop-crotch pants and shorts in cotton fleece and jersey.

Natalie de Koning’s sustainable collection focused on long layered silhouettes mixing the old with the new. All the garments were crafted from recycled or new eco-friendly fabrics, with among sweet details needlepoint collars and multi-layer collars on antique-looking blouses. An ensemble pairing uber-wide ivory culottes with a monochrome top with graphic hand-stitched leather appliqués was also striking.

The strongest contender for the international stage was Vienna-based Nedra Chachoua, whose effortlessly cool collection evoked summers spent in Tunisia as a child mixed with European references, fusing traditional north African clothing such as the djellaba with the classic white shirt. There were shirts edged with palm tree prints, airy knits tacked with foil palm tree leaves, oversized floor-length shirt dresses, camel shorts with banana prints on the turn up and dresses peeling with bananas in yellow wild silk. “It’s a self portrait, it’s a really personal collection… it had to be comfortable but also feminine,” said the designer, who focused on natural fibers with subtle crafty details such as embroidery and quilting. Considering this was her graduate collection, this designer has mileage.

SCHEDULE FOR UPCOMING LIVE SHOW in London and Milan:

http://nowfashion.com/2013-06-09-tunis-fashion-week-art-130.html

Alliance of Youth Movements: Color Revolution 2.0

by Tony Cartalucci

In 2008, the Alliance of Youth Movements held its inaugural summit in New York City. Attending this summit was a combination of State Department staff, Council on Foreign Relations members, former National Security staff, Department of Homeland Security advisers, and a myriad of representatives from American corporations and mass media organizations including AT&T, Google, Facebook, NBC, ABC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC, and MTV.

One might suspect such a meeting of representatives involved in US economic, domestic and foreign policy, along with the shapers of public opinion in the mass media would be convening to talk about America’s future and how to facilitate it. Joining these policy makers, was an army of “grassroots” activists that would “help” this facilitation.

Among them was a then little known group called “April 6″ from Egypt. These Facebook “savvy” Egyptians would later meet US International Crisis Group trustee Mohamed ElBaradei at the Cairo airport in February 2010 and spend the next year campaigning and protesting on his behalf in his bid to overthrow the government of Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak.

The Alliance of Youth Movements mission statement claims it is a not-for-profit organization dedicated to helping grassroots activists to build their capacity and make a greater impact on the world. While this sounds fairly innocuous at first, even perhaps positive, upon examining those involved in “Movements.org,” a dark agenda is revealed of such nefarious intent it is almost difficult to believe.

Movement.org is officially partnered with the US Department of State and Columbia Law School. Its corporate sponsors include Google, Pepsi, and the Omnicon Group, all listed as members of the globocrat Council on Foreign Relations (CFR). CBS News is a sponsor and listed on the globocrat Chatham House’s corporate membership list. Other sponsors include Facebook, YouTube, Meetup, Howcast, National Geographic, MSNBC, GenNext, and the Edelman public relations firm.

Movement.org’s “team” includes Co-Founder Jared Cohen, a CFR member, Director of Google Ideas, and a former State Department planning staff member under both Condoleezza Rice and Hilary Clinton.

Founding Movements.org with Cohen is Jason Liebman of Howcast Media which works with mega-corporate conglomerates like Proctor & Gamble, Kodak, Staples, Ford, and government agencies such as the US State Department and the US Defense Department, to create “custom branded entertainment, innovative social media, and tardeted rich-media campaigns.” He was also with Google for 4 years where he worked to partner with Time Warner (CFR), News Corporation (FoxNews, CFR) Viacom, Warner Music, Sony Pictures, Reuters, the New York Times, and the Washington Post Company.

Roman Sunder is also credited with co-founding Movements.org. He founded Access 360 Media, a mass advertising company, and he also organized the PTTOW! Summit which brought together 35 top executives from companies like AT&T (CFR), Quicksilver, Activison, Facebook, HP, YouTube, Pepsi (CFR), and the US Government to discuss the future of the “youth industry.” He is also a board member of Gen Next, another non-profit organization focused on “affecting change for the next generation.”

It is hard, considering these men’s affiliations, to believe that the change they want to see is anything less than a generation that drinks more Pepsi, buys more consumerist junk, and believes the United States government every time they purvey their lies to us via their corporate owned media.

Watch The Great Deception 2011

While the activists attending the Movements.org summit adhere to the philosophies of “left-leaning” liberalism, the very men behind the summit, funding it, and prodding the agenda of these activists are America’s mega-corporate combine. These are the very big-businesses that have violated human rights worldwide, destroyed the environment, sell shoddy, overseas manufactured goods produced by workers living in slave conditions, and pursue an agenda of greed and perpetual expansion at any cost. The hypocrisy is astounding unless of course you understand that their nefarious, self-serving agenda could only be accomplished under the guise of genuine concern for humanity, buried under mountains of feel-good rhetoric, and helped along by an army of exploited, naive youth.

What we see is not a foundation from which all activists can work from, but a foundation that has a very selective group of activists working on “problem spots” the US State Department would like to see “changed.” Sudan, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Eastern Europe, Venezuela, and even Thailand – where ever protesters and movements are working to undermine governments non-conducive to corporate America’s agenda, you will find Movements.org supporting their efforts.

The April 6 Movement of Egypt is one of them, and their role in the apparent success of the US ousting of Hosni Mubarak that may see their man Mohamed ElBaradei in office is a perfect example of how this new army of prodded youth will be deployed. It is color revolution 2.0, run directly out of the US State Department with the support of corporate America.

It would be strongly recommended that readers go to Movements.org themselves and explore the website, in particular the 3 summits they have held and those that were in attendance. Everyone from the RAND Corporation to the Council on Foreign Relations comes to “prod.” Movements.org truly is a new tentacle for manipulating and UNDERMINING THE SOVEREIGNTY OF FOREIGN NATIONS.

It would be strongly recommended that readers go to Movements.org themselves and explore the website, in particular the 3 summits they have held and those that were in attendance. Everyone from the RAND Corporation to the Council on Foreign Relations comes to “prod.” Movements.org truly is a new tentacle for manipulating and undermining the sovereignty of foreign nations.

2008 Summit New York City .pdf
2009 Summit Mexico City .pdf
2010 Summit London
Source: http://www.globalresearch.ca/google-s-revolution-factory-alliance-of-youth-movements-color-revolution-2-0/23283

It’s truly worth a look:

http://www.movements.org/

———————————————————————————————————————————————————————————-

Obama online gurus trained Turkey protest leaders

Hillary hailed ‘vanguard of a rising generation of citizen activists’

Published: 06/05/2013 at 8:18 PM

Arron Klein

JERUSALEM – The directors of a youth movement helping to lead the anti-government protests rocking Turkey participated in a 2009 U.S. State Department-sponsored training summit on how to use social media to organize societal change, WND has learned.

The keynote speakers at the summit were three architects of the online component of President Obama’s 2008 campaign. The Obama campaign’s use of social media for grassroots community organizing in 2008 was considered a watershed moment in political fundraising and movement building.

