Tag: Turkey

  • Why Doesn’t the Islamic World Have a Superpower to Challenge Israel?

    Why Doesn’t the Islamic World Have a Superpower to Challenge Israel?

    The conflict between Muslims and Jews has historical roots extending over centuries, primarily driven by religious differences rather than just territorial disputes. This is why the ongoing Israel-Hamas conflict attracts worldwide attention and involves Muslims and Jews globally. Social media is abuzz with propaganda from both sides. However, on the ground, Israel has a significant advantage as a sovereign state with advanced project management, while Hamas, which governs Gaza and initiated the fresh wave of conflict with terrorist attacks in Israel, finds itself on the defensive with only weakened support from Iran. The conflict appears to be heavily skewed in favor of one side, with the Hamas side suffering greatly.

    In terms of international politics, Israel receives support from superpowers like the United States, the United Kingdom, and France, while countries like Russia, China, and India maintain a more neutral stance. This support provides Israel with a substantial advantage. On the other hand, Hamas and Gaza mainly receive backing from Iran, whose capabilities are in question. This raises the question: why are there no superpowers in the Arab or Muslim world capable of challenging Israel?

    The answer lies in U.S. supremacy in a unipolar world. Although there is widespread anger and calls for solidarity with Hamas across the Islamic world, which stretches from Morocco to Indonesia, these are largely limited to public statements. This situation represents a clear victory for U.S. diplomacy, which has either aligned powerful countries with U.S. interests or severely weakened others. A powerful or superpower country typically has strong leadership, economic influence, political influence, strong international alliances, and a strong military, but few countries in the Islamic world possess all these features combined. The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Turkey are considered powerful countries within the Islamic world today, but they are all aligned with the United States. Turkey is a NATO member with tight ties to the U.S., while Saudi Arabia and the UAE are highly reliant on business with the U.S., and their leadership maintains strong connections with U.S. diplomats. They also have military defense pacts with the U.S. Qatar, one of the wealthiest Islamic countries, also maintains a close relationship with the U.S. Despite their connections with Islamist leaders and organizations, and their roles in mediating with groups like Hamas and the Taliban.

    All the countries that previously challenged Israel are now weakened and humbled by U.S. strategies and diplomacy. Egypt, home to the largest army in the Middle East and the leader of last century’s Arab movements against Israel, along with Libya, Iraq, and Syria – countries that once challenged Israel—have lost the leadership capable of making such decisions. They are experiencing severe economic decline and face significant domestic challenges. Now, it seems that the Islamic Republic of Iran is currently the only major power from the Muslim world still challenging Israel. However, Iran has also been economically weakened by strong U.S. sanctions and faces serious domestic issues. Iran has been stunned and humbled by Israel through severe attacks. While Iran has vowed revenge, it has not taken any significant actions that are visibly effective. Nonetheless, Iran has not completely withdrawn from its ideological commitment to opposing Israel, unlike other states. Iran continues to fund organizations fighting against Israel, and Qatar is also reported to be providing support. Despite these efforts, no one is currently able to effectively challenge Israel, highlighting the weakness of the Islamic world outside of its elaborate organizations.

    As Israel is not ready for a truce, it seems likely that Gaza will be systematically annexed by Israel. This outcome appears inevitable. The stance of Islamic countries, which avoids a regional war, may bring peace, but it is clear that the position of Muslim governments does not reflect the sentiment of their populations. This could lead to a revival of terrorist organizations like ISIS in the Islamic world, which would bring more challenges in the region.

  • Will the Gaza Conflict Cause ISIS and Al-Qaida Revival?

    Will the Gaza Conflict Cause ISIS and Al-Qaida Revival?

