Mediaboss Marketing

ByBahattin Gonultas,Tuba Sahin

ANKARA

Turkey's president Wednesday has called on Muslim countries around the world to build efficient transportation networks in order to accelerate integration among themselves.

"Reinforcing our cooperation in the field of transport - one of the six areas covered under the COMCEC Strategy - is important for facilitating trade between our member countries and accelerating integration," said Recep Tayyip Erdogan in his opening statement at the 33rd meeting of the Standing Committee for Economic and Commercial Cooperation (COMCEC) of the Organization of the Islamic Cooperation (OIC) in Ankara.

"In todays world, where global competition is intensifying, the cost and time advantage gained through efficient transport networks will make significant contributions to enhancing our competitive power, improving our trade, and strengthening our cultural ties," he added.

Erdogan said the Muslim world was witnessing developments that will shape the fate of its next century.

"As Muslims, we are struggling to simultaneously overcome many threats, trials and tribulations," he said.

Erdogan said terror organizations such as Daesh, al-Qaeda and the Fetullah Terrorist Organization (FETO) were shedding the blood of Muslims by hiding behind religious concepts.

"On the other hand, social maladies, such as Islamophobia, xenophobia and cultural racism are recurring in the West," he added.

Erdogan said that people in Syria, Iraq, Yemen, Libya, Afghanistan and many other places had to live with death, cruelty and terror at every moment.

"It is our responsibility to say 'stop' to this harrowing and anguishing picture," the president said. "We cannot permit the greed, grudges and self interest of certain people to steal our future."

See original here:
Erdogan urges Muslim states to build transport networks - Anadolu Agency

In an April 16 referendum, Turkish citizens voted in favor of a measure that will fundamentally change the nature of Turkeys political system. Although the republic has a long history of such votesseven referendums, and three of them during Justice and Development Party (AKP) rulethis one surpassed all others in terms of its political significance. By a narrow margin (only 51.4 percent voted yes), the tally will result in the scrapping of Turkeys parliamentary political system, which predates the establishment of the modern Turkish republic. The new presidential system will vest significantly more power in the executive and will likely further the development of a two-party presidential system (though it will not terminate the existence of smaller parties) with an excessively powerful president holding most of the cards.

Despite the radical changes, the referendum has generated very little excitement within Turkey. That is because it will have only a limited near-term impact on Turkeys power structure and domestic policies. President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and the AKP do and will continue to wield the real power in the country. In fact, Nationalist Movement Party (MHP) leader Devlet Bahceli, whose offer to support the presidential system led the AKP to finally bring the issue to the table in November 2016, has justified his position by arguing that the referendum will merely legalize the model of government that is already effectively practiced.

Perhaps another reason for the somber atmosphere is that the referendum passed by such a narrow margin. Even the parties supporting itall of the conservative Islamic and nationalist parties apart from the small pro-Islamic Felicity Partyfailed to convince a significant share of their own voters of the need to change the political system. The no vote comprised not only the voter bases of the main opposition Republican Peoples Party (CHP) and the Peoples Democratic Party (HDP) but also a considerable chunk of the normal base of the parties of the yes camp.

To put the contentious aspects

See the original post:
Erdogan's Fragile Referendum Coalition - Foreign Affairs (subscription)

Speaking in Istanbul to the International Forum on Al-Quds Waqfs, a conference aimed at promoting Palestinian economic development, according to the forum website, Erdogan said that about 26,000 Turks visited Jerusalem last year -- the highest number among Muslim countries, reported Turkey's semiofficial Anadolu news agency.

But, Erdogan suggested, "hundreds of thousands" of Muslims should be making the trip.

He said about 600,000 Americans, 400,000 Russians and 300,000 French citizens visited Jerusalem in 2015.

"We, as Muslims, should be visiting Al-Quds more often," he said, referring to Jerusalem by its Arabic name, calling those visits "the greatest support to our brothers there."

Erdogan said Jerusalem is holy for Muslims, Jews and Christians.

"Both in terms of our religion and historical responsibility, Al-Quds and the fight of our Palestinian brothers for rights and justice is of great importance to us. We will keep making efforts for Al-Quds to turn into a city of peace," he said.

Erdogan criticized Israeli policy toward Palestinians as "racist" and "discriminatory" and said permanent peace in the Mideast would be impossible without a solution to the Palestinian issue.

"Here is the only solution: the establishment of a fully sovereign and independent Palestinian state, with East Jerusalem as its capital along the lines of 1967," he said, according to Anadolu.

Israel argues that its blockade of Gaza, which Erdogan singled out for criticism in his speech, is necessary to prevent weapons from reaching Hamas, the militant group that controls the coastal enclave.

Erdogan also spoke out against plans by Israeli lawmakers to place restrictions on the Muslim call to prayer, or Adhan, Anadolu said.

Israel's parliament has been considering a bill that would ban the use of loudspeakers to issue the Adhan between 11 p.m. and 7 a.m. The bill needs two further readings in parliament before it can be passed.

"If you have faith in your religion, why are you afraid of the Adhan?" Erdogan declared.