Ads by Google

Bathtubs for the DisabledGet Info On Our Line of Bathtubs for the Disabled. Free Brochure! DisabledBathing.com

The Alliance of Youth Movement’s annual summit in Mexico City took place Oct. 14-16, 2009.

Participating in the event were the leaders of the Genç Siviller, or Young Civilians, a youth movement in Turkey that has been using Twitter and Facebook to help organize the protests in that country.

The Young Civilians’ Twitter account called for youth to “occupy” Gezi Park to protest pending government plans to turn the park into a complex with a new mosque and shopping center. The park protests last Friday quickly grew into the largest and most violent anti-government protests that Turkey has seen in years.

Young Civilians members have been arrested at various protests.

On Tuesday, the group posted an open letter on its Facebook page to Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan lamenting the park plans and noting that movements for reform have sparked protests throughout the Middle East, Africa and Central Asia.

Also on Tuesday, Erdogan blasted the use of social media, including Twitter, in fomenting the unrest sweeping his nation.

“There is now a menace which is called Twitter,” Erdogan said, addressing the protests. “The best examples of lies can be found there. To me, social media is the worst menace to society.”

Young Civilians was founded in Turkey in 2006 with the stated aim of establishing a “liberal democracy in Turkey based on civil rights, rule of law, tolerance and justice.”

WND found that the leaders of the group, Ceren Kenar and Turgay Ogar, participated in the Alliance of Youth Movement’s 2009 summit.

The summit was sponsored by the State Department in conjunction with Facebook, YouTube, Hi5, Google, MySpace, Gen Next, Howcast Media, MTV, PepsiCo, Mobile Behavior, Univisión, Interactive Media Inc., WordPress.com and others.

The conference opened with a two-minute video address by then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who praised the use of social media to organize, “build movements and change lives.”

Clinton hailed “the vanguard of a rising generation of citizen activists.”

Under Secretary of State for Democracy and Global Affairs Maria Otero and U.S. Ambassador to Mexico Carlos Pascual also opened the summit.

The keynote speakers were three directors of Obama’s online campaign in 2008: Joe Rospars, the campaign’s director for new media; Scott Goodstein, external online director of Obama for America; and Sam Graham-Felson, director of blogging and blog outreach for the campaign.

According to a State Department description of the event, participants were slated to discuss a variety of practical topics, including “politics, resisting violence, and technology; sustainability and long-term planning; and the use of viral video in social movements.”

The summit sought to explore ways to “advance grassroots movements seeking positive social change through 21st century technology and tools,” according to an official description.

Seminars were given on the use of social media to push for change and to launch a global network to empower young people mobilizing against violence and oppression.

The summit one year earlier led to the creation of Movements.org, a nonprofit organization dedicated to identifying, connecting and supporting digital activists.

Founders of Movements.org include Google director Jared Cohen, a former adviser to both Clinton and Condoleezza Rice; and Jason Liebman, CEO and co-founder of Howcast, the How-to website.

Movements.org is intended to serve as a hub for discussion, resources and news about digital activism around the world.

With additional research by Brenda J. Elliott
Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/06/obama-online-gurus-trained-turkey-protest-leaders/#m7KfVI8CZCEWhHEg.99

I know Freedom House was involved in this…they helped with the training. I don’t have time to look but it’s somewhere on this highly disorganized blog.

A demonstrator throws a tear gas canister back at riot police during an anti-government protest in Istanbul. Photo by Murad Sezer/Reuters

On Wednesday hundreds of Turkish riot police fired tear gas and water cannons on thousands of protesters in Taksim Square in central Istanbul. The tear gas rained down on a group that had positioned themselves in Gezi Park two weeks ago in a campaign to stop the planned demolition of the park.

Gezi Park quickly became a symbol for antigovernment protests that began to cover broader issues including  the end to the leadership of President Tayyip Erdogan. The Turkish Human Rights Foundation has reported that 4 people were killed in protests on Tuesday and that almost 4,000 people have been treated for injuries including widespread exposure to tear gas.

Tear gases are nerve gases that specifically activate pain sensing nerves. They are not really gases, but solids or liquids that are turned into aerosols when activated. A number of different compounds such as OC, CS, CR, CN, nonivamide, bromoacetone xylyl bromide and syn-propanethial-S-oxide are labelled as tear gases.

The use of tear gas in warfare is illegal under the International Geneva Convention yet it is frequently used on civilians by their own governments. The 1993 Chemical Weapons Convention does not apply to domestic law enforcement where the most commonly used compound for riot control is called 2-chlorobenzalmalononitrile, or CS. Its use by a number of governments across the globe to suppress protests in recent years has caused injuries and in some cases even death.

They were identified and used in World War I without the knowledge we have today of their effects on human biology because they were extremely cheap to produce. Tear gas causes the closing of the eyes, a sharp rush of pain, and bronchial spasms that make it difficult to breathe. Acute and long-term exposure can be extremely harmful and lead to respiratory problems, especially in asthma sufferers.

When tear gas is deposited on the human body, it can cause burn-like injuries and swelling, especially in parts of the body where the skin is constantly moist. The pain receptors targeted signal to the exposed animal that they have come into contact with a noxious element and must remove themselves from the area in order to increase their chance of survival.

One of the main disputes Turkey had with Russia was over the use of the Bosphorus, a narrow strait of water in Istanbul that connects the Marmara Sea to the Black Sea; a crucial naval passage way for Russia, in the event of any type of conflict in the region. After Inonu’s meeting with American officials an American destroyer was sent to make an appearance in the Bosphorus. The destroyer anchored right off the coast and sent a message to Russia that the United States was now behind Turkey. Overnight the salad known everywhere else in the world as a “Russian Salad” became known in Turkey as an “American Salad”, and anything else that could be connected to Russia was revised as well. Turks were relieved to have the backing of an ally to deal with the Russian threat that bordered them. This incident marked the beginning of Turkey’s alliance with the United States. However, it also marked the beginning of American influence in Turkish politics.

Under increasing international (particularly American) pressure Inonu held the first multi-party elections in Turkey’s history in 1946.  However, these elections were far from free and the Republican Party (CHP) headed by Inonu retained control. In 1950 the first free elections were held and the Democratic Party headed by Adnan Menderes won the election. Adnan Menderes represents the beginning of the center-right regime that has persisted in Turkish politics to this very day. During his ten years as Prime Minister Menderes promoted an Islamist agenda and oversaw a period of great economic growth. However, he was also very intolerant of criticism. He censored the press and jailed political opposition members (this may sound familiar).

A good argument can be made that international pressure rushed the country into an election before the Left (who had been stagnant under the leadership of Inonu in single party rule) could prepare themselves for a competitive election and the election was thus handed to Menderes and his center right coalition. Intended or not, the partnership between America and the Turkish Right was subsequently underway. In the years that followed, Turkey under the leadership of Menderes took part in the Marshall Plan, joined the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), and fought alongside the U.S. in the Korean War. In the following Turkish administrations that were also center-right, Turkey adopted a free market and continued to align itself with America. By the end of the Cold War Turkey was irreversibly aligned with the United States militarily, economically, and politically.