    Palestine is an emotional issue for global Muslims. People who support Muslim solidarity across borders, from the United States to Indonesia, are now feeling angered. So-called rich Islamic countries and secular nations can’t do anything about the Gaza conflict, while the media in these countries continue to report Israel’s actions in Gaza as genocide. The governments follow the strategy of avoiding animosity with Israel or the United States, but they are not blocking media coverage of the conflict in Gaza, and the media continue to celebrate it as usual. While Al Jazeera and Al Arabiya, the state outlets of Middle Eastern governments, strongly propagate the Gaza issue, their own governments can’t do anything about it. Political analysts believe this situation will drive more young Muslims, who are desperate due to various conditions including the situation in Gaza, towards radical Islam, and they are easily swayed by Islamist organizations that fight against mainstream opinions, laws, and governments. The Islamic population feels betrayed by the world, and the media stoke emotional factors, which, combined with tough living conditions and unemployment, as well as patriotic far-right movements opposing Islamism in the West, create what is considered the perfect ground for the revival of the Islamic State, Al-Qaeda, and similar groups.

    Security services across the Middle East, including the Gulf countries, fear that the ongoing conflict may lead to a flow of radicalized youth to ISIS and al-Qaeda through social media groups. These individuals might travel to regions controlled by these groups, where they could receive training and indoctrinate more young people to conduct terrorist attacks. The United Nations has published a series of reports highlighting how major extremist groups are exploiting the war in Gaza to attract new recruits and mobilize existing supporters, even though both al-Qaeda and ISIS have condemned Hamas as apostates for decades.

    Officials and analysts are reporting an increase in Islamic militant extremism in various areas. An ISIS branch in the Sinai desert has recently become more lethal, and rising attacks by the group in Syria have raised concerns, with several plots thwarted in Jordan. In a recent attack, seven Syrian soldiers were killed in an ISIS ambush in Raqqa province, northern Syria, with 383 fighters from government forces and their proxy militias killed since the beginning of the year, according to the UK-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights. Last month, Jordanian security services uncovered a plot in Amman when explosives detonated while being prepared by extremists in a poor neighborhood. Subsequent raids led to the detention of a network of predominantly young men who were apparently radicalized by ISIS propaganda. Reports from India indicate that the Islamic State is trying to recruit Muslim youth willing to fight against the nation and Israel. In Turkey, authorities arrested dozens of people last month to combat an increased threat from an ISIS affiliate with a strong presence there. Meanwhile, al-Qaeda’s branch in Yemen has launched a new effort to inspire followers to attack Western, Israeli, Jewish, and other targets. The issue extends beyond existing terrorist organizations, as increasingly radicalized youth may choose to join new groups or form their own in areas historically free from such threats, due to the borderless nature of the internet.

    The Gaza war may serve as a seminal cause for radicalizing the next generation of jihadis, as they are increasingly exposed to volatile images and videos from Gaza through the internet. Although the immediate consequences may not be apparent, they are likely to manifest over the coming years. The conflict has significantly heightened the terrorism threat and elicited a strong emotional reaction. Regional officials emphasize the impact of continuous exposure to images of suffering from Gaza, available 24/7 on television and the internet, describing the conflict as a ‘Push Factor’ that encourages extremist violence across the Middle East and beyond. According to Palestinian health officials, more than 38,000 people have died in the Israeli offensive into Gaza, with about half of those identified being women and children. 

    A vast regional occupation by the Islamic State, similar to their previous control stretching from Iraq to Syria, is expected to reestablish itself. Despite the opposition forces in this area being highly equipped and prepared for battle, ISIS has launched over 100 attacks on government forces and Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) in Syria in recent months, with violence peaking in March at levels not seen in several years. ISIS cells are operating at higher levels than before. Kurdish forces opposing ISIS face severe challenges from the armies of Turkey, Iraq, and Syria. In this complex war zone, combined with poor governance, the presence of individuals willing to fight and die for the cause could contribute to the creation of a caliphate and expansion into new areas. As more Islamic factions demand separate regions and attempt to overthrow democratic governments, anarchy is resulting. Consequently, the emergence of a more effective caliphate can be expected.

    Islamic extremist groups are inundating the internet with material that supports Gaza, Hamas, and Islam, while inciting anger towards Jews, Israel, the United States, and even Islamic Gulf countries. They are spreading instructions for bomb-making, violence, coups, and Islamic methods of killing, which easily influence the youth. The foundational ideas of Islamizing the world and killing infidels are more aggressively propagated through the internet than ever before. A new generation is growing up with an ideology that threatens peaceful coexistence in many countries. As more Muslim countries descend into anarchy, radicalization becomes increasingly feasible, and the revival of notorious Islamist terrorist organizations seems imminent, posing a growing risk to global stability.