The Israel Foreign Ministry responded to Erdogan's comments with a strongly-worded statement: "Whoever systematically violates human rights in their own country should not preach morality to the only true democracy in the region. Israel consistently protects total freedom of worship for Jews, Muslims and Christians -- and will continue to do so despite the baseless smears launched against it."

Erdogan's remarks come less than a year after Turkey and Israel reached a deal to normalize diplomatic relations following a violent clash over a Turkish aid flotilla to Gaza in 2010.

CNN's Ofri Eshel in Jerusalem contributed to this report.

Read the original here:
Erdogan slams treatment of Palestinians; Israel issues angry response - CNN

The statement was terse and to the point, issued by the office of the White House press secretary:

We congratulate President-elect Macron and the people of France on their successful presidential election.We look forward to working with the new President and continuing our close cooperation with the French government.

President Trump issued a comment about Sundays runoff election in France via his Twitter feed, too, which was slightly more energetic:

Trumps statements after the election are notable for a pair of reasons. The first is that he all but endorsed Marine Le Pen, the losing candidate in the race, in the days ahead of the election. The second is that Trumps public statements about foreign leaders have drawn notice for their breaks with precedent.

What's So Bad About Trump Calling Erdogan?

Le Pen and Trump have been commonly lumped together as avatars of the nationalist, nativist, isolationist political movement popping up around the globe. Both have also been particularly inflammatory in discussing Islam and dismissive of the EU. But there was more to the comparison than these policy affinities. During the summer of 2016, Le Pen said she would vote for Trump if she were an American voter. Prior to Trumps inauguration, Le Pen was spotted hanging around Trump Tower, though it was not clear quite why. Russia also worked to encourage the election of both Trump and Le Pen.

Ahead of the April 23 first-round French presidential vote, in which Le Pen placed second, Trump praised her in interviews and social media. After a police officer was killed in an apparent terrorist attack on April 20, Trump tweeted:

Later that day, during an interview with the Associated Press, Trump elaborated: I think that itll probably help her because she is the strongest on borders and she is the strongest on whats been going on in France. He insisted he was not endorsing her, and that he was simply actingas he is often wont to do, blithely ignoring how such statements function when coming from the leader of the free worldas a pundit. Look, everybody is making predictions who is going to win. I am no different than you, he said.

For an American president to even flirt with public support for Le Pen, much less to go as far as he did, was a stunning turn. Her National Front grew out of Vichy collaborationists, anti-Semites, and neo-Nazis; when her father and predecessor, Jean-Marie Le Pen, surprised the nation by advancing to the presidential runoff in 2002, he was trounced by Jacques Chirac in the head-to-head matchup. Marine Le Pen has sought to remake the partys image since taking over, and even suspended her father from his own party for downplaying the Holocaust.

As the results of Sundays election, in which Macron, who was himself endorsed by former U.S. President Obama, beat Le Pen by a two-to-one margin, demonstrate, Le Pen has not successfully changed the image of the party among French votersand one reason was a succession of incidents during the election that suggested she had not changed its substance, either. Yet the FNs fascist-friendly past did not give Trump pause before delivering his almost-endorsement.

Trumps friendly relationship with Le Pen might help to explain his somewhat chilly reaction to Macrons victory. But a comparison with how the president handled a recent referendum in Turkey helps reveal the ways in which Trump is remaking American policy and precedent.

In April, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan oversaw a referendum that would grant him sweeping new powers, and effectively ratify a purge and power grab he has conducted over a series of years. Many pro-democracy observers viewed the referendum itself as unsavory, and beyond that, election observers have questioned the integrity of the result, which was a tighter win for Erdogan than expected.

Nonetheless, Trump quickly called Erdogan to congratulate him on his victory. As I wrote at the time, that phone call divided American foreign-policy observers. Some saw it as a horrifying gesture of U.S. support for a power grab. Others viewed it as only a slight (if unwise) deviation from norms, but in line with the U.S. habit of congratulating allies, and even pseudo-allies, on peaceful (if flawed) elections.

The White House and president did issue speedy statements after Macrons victory was clear. But if Trump placed a phone call to the president-elect, the White House has not made it public. (An inquiry to the White House about whether Trump has called, or plans to call, Macron was not immediately answered.)

The contrast between the warmth for an increasingly authoritarian Turkish president and coolness toward the centrist leader of a key American ally is stark. At the time of his call to Erdogan, one theory for Trumps move was that he is eager to court Erdogan as an ally in the American fight against ISIS, as well as potentially against Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. (Despite missile strikes in April, Trumps policy toward Assad remains a muddle.)

Yet France is not only one of Americas closest allies, and a friend of longstanding, it is also a central part of the alliance conducting strikes against ISISand furthermore, Macron was supportive of striking Assad after an April chemical-weapons attack, as Trump did, while Le Pen criticized Trumps decision to fire missiles.