America has also served as a home base for Fethullah Gulen since his self-imposed exile in the late 1990s, he is considered by many to be the mastermind behind the Islamist movement in Turkey. Many consider AKP and Erdogan the brainchild of Gulen himself. Gulen is a multi-billionaire former preacher whose version of Islam was dubbed “Calvinism” because of it’s intermixing of Islam and Capitalism. Gulen was tried in absentia in 2000 for comments he had made promoting the return of the Caliphate for Turkey, he was acquitted in 2008. Today, Gulen lives in Pennsylvania in a heavily guarded compound offering financial and intellectual assistance to the Islamist movement in Turkey. Another reason Gulen is significant today in Turkey is because of the amount of Gulen loyalists who have infiltrated the ranks of the police. A book titled “Imamin Ordusu” (The Imam’s Army) on this very matter was banned from publication and purchase by the Erdogan government. Furthermore, there is an alarming amount of government contracts that are being awarded to members of the Gulen Cemaat (clan) due to a loophole on the Turkish laws regarding the awarding of government contracts (this deserves an entirely separate article in its on right, the mining company Koza[4] is a prime example of this crony capitalism).

Erdogan himself has been closely aligned with the United States since the onset of his political career. In fact, in 2002, while Erdogan was still banned from participating in Turkish politics, George W. Bush invited Erdogan to the White House and gave him full presidential protocol. Bush wanted Erdogan to allow him to use Turkey as a launching pad for an invasion on Iraq. Inviting Erdogan to the White House while he was still banned from politics served in many ways to give Erdogan international legitimacy and did indeed garner much appreciation on the part of Erdogan[1]. In fact, in 2003 when the United States were preparing for an invasion on Iraq and Erdogan was now officially the Prime Minister of Turkey, he and his party (AKP) supported a U.S. led invasion from Turkish soil to Iraq. It was the opposition parties who eventually blocked the passage of the AKP sponsored bill that would allow the use of Turkey as an American base for the Iraq War.

When asked about Bush’s infamous comment to former Palestinian Foreign Minister Nabil Saath about being on a mission from god in Afghanistan and Iraq[2], Erdogan said that he believed that Bush was in fact right and that he may very well have a divine mission in the region. Furthermore, Erdogan did his best to send Turkish troops to the quagmire that would soon become the Iraq War. If the opposition did not block the bill that would have allowed this, hundreds if not thousands of Turkish lives would have perished fighting alongside America in the mistake that was the Iraq War. Once again, Bush offered Erdogan political cover during his first legislative hurdle that ended in defeat by making the claim that he would have not accepted the Turkish assistance regardless because of Kurdish sensitivities[3]. Only a week prior Bush and fellow Republicans had been pressuring the Turkish Grand National Assembly to vote yes on Erdogan’s Iraq War bill. Despite Erdogan’s failure to deliver on the Iraq War, Bush continued to champion Erdogan as a poster-child for an Islamist democrat.

The close relationship between AKP and the U.S. did not end with the Bush Administration, it was very much continued during the Obama Administration. Even during the Gaza flotilla fiasco, the Obama Administration gave Erdogan international cover by approaching the matter in a balanced way and even siding with Turkey at times. Israel, which is usually a sacred cow in American politics was not even off limits to criticism by U.S. officials during the crisis. In fact, recently, it was John Kerry (the new U.S. Secretary of State) who convinced Netanyahu to apologize to Erdogan (who had been getting domestic criticism for his handling of the affair); this apology effectively gave Erdogan a domestic political victory and earned the Obama Administration credibility in the devolving Syrian crisis with Erdogan.

Most recently during the Syrian crisis, the border between Turkey and Syria has effectively been handed over to the CIA, NATO, and Syrian rebels. The CIA is riding rough shod along the border and Patriot batteries that are stationed on Turkish soil represent prime targets in the event of hot conflict. Much like Turkey represented the eastern bulwark of NATO during the Cold War, it is once again on the front lines for NATO. Despite polls showing that the overwhelming majority of Turks do not want any part in the conflict, Erdogan is pressing forward without any hesitation. What started in his first term as a foreign policy labeled “Zero Problems” (with neighbors) has quickly morphed into a policy of “Nothing But Problems”. Erdogan and his foreign policy staff (chiefly Davutoglu) are Neo-Ottomans, they believe that Turkey has a place in the Middle East as a Sunni powerhouse. Turkey has been able to avoid this sectarian madness in the region large part due to the foreign policy laid out by Ataturk in the onset of the Republic: aligning Turkey with the West and not meddling in the East. However, due to Erdogan’s religious views and subsequent sectarianism he has chosen to side with the Sunnis in the Arab Spring, and in doing so has dragged Turkey in to a centuries old sectarian conflict which it had been able to previously avoid. Emboldened by the support he has received from America, Erdogan has stepped up his rhetoric even further. Recently Erdogan named the third Bosphorus bridge after the Ottoman Sultan Selim the Grim, who is perhaps best known for his massacre of Shiites (specifically, Alawis) during his reign. Choosing such a blatantly proactive symbol of Sunni aggression has left many wondering whether Erdogan is even making any secret of his intentions anymore. Several weeks ago this foreign policy came home to roost. A bomb planted by Shiites in the Turkish town of Reyhanli went off, killing 51 and injuring 140 others. As if the imposition of the refugees were not enough for the bordering towns, they would now have to contend with being dragged into a conflict that they never wanted any part of. This incident should have marked the end of AKP’s expansionist foreign policy, however, due to pathetic media coverage and inept opposition the scandal barely stuck to Erdogan. The Grand National Assembly quickly moved to pass an alcohol restriction, distracting the opposition and media with a symbolic hot button issue while completely avoiding the political damage that should have been felt by the death of 51 Turkish citizens caused by a foreign policy that was roundly rejected by the public at large.

Whether it be Turkey joining NATO under Menderes, becoming Capitalist under Ozal, or partnering with the U.S. in the Iraq War and the current Syrian crisis under Erdogan: it is undeniable that there is a symbiotic relationship between the Turkish Right and the United States of America. It is rather irrefutable that this relationship has been beneficial geo-politically. However, whether it has been beneficial for Turkey’s democracy and sovereignty is a separate question entirely.

Some pictures from a Greek demonstration in November 2012:

And how many things have changed since then??

I will tell you…Nothing has changed in the West.

But some of the Arab movements were organised into true Revolutions:

1. The Tunisian Revolution democratised the country and with the first elections and only (!!!) since 1959 elected Moncef Marzouki who is now acting as an interim President  since 2011 . By the way I saw an amazing exhibition in Paris: “Degagement La Tunisie Un An Apres”  at the Institut de Monde Arabe which gave me an apprehensive insight into the Jasmine or Tunisian Revolution and the positive impact of the internet in the uprise.

http://www.imarabe.org/exposition/degagements-la-tunisie-un-apres

2. The Egyptian Revolution overthrew the regime of Mubarak.

3. The Libyan Revolution captured and killed dictator Gaddafi.

4. Yemen overthrew of dictator Saleh.

Of course Mauritania, Kuwait, Jordan, Oman, Sudan, Djibouti, Palestine, Saudi Arabia, Morocco still have minor protests.