  • Is Turkey Really Going to Fight Against Israel?

    Is Turkey Really Going to Fight Against Israel?

    Turkey and Israel maintained a good relationship, while other Islamic countries, from Morocco to Indonesia, do not even recognize the state of Israel. Israel and Turkey formally established diplomatic relations in 1949, shortly after Israel was founded. Both countries prioritized cooperation in economics, diplomacy, military, and strategic affairs. Although disputes have arisen, diplomats from both sides have worked to keep the relationship intact.

    However, in recent decades, under the leadership of Islamist leader Erdoğan, the relationship between the two countries has deteriorated considerably. Relations worsened further after Israel’s retaliation in Gaza, with Turkey condemning Israel and supporting Hamas. As tensions escalate, many question the likelihood of Turkey intervening, given Erdoğan’s strong support for Hamas and his advocacy for global Muslim solidarity. Will Turkey fight against Israel to save Palestinians?

    During a meeting with his ruling AK Party in his hometown of Rize on Sunday, President Tayyip Erdogan suggested that Turkey might intervene in Israel, similar to its previous actions in Libya and Nagorno-Karabakh. In the televised address that was trending on X, he stated that there was no reason Turkey could not undertake such actions and emphasized the need for strength to pursue these steps. Although he did not specify the form the intervention might take, he confidently highlighted Turkey’s defense industry  throughout his speech.

    Erdogan has demonstrated a readiness to engage in significant interventions in the Middle East, often citing Turkey’s strategic interests and invoking a sense of Ottoman heritage. He has participated in attacks in Nagorno-Karabakh alongside Azerbaijan, showing hostility toward Armenia and advocating for a grand Turkic ethnic union. Erdogan also supports the faction in Libya that controls Tripoli, which opposes the faction backed by France and other groups. Additionally, Turkey frequently conducts operations along the Syrian border, targeting Kurdish-controlled areas, and there are reports suggesting potential intervention in Kurdish territories in Iraq. It’s interesting that while Turkey does not support the creation of Kurdistan, it actively advocates for the Palestinian cause.

    Erdoğan has been highly critical of Israel’s actions during its conflict with Hamas, accusing Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of genocide. Turkey has halted all trade with Israel and recalled its ambassador. The Turkish foreign ministry compared Netanyahu to Adolf Hitler, claiming that, just as Hitler’s reign ended, so too will Netanyahu’s. The ministry also declared that those who seek to destroy the Palestinians will be held accountable and that humanity will stand with the Palestinians, who will not be defeated.

    In response, Israel recalled its diplomats from Turkey and accused Ankara of supporting terrorist organizations, including Hamas and Iran. Israeli Foreign Minister Israel Katz comparing Erdoğan to Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein. Katz suggested that Erdoğan’s threats against Israel are reminiscent of Saddam Hussein’s actions and cautioned Erdoğan to remember the outcome of Saddam’s threats.

    Turkey, where about 99.8% of the population are Muslims, was regarded as secular until Erdoğan’s leadership. If Turkey were to enter the war, it could be perceived as a reestablishment of Ottoman Turkey. While the global Muslim population is frustrated by the lack of punitive action against Israel, especially as Lebanon, Syria, and Iran face frequent attacks, Turkey’s intervention could restore some of the historical significance associated with the Ottoman Empire and potentially position it as a leading force in the Islamic world.Such a move would likely have a significant impact on the global order.

    There is no doubt that Turkey is a major military power, boasting NATO’s second-largest military and advanced munitions technology, including its renowned drones. Its involvement could present a significant challenge to Israel, unlike Iran, Egypt, or Saudi Arabia, which face geographical limitations and a lack of war experience. However, the likelihood of Turkey intervening remains low due to US influence over the country. If a conflict does occur, Turkey’s economy may struggle to sustain it, potentially leading to hardship for its people. Additionally, the US might then support the creation of Kurdistan, an expanded Armenia, or a unified Cyprus, which could threaten Turkey’s existence.