Algeria, Iraq, Iran, Israel, Bahrain remain in upheaval and in Syria the civil war continues…

Why in the East there was an Uprising Spring?

Is it because the Orient has less to lose?

Counting up the stats for the “Arab Spring”:

The dead: impossible to count.

The tortured: impossible to count.

The raped: impossible to count.

The self-immolations: impossible to count.

The injured: impossible to count.

Number of lost limps, eyes, lungs, kidneys, teeth: impossible to count.

The imprisoned: impossible to count.

The dead or tortured journalists: impossible to count.

The mothers who lost their children: impossible to count.

The children who lost their fathers: impossible to count.

Demolished houses, parks, small and big businesses, schools, universities, hospitals, theatres, museums, churches, wells, bridges: impossible to count.

Families that lost everything they had: impossible to count.

Number of goats or livestock that lost their stable or gone: impossible to count.

Number of children who stayed for days without milk: impossible to count.

The question remains: Why in the West the Occupy movements never fulfilled their promising start?

Is it because the Occident has more at stake?

Coffee and cigarettes

I think we haven’t touched base yet… Alice has not landed yet all the way down at the bottom of the well… We haven’t got the message yet… How shall I put it? WE ARE NOT THERE YET, but we will be soon…Wont’t we?

But Istanbul is only few kilometres away… I look at them and think…the Greek Revolution cannot be that far away…

Couple Kissing in the midst of the Turkish Uprise (photographer ?)

The Turkish cause is much different than that of those other uprisings.  Erdogan caused this one and he can fix it.

Turkey lies between Europe and the Middle East.  Within its borders reside very wealthy, very poor, Christians, Muslims, educated, not educated, progressives, and conservatives.  A true mixture and probably not a melting pot.

Strategically, Turkey is an important US ally.  It’s secular history (since the founding of modern Turkey) brings needed balance to the more conservative Islamic States which lie nearby.  Turkey has also maintained a supportive position towards Israel unlike its neighbors.

So why all this fuss?

Prime Minister Erdogan has been democratically elected three times and seems to want to be elected again.  Unfortunately along this path, he has appeased the conservative Muslim faction (in return for votes) with “small step by small step” accommodations,  seemingly hoping to reintroduced the trappings of the  Ottoman Empire.  Each step seemed insignificant but in total are threatening to swallow the secularness of modern Turkey.

Last August, following Ramadan, during the two day national holiday, I witnessed in Istanbul, modern Turkey.  Everywhere one went, thousands of citizens, dressed in their best, were out and about.  Mosques, museums, parks, the Golden Horn, and public transportation were flooded with holiday enjoyers.  Dressed neatly in both western garb and traditional ethnic Muslim coverings, the Turks I saw were polite and respectful, and got along with each other.  They were able to enjoy the holiday and demanded nothing of me or any other Western visitor.

The ironic aspect of Erdogan’s pro-Muslim policies (like with alcohol limits, dress, and women’s rights) is that in secular Turkey, 99% of the citizens are Muslim.  No one is required to drink alcohol or wear western dress (even though most men and many women do).  Traditional dress for women, long skirts or pants, kerchiefs, and modest blouses and coats can be seen everywhere.

It is a good question why, as a personal choice, anyone other than the deeply religious, would seek to reintroduce ultra conservative muslim dress, but the more telling question is why would anyone want Turkey step back in history by allowing Islamic clerics to specify what others should wear?

If Erdogan is to be remembered as a great leader, he will take this Taksim Square demonstration as a wake up call.  Young, modern, and entrepreneurial Turkey is saying “enough”.  Erdogan supporters (and there are plenty) comprise a lot who are far less educated and are concentrated in some of the poorest regions of Turkey.

The loss of secularism will deal Turkey a severe economic blow and hurt the people Erdogan say he wants to help.  It will also cement Erdogan as the modern day anti-Mustafa Ataturk.

Cairo, Egypt © Jairo Londono with CCLicense

Art starts conversations and inspires thought that frightens tyrants. What is the future of art in a society in transition?

Beirut, Lebanon

Synkroniciti is excited to share three jaw-dropping short films produced by the Art in the Streets series from the Museum of Contemporary Art in Los Angeles. They feature street artists in the capital cities of Libya, Lebanon and Egypt, where the medium known as graffiti is gaining some acceptance even as it creates conflict. Beirut, which knew revolution before the so called Arab Spring, is a city where graffiti is legal, causing street artists to flock there from all over the world. Artists in Cairo and Tripoli are finding their voices in a culture that is divided. Some cheer their efforts and praise their abilities. Others react in fear and find their art an affront to God. Women painting on the streets and artists representing faces and words are considered by many to be offenses punishable by violence.

Tripoli, Libya © Panoramas with CCLicense

The Arab Spring is not a short term project, nor did it begin with the wave of protests and demonstrations of 2010, no matter how convenient that may be for outsiders and history books. This revival and renewal has been brewing for many moons and will continue. It has many facets and motivations, and like any revolution, those who participate have their own prejudices and failures. These artists are perhaps the most inspiring spokesmen and women for the changes occurring across the Middle East and North Africa. They do more to construct a new society than all the armies of the world.

Videos via MOCAtv on YouTube.

Want to delve into this subject with us? Read Synkroniciti’s article on Orhan Pamuk’s My Name is Red or our article on the currents behind Frank Herbert’s Dune.

Syria is a mess. You have a world class dictator that is supported by the terrorists Hezbollah and the state of Iran on one hand and a conglomeration of rebel forces that would probably like to see a strict Islamist government based on Sharia law on the other. The U.S. was full of support and hope for the Egyptian protesters during the so called Arab Spring, Now we are faced with a country run by the Muslim Brotherhood that wants to scrap the peace treaty with Israel and resume hostilities. It doesn’t seem like we have learned any lessons from that debacle. It’s kind of like watching a hungry lion fight a hungry tiger and trying to decide which one to support. Whichever one wins, neither will be your friend. So why support either?

The Word:

Now the king of Aram was at war with Israel. After conferring with his officers, he said, “I will set up my camp in such and such a place.” The man of God sent word to the king of Israel: “Beware of passing that place, because the Arameans are going down there.”  So the king of Israel checked on the place indicated by the man of God. Time and again Elisha warned the king, so that he was on his guard in such places…  They [the Arameans] went by night and surrounded the city. When the servant of the man of God got up and went out early the next morning, an army with horses and chariots had surrounded the city. “Oh no, my lord! What shall we do?” the servant asked. “Don’t be afraid,” the prophet answered. “Those who are with us are more than those who are with them.” And Elisha prayed, “Open his eyes, Lord, so that he may see.” Then the Lord opened the servant’s eyes, and he looked and saw the hills full of horses and chariots of fire all around Elisha. (2 Kings 6: 8-17)

“But I will restore you to health and heal your wounds,’ declares the LORD, ‘because you are called an outcast, Zion for whom no one cares.’” (Jeremiah 30: 17)

Pointers for prayer:  Please continue to proclaim God’s sovereignty over Israel and stand against every principle and power seeking to come against His authority and thwart His purposes.  Please continue to pray that God would protect Israel from the rising danger of cross-border attacks from Syria, Lebanon and Gaza. Pray that Israeli leaders will have wisdom on how to respond to each provocative attack in a way that will ensure the safety of their people while not causing an undue escalation.