    Despite international media reports, it is more realistic to view Erdoğan and the Turkish government’s comments as part of a strategy to maintain his image as the defender of Islam. This is particularly relevant given that the Muslim population, who are staunch supporters of Erdoğan, are discontented with the situation in Gaza. If public dissatisfaction persists, Erdoğan faces a significant challenge as the opposition gains support among the people.

    Although direct confrontation is unlikely, Turkey is exploring all possible options against Israel. Reports indicate that Turkey may formally submit a declaration of intervention in South Africa’s genocide case against Israel regarding the Gaza conflict to the International Court of Justice. As a seasoned politician, Erdoğan knows that without addressing the concerns of the Islamist populace and taking a strong stance on the Palestinian issue, he cannot maintain his political position or assert Turkey’s leadership in the Muslim world.

  • Will the Turkic States Group Become a Major International Player?

    Will the Turkic States Group Become a Major International Player?

    Turkic and Turkey might sound confusing, like Turkey the bird and Turkey the country, but there’s a distinction. Turkey is a Turkic state, but not all Turkic states are Turkey. Let’s not drag this into more confusion: Turkic states are a group that includes Turkey. They share a common ethnic background, similar language, cuisine, and almost identical culture, extending from Kazakhstan to Turkey. This includes most Central Asian countries except Tajikistan, the Caucasian state Azerbaijan, and Turkey (Türkiye). Some even include Hungary due to historical and linguistic ties.

    Currently, these countries are part of an evolving group that can influence Asian politics, global politics, and the global economy. They support and care for each other, with kebabs being a beloved symbol of their shared culture. Historically, the political evolution of this group was limited due to Russian influence. Now, they are free and more united.

    The Organization of Turkic States (OTS) is the union of Turkic states that we are discussing. It includes Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Azerbaijan, and Turkey as full members, with Turkmenistan, Hungary, and Northern Cyprus as observers. The OTS was founded in 2009 to strengthen the bond between these countries. During the 8th summit in 2021, the organization was restructured to enhance cooperation, with refreshed objectives ranging from trade to extradition agreements. While many believe the OTS’ main aim is cooperation and growth, others think the organization’s main objective is the cultural revival of Muslim Turkic culture and protection from external influences, such as Russia’s historical cultural integration with Central Asian countries. As OTS eagerly pursues expanded trade relations with the West, the leaders of Turkic states in Eurasia are cautious about importing Western values. 

    The latest summit of the OTS was held in Azerbaijan, showcasing the dichotomy of interests among the Turkic heads of state. Hosted by Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev in the Nagorno-Karabakh town of Shusha, a region recently recaptured from Armenia, Aliyev highlighted in his opening remarks his vision for the Organization of Turkic States (OTS) to become an influential global entity capable of protecting regional interests from outside influence. He emphasized that the OTS should become one of the prominent international forces, stressing the commitment of their peoples to traditional values and shared ethnic roots that closely bind their countries. According to him, the 21st century must be a century of progress for the Turkic world.

    After praising traditional values and shared heritage, Aliyev stressed the significance of enhancing trade, declaring, “Expanding the East-West transport corridor is among our foremost priorities”. His sentiments were echoed by other participants, including Kazakhstan’s president, Kassym-Jomart Tokayev, who stressed the need to utilize the full potential of the Trans-Caspian international transport route. Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban, who attended the Shusha summit, referred to the OTS as a “Very important organization for cooperation between the West and East”.

    Aliyev urged his fellow heads of state to show greater commitment to the OTS through increased budget allocations, noting Azerbaijan’s recent $2 million contribution to enhance the OTS secretariat. They recognize the economic potential of the bloc, as member countries are rich in minerals and generate significant revenue from their resources. With Russia’s influence weakening, superpowers such as China, India, Korea, and the United States are keen to explore opportunities in the region. It is believed that uniting these countries will increase their scope and opportunities.

    Political scientists believe that the OTS represents a solution for Turkic leaders to navigate their complex political relationships. Aliyev’s efforts to bolster the OTS come at a time when Baku’s relations with the West have deteriorated. Over the past year, Aliyev and other top Azerbaijani officials have openly expressed grievances against the U.S., France, and major European bodies. In his inaugural address in February, Aliyev signaled further divergence from the West, speaking enthusiastically about pan-Turkic cooperation. Although Aliyev appreciates ties with Russia, they maintain a certain distance. Azerbaijan frequently boasts of its friendship with Pakistan, considers Turkey a brother, and is open to cooperation with India and Iran for trade. While trade is welcome, maintaining Turkic identity is their top priority. This sentiment is shared by other Turkic states, which rely on trade with various superpowers  but prioritize their cultural unity and Turkic identity.

    It’s certain that the OTS has great potential. With its strategically important location, population, economy, minerals, and everything necessary to grow into a superpower, they can impact world dynamics akin to the impact of the EU on global dynamics. United, they will gain more bargaining power and can effectively utilize their resources, particularly minerals currently in high global demand. The geographical area, intersecting important trade routes across all directions, west to east and north to south, will promote their growth. So, if they remain united, as Aliyev said, it’s a century for the Turkic world. 

  • What Led Turkey to Suspend Trade with Israel?

    What Led Turkey to Suspend Trade with Israel?

    The encampment protests for Gaza are making huge waves around the globe. Western nations like the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, and Australia are witnessing the protests on a large scale, and countries like Colombia are openly starting to criticize Israel. On this occasion, there was criticism that many protests are not visible from Muslim countries, especially from the Middle East. However, now Turkey, which claims Ottoman hereditary so proudly under the Islamist politician Recep Tayyip Erdogan, is taking strong actions against Israel by halting all trades with Israel and accusing it of humanitarian tragedy in Gaza. Turkey’s decision is a huge and brave step, considering Turkey had an amicable relationship with Israel and is a NATO member and ally of the United States. Historically, Turkey recognized Israel when they announced independence, while many Muslim countries were reluctant to do so. The fruitful relationship started to sour during the Erdogan regime and was taken to its lowest level by Turkey’s imposition of a trade embargo, overthrowing trade agreements, and foreign relations in the area.

    Turkey’s trade ministry announced late on Thursday that export and import transactions related to Israel have been stopped, covering all products. The ministry emphasized that these measures would be strictly and decisively implemented until the Israeli government ensures an uninterrupted and sufficient flow of humanitarian aid to Gaza. Turkey’s trade ministry had previously announced restrictions on exports to Israel in early April, halting the export of iron and steel products and construction equipment. The decision has a huge economic impact because as of 2023, the two countries had a trade volume of $6.8 billion. This trade embargo by Turkey will also cause harm to the Turkish economy, as Turkey’s exports mostly go to western countries with close ties to Israel, and Israel itself is a top importer of Turkish goods. And as expected, Israel drew strong criticism of Turkey’s decision. Israel’s foreign minister, Israel Katz, accused Turkey’s president, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, of acting like a “Dictator” in response to the reported restrictions. This dispute is likely to deepen tensions between the two former close allies. Katz accused Erdoğan of “Violating agreements by obstructing ports for Israeli imports and exports” alleging that he disregards the interests of Turkish citizens and businessmen, and ignores international trade agreements. Katz also stated that Israel would attempt to replace any lost products through local production and imports from other countries. Last month, he had criticized Erdoğan for publicizing his latest meeting in Istanbul with the head of Hamas’s politburo, Ismail Haniyeh.

    The reason behind Turkey’s decision, or Erdogan’s decision, is political. Turkey knows this action could sour relationships with Israel and, consequently, the West. However, the West will not take any action against Turkey now. There are several reasons for this. There is global sentiment against civilian killings in Gaza, which is also present in the West. Following the killings of aid workers and university protests, Western media are not actively supporting Israel anymore; they are maintaining a neutral stance instead of siding against Hamas, the terrorist organization responsible for brutal killings in Israel and taking hostages. This shift in Western mindset is providing Erdogan with a sense of security, as there is support for Turkey’s decision among Western populations. It’s evident that there is significant sentiment among Muslims worldwide in support of fellow Muslims in Palestine, and there is also resentment toward wealthy Gulf countries that have not taken significant steps to support Palestine, despite their close ties with Israel and the US. Erdogan can leverage this sentiment to portray himself as a true Ottoman leader, as he desires. As a seasoned politician, Erdogan can navigate this sentiment to push his agenda of Islamism In Turkey, especially as the country’s opposition makes progress and wins elections. He sees an opportunity and frames it well, presenting it at the opportune moment. So, this action will definitely impact Turkish domestic politics where Erdogan faces challenges.