Once again, I feel the need to emphasise that any information given in these reports is not to stir up hatred or ill feelings against the Muslim world.  To deal correctly with this difficult issue, we must always examine our own heart and let compassion be our motive. The information here is solely that we might be equipped to pray into this situation ~ that even now, the Lord God would have mercy on the Muslin world and bring them to salvation in Yeshua.  If you feel led, try and make an effort to fast and pray on Fridays for victory over Islam and that the gospel would bring truth in the Muslim world!   While tens of millions of Arabs have been suffering for decades from brutal oppression from their own Arab leaders and many have been tortured and imprisoned and women humiliated and dissidents killed, the world has become obsessed with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, as if the Palestinians (who have rejected one peace offer after another) were the only victims in the Middle East.  Cry out for the Arab people struggling under the heavy restraints of Islamic oppression.  Pray that they may find freedom in following the true Lord God Almighty.

Being on guard in such places…

Despite tensions between Hamas and Hezbollah over Syria, the lynchpin keeping the two allies close to one another is their mutual hatred of Israel, according to a former Hezbollah official.  “What brings us together, in terms of our hostility toward the Zionist entity, is greater than a dispute over the situation in Syria,” former Hezbollah MP Hassan Hoballah, stated recently.  Meanwhile, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu issued a statement this week emphasizing that Israel is staying out of the Syrian civil war, even as Western allies are considering getting more involved there. Netanyahu told a meeting of the Knesset’s Foreign Affairs and Defence Committee, “Israel does not take sides in the Syrian civil war.”  He also dismissed as “nonsense” rumours that Israeli soldiers are operating inside Syria undercover. However he also acknowledged that for 40 years there had been quiet in the Syrian arena, but went on to say. “…it could be that this is changing before our eyes. Iran is sending Assad money, resources and experts.  Israel will do all it can to prevent these weapons from being transferred to Hezbollah. We have a clear policy to prevent this.”  Syrian President Bashar Assad declared in an interview published on Monday by Lebanon’s Al-Akhbar newspaper that he is very serious about threatening Israel.  As the Israeli Defence Force (IDF) remain on high alert, they have warned civilians to keep away from the Golan Heights.

As I was monitoring the news regarding Syria this past week, I pondered on the Scripture of 2 Kings 6 and how the ancient army from Aram tried to defeat Israel.  The Arameans were a Northwest Semitic semi-nomadic people who originated in what is now modern day Syria (Biblical Aram).  By far the most lasting impact the Arameans had on the Middle East was the language that impacted the ancient Middle Eastern societies. The Arameans inhabited the Fertile Crescent (the land between the Tigris and Euphrates rivers) in the 14th century BC, but did not begin seriously influencing the region until three centuries later.  Interestingly, God had given this vast land to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob (Genesis 15:18).  If one was to look at the countries that would be affected if the borders given in Genesis became a reality today – it would clearly reshape the Middle East!

The Arameans were a military force until about the 9th century BC, when they fell to the attacking Assyrians. Although the Aramean nation fell, its language did not; Aramaic, which is very similar to Hebrew, was adopted not only by Babylonian Jews as the “Jewish tongue,” but also by the ‘well-informed’ as the language of choice. It wasn’t until Greek emerged several centuries later that Aramaic lost its prestige as the most sophisticated language.  However, if we look through the Scriptures between 1 Kings 11 and 2 Kings 6, we discover why God needed to raise up great men of God like Elijah and Elisha.

The disruption of the Israeli Monarchy at the death of Solomon and the subsequent wars between the two divided kingdoms not only weakened the nation, but also furnished the Arameans of Damascus with an unparalleled opportunity to consolidate their power and to make their kingdom the dominant force. The kingdoms of Israel and Judah, on the other hand, were so involved in mutual hostilities that they had little time to devote to the formidable threat of an unfriendly and increasingly powerful state forming so dangerously near at hand.  Today, Israel need to take heed of history, and stand strong against any division within their nation.  As we watch the rest of the Middle East splinter in rebellions and civil war, Israel need to seek the God of Israel to protect them from being dragged into these conflicts.  For those of us who are called to stand in support of Israel – prayer in this area is key.  In 2 Kings 6, we read, ‘So the king of Israel checked on the place indicated by the man of God. Time and again Elisha warned the king, so that he was on his guard in such places…’  Pray that Israeli leaders will have wisdom on how to respond to each provocative attack in a way that will ensure the safety of their people while not causing an undue escalation.

Saudi Arabia condemns Hezbollah interference in Syria

The whole issue regarding Syria is still causing shock waves throughout the Middle East.  This week Saudi Arabia condemned Hezbollah’s “blatant interference” in the Syrian crisis on Monday.  During a cabinet session chaired by Crown Prince Salman bin Abdulaziz Al Saud at Al-Salam Palace in Jeddah on Monday, the Saudi cabinet was briefed on the latest developments in the international arena, including the Syrian crisis.  Following the meeting, Saudi Minister of Culture and Information, Dr. Abdulaziz Khoja, informed the Saudi Press Agency (SPA) that the cabinet had discussed the escalating violence in Syria, the dangerous regional repercussions of the Syrian war, and the Syrian regime’s use of sophisticated weaponry to target Syrian cities, killing and displacing innocent civilians.

The cabinet also voiced concern over the destruction of Syrian infrastructure and the depletion of the capabilities of the Syrian people. The statement condemned the continuing acts of violence, killings, and crimes against the Syrian people, in addition to the foreign intervention that has turned Syria into an international battlefield.  The Saudi cabinet also called for greater response to the international calls for humanitarian aid to the Syrian people, warning of the deteriorating situation in the country. Riyadh called on the international community to shoulder its humanitarian responsibilities and work to deliver food and medical aid to all those affected.

Saudi Arabia also expressed concern about the violent conflict that has spilled over into the Lebanese city of Tripoli, reiterating Riyadh’s appeal to all parties to act wisely and not be deceived by calls for violence that only serve to harm Lebanon and its people. Saudi’s condemnation of Hezbollah’s role in the Syrian war came on the same day that the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) announced that it is set to take action against Hezbollah loyalists living in GCC member-states, of which Saudi Arabia is one.