    Israel’s revenge mission for the deaths of 1,136 Israeli citizens on October 7th and the taking of about 250 people hostage shows no signs of stopping nearby. The Israeli military is currently in Gaza and has bombarded the territory, resulting in the deaths of more than 34,000 people, according to the Hamas-run health ministry. This situation has provided many politicians with leverage. Netanyahu doesn’t need to worry about protests against him, Iran has taken advantage by increasing calls for reform after Mahsini’s death, and European right-wing politicians have found an opportunity to showcase the increased Muslim population in Europe. Additionally, Turkey is now seeking an opportunity to quell discontent against Erdogan and gain an advantage over the opposition by increasing solidarity with Palestinian Muslims. So, everyone benefits except for the common people who lose their lives and property. Turkey’s decision to impose a trade embargo will not have any impact on Israel or the new world order; however, it is a win for Turkey and Erdogan.

  • Turkey’s Local Elections: Opposition Stuns with Victory Over Erdogan’s Party

    Turkey’s Local Elections: Opposition Stuns with Victory Over Erdogan’s Party

    Last year, Erdogan comfortably won another presidential term amidst severe economic crises, mishandling of natural disasters, and a steep decline in living standards. This underscored his enduring influence and highlighted the weakness of the opposition. Erdogan, Turkey’s leader for the past two decades as both Prime Minister and President, adeptly navigated challenges to his rule. He successfully thwarted a potential military coup, triggered by constitutional provisions aimed at safeguarding secularism in the country. Moreover, Erdogan orchestrated a referendum to transition Turkey’s governance from parliamentary to presidential, driven by his desire to retain power. He effectively advanced Islamic and Ottoman sentiments, sacrificing the progress Turkey had achieved since the World War. The reopening of Hagia Sophia after years of closure symbolizes this transition from modern secular principles to embracing Turkey’s Ottoman aspirations

    In Turkey, elections encompass six levels of government: Presidential (National), Parliamentary (National), Municipality Mayoral (Local), District Mayoral (Local), Provincial or Municipal Council Member (Local), and Muhtar (Local). Less than a year ago, both presidential and parliamentary levels were conducted, and Erdogan and his Justice and Development Party (AKP) emerged stronger, leaving Turkey’s main opposition parties disheartened. However, after a year in the local elections, we are witnessing a surge in support for opposition parties in the local level elections.

    It’s no surprise that the recent local elections brought about a remarkable shift, leading to exuberant celebrations well into the early hours. With inflation soaring close to 70% and voter dissatisfaction amplified by a significant increase in interest rates. Erdogan’s strategy of leveraging Islamic identity politics has faced challenges. The austerity measures endorsed by Erdogan since his reelection have placated Western markets but have alienated key AKP supporters. In contrast, the charismatic and influential opposition leader Ekrem İmamoğlu’s ability to appeal to conservative voters has bolstered the CHP, making him a formidable adversary compared to the lackluster opposition candidate fielded last May.

    In Istanbul, Turkey’s largest city, the incumbent mayor, Ekrem Imamoğlu, convincingly defeated Mr. Erdogan’s candidate. Imamoğlu’s Republican People’s Party (CHP) also achieved sweeping victories in other major cities, securing landslide wins in the capital, Ankara, and easily in Izmir. Local elections in Turkey’s key cities, notably Istanbul and Ankara, hold significant importance in the country’s political and economic landscape. The mayors of these cities play prominent roles in national politics. In a surprising turn of events, the CHP managed to secure victories in conservative towns and villages that constitute Erdogan’s electoral stronghold in Anatolia and near the Black Sea. The gains made by the Islamic far-right New Welfare Party (YRP) in those regions, at the expense of the AKP, further compounded the president’s woes.