Egypt’s most senior Muslim cleric, a leading voice of mainstream Sunni Islam across the Middle East, has also condemned ‘Shi’ites’ for engaging in “hateful sectarian strife” in Syria. In a statement that highlighted a deepening rift in the region since Hezbollah committed itself in the Syrian civil war, Grand Sheikh Ahmed al-Tayeb condemned the Lebanese Shi’ite militia for getting involved.  But why is he so angry?  Simply because by getting involved in the Syrian conflict Hezbollah are “turning away from its struggle against Israel.”  It’s amazing how the Sunni’s and Shi’ites hate each other and will war against each other, but mention Israel and they will unite!  Hezbollah fighters helped Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s forces retake the strategic town of Qusair near Homs on the Lebanese border last week from rebels drawn mostly from Syria’s Sunni majority and backed by Sunni powers like Saudi Arabia.

Meanwhile, Chairman of the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defence Committee, MK Avigdor Lieberman, lashed out at the European Union in a letter on Monday, calling its decision to exclude Hezbollah from a terror blacklist as “the ultimate hypocrisy.”  Lieberman stated: “Such a decision would not only send a strong message of zero tolerance towards the activities of the organization, but also prevent it from being able to raise funds and gain support across Europe.”  He noted that the threat Hezbollah poses to European countries increases every year, using as an example the recent Bulgaria bus bombing, the organization’s drug trafficking in Germany, and the recent conviction of a terror operative in Cyprus.

In related news, Austrian soldiers serving with the United Nations Disengagement Observer Force (UNDOF) peacekeeping mission on the Golan Heights have begun to withdraw, according to an announcement from the Austrian Defence Ministry on Wednesday.  According to reports, the first 60 to 80 soldiers will land in Vienna on Thursday. There have been Austrian troops patrolling the area to ensure Israeli and Syrian troops stay separated since the signing of the agreement between the two sides and the UN in 1974, but with the violence on the Syrian side of the border, Austria decided to end its participation in UNDOF.  Is this just the start of the nation’s leaving Israel to stand on their own?

Iran’s presidential election

This report is going out just before the Iranian presidential election get under way on Friday 14th June 2013.  Just who will take over from Mahmoud Ahmadinejad remains to be seen; certainly many are thinking that the world will be a safer place with him gone…or will it?  Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei is making sure that all of the possible candidates share his views and are thus acceptable replacements. In this year’s election, Iran’s Guardian Council has already ruled out 678 of 686 candidates, leaving eight to compete.  Ahmadinejad cannot run again because of term limits.

Many questions are currently being asked, such as “will pro-reform voters rally behind one of the relative moderate candidates – though not necessarily moderate in the West’s eyes – or will they boycott in protest of the relentless crackdowns in recent years?”  Many people have asked if Iran will continue to pursue the same determination to gain nuclear weapons as Ahmadinejad has done in recent years?  Actually, the Iranian president does not have a direct say in major policies such as the country’s nuclear program or relations with the West – those decisions are in the hands of the ruling clerics and its defenders, including the powerful Revolutionary Guard – however, the presidency can help sway views, as Ahmadinejad certainly did during his charge.

The president also directs the economy, which is an increasingly important role as international sanctions bite deeper over Tehran’s nuclear program.  As far as I can see, the two leading candidates are Saeed Jalili, 48, a conservative and head of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, who is also Iran’s head nuclear negotiator, and Muhammad Bagher Ghalibaf, 52, who is in his second term as mayor of Tehran.  There were rumours recently that Ahmadinejad was throwing his support behind Jalili, who said on Saturday that Iran needs to continue its nuclear program despite international pressures.   Iran of course is currently playing a dangerous game, but as long as the world does not call its bluff, Iran will be able to continue on its current course, regardless of who wins the coming elections.

UN Watch under attack.

I received an email this week from Hillel C. Neuer, Executive Director of UN Watch, a non-governmental organization based in Geneva whose mandate is to monitor the performance of the United Nations (UN).  I’ve often reported on what issues UN Watch are fighting against and wholeheartedly support their work.  In Hillel Neuer’s email, it stated that Richard Falk, the UN’s special rapporteur on ‘Palestinian human rights’, called on the U.N. Human Rights Council to shut down the watchdog organization UN Watch.  According to UN Watch, Richard Falk is the U.N.’s permanent investigator against Israel. He endorses 9/11 conspiracy theories, supports Hamas, and exonerates Al Qaeda. Days after the Boston Marathon terrorist attack, he blamed the bombings on America and Israel.  UN Watch successfully exposes his abuses, getting him condemned time and again by world leaders, and throwing him on the defensive. Click here to see dramatic new video.  In retaliation, Falk is now trying to get the U.N. to remove UN Watch’s observer credentials and to shut them down.  This must not happen – so please stand with UN Watch and pray that Falk will once again fail and be exposed.

In an unprecedented act, Falk’s report devotes a scathing rant against the non-governmental organization.  Hillel C. Neuer states, “Falk lashes out at UN Watch, saying we’ve made his life a living hell, that we’ve completely disrupted his “Legitimacy War” against Israel.  In his own words, he testifies to UN Watch’s incredible impact: Falk objects that UN Watch “demeaned” and “defamed” his character, damaged his “credibility,” and destroyed the “effectiveness” of his mandate.  Falk expresses outrage that UN Watch got world leaders—and even his own boss, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon—to denounce him. As a result, journalists ignored his latest reports against Israel.  Falk complains that UN Watch “smears” have been “sent to diplomats and United Nations officials, including the Secretary-General, who apparently accepted the allegations at face value, issuing public criticism with no effort to seek [my] views.”  Falk laments that UN Watch won’t give him a moment’s rest, and that our “smear campaign” is carried out “in numerous settings,” from the UN to “university venues where the Special Rapporteur gives lectures.”  Falk concludes that UN Watch has managed to “divert attention” from his “message” and to “shift public interest away” from his campaign of boycott, divestment and sanctions against Israel.  Falk is lobbying furiously this week to get the dictator-dominated Human Rights Council to “investigate” UN Watch, falsely accusing us of being an Israeli-controlled puppet.”

According to Hillel Neuer, the U.S. Ambassador Eileen Donahoe has just declared that “the United States completely rejects and condemns the irresponsible call to investigate a legitimate and UN-accredited NGO.”  ADL’s Abe Foxman and Heritage Foundation’s Brett Schaefer have also rallied to their defence.  Neuer states, “Let me assure you: We will stand our ground. We won’t back down.”

David Soakell

(CFI Church Liaison Officer (UK) & WoZ News Report Correspondent)

 Sources: Unless otherwise stated: Personal sources throughout Israel along with The Jerusalem Post, BBC News, CFI Jerusalem, Arutz-7 News, Israeli Embassy London & Israel National Radio

Clay Shirky wrote HERE COMES EVERYBODY in 2008, and what he has stated about the communication capabilities of the internet has proven to be eerily true today. As one can glean from this talk by Shirky at Harvard, the affects of the internet are becoming broadly social enough that the internet is not a decoration on contemporary society, it is a challenge to it. Like the communication revolutions of the past – Gutenberg’s printing press, the telegraph and telephone, recording media, and the ability to harass broadcasting – the internet is a medium that brings capabilities together: broadcasting information, community-building, and interacting with/responding to information and people. In a very short time, we have evolved in our usage of this communication tool from sharing, to conversation, to collaboration, and (now and more in the future) to collective action.

One need only look to the Arab Spring and the Occupy Wall Street social movements to realize that Shirky’s trajectory has proven to be a sound model to understand how internet technologies will be leveraged to change the world. As we share, communicate, and collaborate, we are heading toward the day when significant global issues – climate change, international conflict, etc. – will be ameliorated due to the collective action of those who use internet technologies as their platform.

Erdogan still has a choice between rising to the heights of statesmanship of former French President Charles de Gaulle or by spending his remaining political life as a Turkish likeness of Russian President Vladimir Putin.

The questions being asked of Mr Erdogan is whether he has the political determination to accept the demands of the initial protestors, which started in the occupied Gezi Park. Those frustrations are being asked, too, in Turkey’s capital Ankara, on Istanbul’s Taksim Square.

For Mr Erdogan to concede to those demands would mean giving up on his personal dream to build the Ottoman barracks on the park and turn it into a shopping mall. But his track record would suggest this is highly unlikely.

Arguably, the single most important trigger for the rapid spread of events was the prime minister’s inability and unwillingness to listen to reasoned critique and disagreement. This inability has manifested itself over the last few years.

Erdogan’s rhetoric has been spiralling out of control and has ranged from lecturing women on how many children to bear to calling everyone who enjoys drinking a beer in a sidewalk café an alcoholic.

What is more, the country has used an excessively violent policing strategy, with which the government has oppressed almost all legitimate protest by trade unions, political movements and student groups.

Such extreme use of force looks awkward in a country where the government was re-elected with almost 50% of the vote just two years ago and where, remarkably, its macroeconomic development indicators tell a story of unfettered progress.

Mr Erdogan’s government still enjoys such popular support, but one should wonder why it is unable to tolerate a few protests here and there and why it appears incapable of giving into what are very reasonable demands against the excesses of environmental degradation and rent-based urban renewal policies.

And why would an elected prime minister, who has, until now, been respected abroad and at home, use the force of his security apparatus to crush so brutally any popular dissent? Such protests are far from threatening Mr Erdogan’s place at the top of Turkey’s political system.

Part of the answer lies in Turkey’s recent record of undemocratic manipulations to bring the government down. Kemalist elites, the military, the judiciary and the so-called ‘deep state’ rogue elements acting within the visible state structures, conspired to terminate the Justice and Development Party’s (AKP)  government from the very moment of its first election in 2002.

Ever since, the AKP has faced several attempts at power grab – from an ultra-nationalist conspiracy in the mid- 2000s (based on unresolved assassinations of Christian missionaries) to the so-called Republican Marches against the election as President of Abdullah Gul to the Constitutional Court’s only narrowly averted closure case against the ruling party in 2008.

These experiences have led the AKP government to look at Turkish politics through the prism of conspiracy theories, and the blame for this paradigm shift does not lie just with the AKP.

More significantly, however, is the manipulations the Erdogan government has faced from the judiciary and the military. This led to the AKP government filling both institutions with sympathisers, adding to an already weak system of checks and balances in Turkey.

The confluence of both the conspiratorial mind-set and a lack of checks and balances has created the ground for Erdogan’s unhealthy mix of extreme self-confidence on the one side and his insecurity vis-à-vis public criticism on the other.

The shopping mall in Gezi Park, the third bridge over the Bosporus, the new airport and a canal project that is supposed to connect the Marmara and the Black Sea have been devised and planned without any public debate or consultation.

That the prime minister sees any criticism of these projects as manipulations by domestic and external enemies is a sure sign of his insecurity. That he failed to grasp that the Taksim protests were not started by undercover military agents, Kemalists, Iranian agents or Syrian provocateurs may yet mark the beginning of his undoing.

What is needed is for Mr Erdogan to be able to arrive at a sober consideration of the situation by giving-in to the demands of the protestors in Gezi Park, by calling an impartial review of recent police brutality, and by giving some thought to his heavy policing strategies, all of which have turned Turkey into a police state.

If he did that, Mr Erdogan would still have a chance to enter Turkish history as a statesman who carried his country into the 21st century, disassembled the military’s tutelage, ended the Kurdish War and granted long-fought-for rights to the country’s largest minority, the Kurds.

If he fails, and drags the country towards polarisation and political unrest, his government, the economy, and the people of Turkey will lose.

Every country needs a leader, but it’s so hard to find a good leader, a leader who doesn’t care about money or power, but just helps the people. And of course a leader chosen by the people.

Unfortunately there were a lot of fights and there were even deaths. It’s so frustrated that first something bad must happen before people can live the way they want. People are sometimes so cruel, especially when it’s about money or power.

Of course there must be rules, but there must also be democracy. All people have the right to share there opinion. We live in a modern world, a world where peace is so important. But why is that so hard?

Last month the Center for Strategic Research, which is a think tank affiliated with the Turkish Foreign Ministry, published what it called a conceptual map of Turkish foreign policy under the AKP. It is a 35 page attempt to define what it sees as important foreign policy concepts and terms used by the AKP, and it is simply stunning in its complete lack of self-awareness. In fact, if I didn’t know any better, I would swear that it was not a real report but rather a parody. To take one of my favorite entries, “rhythmic diplomacy” is defined thusly: “Although it has not found an exact conceptual equivalence in international relations theory, rhythmic diplomacy is a specific style of foreign policy practiced in Turkey. It is a tactical activity that envisages simultaneously and harmoniously using diplomacy in different fields.” In case you are still confused, there is a quote from Davutoğlu purporting to explain it. “What is meant by rhythm is the co-existence of mobility and harmony. If there is mobility but not harmony it might lead to chaos. Unnecessary leaps might bring along unnecessary risks. However, if you have rhythm but no mobility than you will not make any progress. There needs to be mobility as well. Yet, if you desire for the perfect harmony and wait for it there will be no mobility.” Confused? You should be, although this combination of arrogant assertiveness and meaningless pablum is what Davutoğlu has ridden to widespread international acclaim and a reputation for unparalleled brilliance.

Other gems include lines like, “Being an order-building actor has been said to be one of the methodological macro-level objectives of foreign policy in the AK Party era.” Or asserting that Turkey has successfully pursued a win-win strategy when it comes to Cyprus. Or describing Turkey as a “wise country” which “is listened to on global matters, who predicts incidents in advance, takes precautions against these, and produces solutions for them.” Or the fact that despite the sheer volume of self-serving nonsense contained in its pages, the very first term defined in the paper is self-perception. A couple of weeks ago, some good friends – who are all veteran Turkey analysts – and I got a good chuckle out of mocking the report, but just stop for a moment and reflect upon how even more insane this stuff sounds in light of what is going on in Taksim, John F. Kennedy Avenue in Ankara, and other places around Turkey where the police are wreaking havoc on protestors and civilians of all stripes. Once Christiane Amanpour and Richard Engel are reporting live from Istanbul in gas masks while the world watches the Turkish police storm Taksim Square on the orders of the government – and after promising not to touch any of the protestors in Gezi Park, no less – your claim to be some sort of exceptionally wise country and model state is pretty much destroyed.