    The recent election has injected enthusiasm into Turkish politics. As a fresh challenger heralding a new era for Turkish democracy, Ekrem İmamoğlu’s securing of a second term as Istanbul’s mayor sparked jubilant celebrations among his supporters. The victory of Turkey’s main opposition party in the local elections exceeded expectations, offering the Republican People’s Party (CHP) a glimpse of a promising future. Social media platforms overflowed with celebratory memes, and Istanbul residents took to the streets, blaring music and, in some cases, removing posters of Erdogan’s mayoral candidate. Addressing his supporters after a night of historic wins, Ekrem İmamoğlu declared it “The Dawn of a New Era”.

    The opposition’s strongest showing in decades is also a success for another leader called Ozgur Ozel. Following its defeat in the general election last year, the CHP appointed a new, younger leader, the former pharmacist and trusted candidate Özgür Özel, who is perceived as a longtime ally of İmamoğlu. Both represent a shift within the opposition, with the ability to appeal to conservative and Kurdish factions of Turkish politics beyond the party’s traditional stronghold. Together, they successfully united all anti-Erdogan votes.

    At the same time, the setbacks for Erdogan’s AKP reflect years of internal turmoil. While the president has maintained popularity, the party’s overreliance on his charisma has intertwined their fates. Despite Erdogan’s prominent role in the campaign to reclaim Istanbul from İmamoğlu, the party fielded a mayoral candidate unlikely to emerge as a potential successor – a figure Erdogan sorely needs but seems hesitant to endorse. Additionally, the AKP faces challenges from far-right parties, which have split their voter base. The emergence of Islamic parties like the New Welfare Party (YRP) will definitely challenge AKP’s support

    Considering Erdogan’s firm control over institutional patronage and influence networks, honed over his more than two decades in power, it would be premature to interpret these results as a definitive turning point. However, they provide ample reasons for optimism among secular and liberal voters. Most notably, Sunday’s significant rebuke may deter Mr. Erdogan from pursuing additional constitutional amendments to enable him to seek yet another presidential term.

  • Central Asian States Embrace US-Facilitated Integration Plan: Redefining Regional Dynamics

    Central Asian States Embrace US-Facilitated Integration Plan: Redefining Regional Dynamics

    Once firmly ensconced within Russia’s sphere of influence, Central Asia is now slowly stepping out of its shadow. Despite possessing vast economic potential, abundant geographical resources, and significant opportunities for tourism, the region had been reluctant to liberate itself from the iron grip of the Soviet era. However, as Russia’s influence diminishes and Central Asian nations strive to assert their own identities, they are increasingly seeking collaboration with other global actors.

    China has made notable strides, participating in diverse agreements like the Belt and Road Initiative and embarking on infrastructure and mining ventures. India, an emerging economic force, similarly seeks to tap into Central Asia’s mineral resources to satisfy its expanding needs, resulting in numerous accords. Under Erdogan’s leadership, Turkey has rekindled its focus on the Turkic identity and is deepening its engagement in the region. Saudi Arabia expresses interest, while Iran sustains its presence.

    Despite these shifts, the United States, a major player in global politics, has not significantly intervened in the region, largely deferring to Russian authority. Central Asian leaders have also distanced themselves from the United States to maintain favor with Russian rulers. However, as Russia’s supremacy is challenged with the incidents such as the Ukraine conflict and increasing alignment of neighboring countries with the United States, both Central Asia and the U.S. see an opportunity for closer ties and market exploration in the region.