Perception matters a great deal in world politics, but in Turkey’s case perception has been even more important, as it fueled Turkey as a figurative growth stock all the while masking some very serious problems. As should now be clear to everyone, Turkish democracy is not nearly as robust as the government wanted the world to believe. Turkey under Erdoğan has had a real problem with creeping authoritarianism that is looking a lot less creeping every day. And yes, the problem is authoritarianism and not Islamism. This has been a recurring theme for me, as lots of people have a hair trigger when it comes to any action on the part of the AKP that has a whiff of Islamist rationale behind it while glossing over the much larger issue, which is garden variety autocratic and illiberal behavior.

On a related note, Michael Rubin somehow accused Aaron Stein and me of “dismiss[ing] the erosion of liberty in order to stay on the correct side of political correctness” because we interpret Erdoğan’s alcohol bill as more a problem of authoritarian instincts than a problem of Islamism, and says that since the protests have started – which Rubin implies are being driven primarily by the alcohol bill – “there has not been subsequent introspection about why they were so anxious to dismiss a repression which so many Turks so clearly felt and which so many now protest against.” First, if Rubin genuinely believes that the protestors in the streets are primarily motivated by an alleged Islamist turn by Erdoğan and the AKP, then I have serious doubts about whether he has actually spoken with anyone in Turkey over the last two weeks. The alcohol bill is certainly a factor in these protests, but it is one factor of many, and anger over a majoritarian theory of governing, mistreatment of minorities, crony capitalism, rampant over-development in Istanbul, and most importantly police cracking heads in the service of clearing environmental protestors out of Gezi Park have absolutely nothing to do with backlash against Islamism. I’d urge Rubin to read today’s post from Zeynep Tufekci, who has spent days interviewing Gezi protestors and has catalogued their complaints, which have nothing to do with religion or Islamism. Second, if Rubin thinks I have dismissed Turkish repression, it is glaringly obvious that he has never read a thing I have written. He might want to try this or this or this, or perhaps he might want to check out “subsequent introspection” such as this widely read piece. *Deep breath* And now back to your regularly scheduled programming.

Turkish economic growth has been driven by foreign borrowing and increasing reliance on energy imports from Russia and Iran, which have led to an over-leveraged economy and a structural current account deficit, neither of which have any prospect of abating in the near future. There is a civil war taking place right across Turkey’s southern border, and not only is it not going to end any time soon, the Turkish military is in such a sorry state as to be unable to respond to the downing of its aircraft or to stop the Syrian military from shooting across to the Turkish side. These are all problems that have existed in one form or another for some time, but now that Erdoğan has decided to go postal on his own citizens, it is going to be a lot more difficult for Turkey to paper them over.

Turkey is about to see its foreign financing disappear as the perception of Turkey as an island of stability goes up in a cloud of tear gas smoke. The enormous building projects designed to attract the 2020 Olympics are now going to be used solely by Istanbul residents, since not only will Turkey not get the Olympics but regular tourists are going to stay away in droves. Erdoğan and Davutoğlu can also forget about hosting various foreign conferences, as Western countries are going to elect to forego the optics of meeting in a country where protestors are being dubbed as marginal terrorists. The next time that Davutoğlu insists that Turkey isn’t a model for anyone while actually implying that Turkey is indeed a regional exemplar for Arab states to emulate, who is going to take him seriously? The next time Erdoğan crows about how the European economy needs Turkey more than Turkey needs Europe, who isn’t going to dismiss him out of hand? What Turkish diplomats are going to have the gall to seriously talk about Turkish democracy as a genuine success story? All of those issues that Turkey was able to largely keep under wraps by painting a portrait of a country on the rise, a country with a vibrant economy and a vibrant democracy and a vibrant diplomacy, are now about to be exposed to the world.

I wrote last week that Erdoğan isn’t going anywhere and that these protests are not going to dislodge him, and I am confident that is still the case. When this is all over, Turkey is still going to be stuck with its prime minister, for better or worse. But that does not mean that what is taking place is inconsequential; indeed, the long run consequences of the last few days are potentially devastating. Erdoğan has taken the conscious decision to pursue a strategy of solidifying his base and pitting it against everyone else in an us-versus-them rhetorical battle. He has dismissed the people in the streets as marginals, hoodlums, foreign agents, international provocateurs, parasitic financiers, and any other derogatory term that he can come up with. He is quite clearly trying to mobilize his supporters by acting as if his opponents are attempting to carry out a civilian coup, and by repeatedly refusing to stand down and instead upping the ante with tear gas, truncheons, water cannons, and endless tone deaf insults, he is beginning to tear the country apart. There are numerous cleavages in Turkish society that run along fault lines of religious-secular, rural-urban, conservative-liberal, rich-poor, and Sunni-Alevi-Kurdish, to name just a few. Some of these have been more under wraps than others, but this brings them all to the surface in a way that will be difficult to undo. After the government’s over the top and appalling response to the protests, the AKP won’t be able to command half of the votes anymore come the next election, and neither will it be able to run on the economy after what I think is about to happen. What this means is more of an appeal to people’s base instincts, more nationalist rhetoric, more pitting one group against another. I think we are in for a return to a distinct past flavor of Turkish politics, and not one that has ever ended well. Turkey’s house of cards has fallen down, and everyone can now see what Erdoğan has been holding.

The conflict continues to rage in Turkey, just over two weeks since the protests began.

What began on the 28th of May a series of peaceful protests intended to prevent the destruction of Gezi Park – one of the few green oases remaining the the city – has escalated into widespread protests.

Across the country people are rising up in anger, discontented with their Prime Minister Erdogan and his stifling conservatism.

In the weeks that have followed the initial confrontation, Gezi Park has been transformed into a hub of activity, taken over by tents belonging to leftists, environmentalists, liberals, students and professionals alike.

More than 9 000 people have been arrested in over 90 demonstrations across the country.

Four people, including a policeman, have died in the protests.

The overwhelming consensus is that the proposed followthrough of the development plan even after the ongoing public displays of discontent coupled with the violence of the crackdowns are indicative of an overbearing (possibly authoritarian?) government.

Recent developments include further crackdowns on protests just hours after Prime Minister Erdogan demanded an immediate end to clashes between protestors and police.

Al-Jazeera’s most recent report on the protests (link below) quote a protester as having said:

The governor promised not to make a move against Gezi Park. But for nearly eight to 10 hours the police have been attacking, even in the park…. this is brutal.

Despite the prime minister’s best efforts, the protestors in Turkey will not be ignored.

Demanding an end to the dissent while fresh riot police are deployed sends the wrong message entirely. Reform of some description appears to be necessary – why else have such protests become so widespread?

Related/Source Articles:

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/europe/2013/06/201361122543931434.html

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/05/31/istanbul-erupts-in-violence-after-protests-against-razing-of-gezi-park.html

http://defnesumanblogs.com/2013/06/12/resist-istanbul-or-how-i-got-teargassed-again-and-started-losing-hope-that-this-government-will-ever-stop-the-violence/