    The United States is initiating a strategic effort, akin to stringing  pearls, to unify all Central Asian nations into a cohesive network of collaboration. They initiated B5+1, a diplomatic platform for Central Asian countries (Kazakhstan, Kyrgyz Republic, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan) and the U.S.. Following its inaugural Forum, the group is placing emphasis on five priority industries and outlining specific actions necessary to expedite regional integration and economic growth in Central Asia. Attendees at the March 2024 Forum in Almaty, Kazakhstan, included business leaders, investors, experts, and policymakers from the region and various other nations. The role of the United States in this initiative is that of a facilitator, anticipating that Central Asian states will lead efforts to integrate the region’s economy through robust public-private partnerships. Furthermore, the involvement of the private sector is deemed essential in shaping the process.

    the United States  laying a sturdy groundwork for potential success. Central Asian governments are responding positively to the plan. The objective of the primary forum was to foster discussions aimed at dismantling trade barriers hindering outside investment and fostering a regional market. This objective has been successfully realized. Interest from regional governments in developing the B5+1 initiative appears robust, with Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan reportedly vying to host the forum next year.

    The Kazakh government, the biggest player in the region, has shown immense support for the initiative. During the closing remarks of the initial B5+1 forum, held in Almaty from March 13-15, Kazakh First Deputy Minister of National Economy Timur Zhaksylykov expressed the government’s willingness to collaborate with the private sector in enhancing trade prospects, particularly in sectors like agribusiness and e-commerce. They also expressed a commitment to working towards the development of a unified regional market.

    During the Almaty forum, private sector representatives issued a statement expressing their commitment to coordinating efforts aimed at enhancing trade, transit, and investment facilitation. Additionally, they pledged to work towards harmonizing regulations in key industries beyond the dominant energy and extractive sectors, which have traditionally attracted the majority of Western investment in the region. The B5+1 initiative has identified five economic sectors for prioritized development: trade and logistics, agribusiness, e-commerce, tourism, and renewable energy. Areas where the United States can pump their interest and money.

    They also addressed the immediate need to establish a regional chamber of commerce to advocate for economic integration. One common priority identified across all sectors is the development of transnational mechanisms to harmonize regulatory and customs frameworks. One suggestion is the development of a standardized digital CMR, allowing for the smooth movement of truck-borne goods across borders through electronic contractual documentation. Currently, many customs procedures lack digitalization. Another recommendation advocates for the removal of visa requirements for truck drivers engaged in import-export activities. Additionally, to boost tourism, the B5+1 proposes the adoption of a Schengen-like tourism visa, enabling tourists to freely explore the five regional states.

    Despite the promising start of the B5+1 initiative, numerous challenges persist. In a region where authoritarian governance often shapes policy, the extent to which officials are willing to relinquish control to private sector entities remains uncertain. Moreover, the private sector’s capacity in areas like policy development and advocacy is largely untested. Previous attempts to enhance regional economic integration have faltered, and the promotion of a unified Central Asian market conflicts with the interests of Russia and China.

    However, if the B5+1 maintains its momentum, the envisioned outcome is a well-regulated and efficient single market that attracts significant Western investment. Under the B5+1 vision, integration can safeguard the individual sovereignty of each Central Asian state, bolstering their resilience against political and economic pressures from neighboring and external actors.

    Supporters of the US-led B5+1 process acknowledge Washington’s intention to enhance its influence in Central Asia but emphasize a significant contrast between this approach and those of Russia and China. The strategy of the B5+1 aims to organically expand American influence in the region, employing methods that fundamentally differ from those employed by Moscow and Beijing.

    Cooperation with the United States economy holds paramount importance for any nation’s success. From bolstering foreign reserves to attracting significant business investments, reliance on the dollar and partnerships with the United States permeate various aspects of economic development. And here, collaboration talks extend beyond financial realms, encompassing areas like travel visas, currency agreements, legal frameworks, and trade tariffs, all contributing to creating a highly competitive environment for investments in partner countries. Indeed, intensified cooperation between the United States and their allies in Asia like Saudi Arabia holds the potential for increased investment and developmental strides in the region.

    Moreover, as companies engage in collaborative ventures, the United States stands to gain allies in the region, countering the dominance sought by Russia and China over resource-rich nations. This collaborative approach not only mitigates the risk of monopolistic tendencies but also accelerates the realization of development aspirations in Central Asia. While Russia may attempt to maintain control through power dynamics, the path forward may not be without challenges. Nonetheless, for Central Asian nations and the United States alike, this presents an opportunity to foster economic growth and wield greater political influence in the Asian landscape.