Its difficult to know what Trumps calculus is, but one potential reason for his friendlier view toward Erdoganand toward Le Penis not direct policy similarities, but attitudinal similarities. Trump respects and reveres strength. Erdogan has positioned himself as a neo-Ottoman strongman; it was Le Pens strength that Trump praised in his AP interview. Macron, meanwhile, is a bland, centrist technocrat, hardly a paragon of steeliness.

Trump has already demonstrated that a relationship that begins cool can warm up. After getting into a bizarre and unexpected tiff with Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull in February, Trump hosted Turnbull for a cordial visit over the weekend. Maybe Macron and Trump will similarly hit it off in the future. For the time being, however, the president has signaled that strength is more important to him than traditional tieswhether thats Frances close relationship with America, or the fascist sympathies of Marine Le Pens National Front.

View post:
Trump's Tepid Congratulations for Emmanuel Macron - The Atlantic

Mayank Singh

Mayank Singh is a writer. He gave up a prestigious career with a scientific research laboratory to pursue his passion for writing. In his analytical w

During a visit to India, Erdogan offered to play peacemaker on Kashmir to boost his credentials as the leader of the Muslim world.

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has ensured that the summer in Kashmir will be hotter than anticipated. While all indicators from the valley with stone throwers refusing to back down and terrorists being brazen in their attacks on security forces suggested that the summer of 2017 would be difficult, Erdogans call for multilateral dialogue on Kashmir has only added fuel to the fire. The president further queered the pitch with his call for awar on terror. Although he condemned the Naxalite attack on security forces in Sukma, Chattisgarh, he turned a Nelsons eye to relentless terror attacks in Kashmir and did little to assuage Indias concerns.

Erdogans intemperate remarks and visibly stiff body language during photo ops with his Indian counterpart were a manifestation of the fact that he has decided to throw his lot with his dear friend Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and, therefore, the Pakistani army. Turkey, ever since the rise of Erdogan, hassupported Pakistans positionon Jammu and Kashmir, with Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu calling for a fact-finding mission to India-held Kashmir to look into reports of atrocities being committed there by Indian forces.

It would, however, be naive to presume that Erdogans undiplomatic remarks were meant only to encourage his friend in Pakistan. It needs to be understood that the Turkish president was trying to kill many birds with a single stone.

Despite gaining in strength after winning the recent referendum, Erdogan is apprehensive of his support back in Turkey. His wariness stems from the fact that notwithstanding a brutal suppression following the failed coup of July 2016, he is unsure of support from the army in his quest for an Islamist Turkey. The overthrow of the Muslim Brotherhood government by General Abdel Fattah el-Sisi in Egypt is too recent an event to forget.

President Erdogans effort torewrite Turkeys secular constitutionand social fabric has won him admirers among Islamists. The army, however, remains a mystery for him. Ever since Kemal Ataturk initiated Turkeys move toward secularism and modernity, the army has considered itself to be the defender of the countrys secular model. While the 2016 coup attempt was put down, Erdogan is still not convinced of the armys support for his drive toward Islamism.

Like a shrewd operator, therefore, he has used every opportunity to portray himself as a successor of the Ottoman Empire and defender of Islamic identity. In a subtle message to the Muslim world, he delayed permission to Iraqi Kurdishfighters to enter Kobane in Syria to support besieged Kurds there. He even had the temerity to bring down a Russian fighter plane engaged in combating the Islamic State. The assassination of the Russian ambassador in Ankara epitomized the rising tide of Islamism in Turkey, for which Erdogan is greatly responsible.

Erdogan has also used Kashmir as a public address system to reach the original defender of Islamist ideology: Saudi Arabia. The friendly banter between the two countries does not hide their quest for being anointed as the leader of Sunni Muslims. Relations between Pakistan and Saudi Arabia have been strained since Islamabad turned down Saudi requeststo contribute soldiers for the war in Yemen. The Pakistanis have since made serious attempts to placate the Saudis. The decision of the Pakistani government to permitGeneral Raheel Sharif to lead a NATO-styled 39-nation Islamic Military Alliance ironically meant to combat terrorism was one such step. This military alliance is the brain child of the Saudi government, which is itself feeling jittery over rising militancy in the kingdom.

Through his statement on Kashmir, Erdogan has tried to present Turkey as the defender of Islam, compared to the Saudis whose economy, after decades of funding Wahhabism, is feeling under the weather due to the US discovery of shale oil. Kashmir has found itself being utilized as a ring for the shadow boxing match between Turkey and Saudi Arabia.

Notwithstanding the nuances of Erdogans statement, it is bound to encourage both the Pakistani army and its proxies in Kashmir to indulge in wanton violence. Ever since taking the Kashmir dispute to the United Nations in 1949, India has refused to allow the internationalization of the matter. Despite repeated resolutions by the Organisation of Islamic Countries (OIC) siding with Kashmiri separatists, India has refused to budge from its stand of Kashmir being a bilateral issue between India and Pakistan.

Pakistan, on the other hand, has made desperate attempts to internationalize the Kashmir conflict. The violence in Kashmir, which has been relentless since the killing of Hizb-ul Mujahideen (HuM) commander Burhan Wani in July 2016, is part of a hybrid war designed and executed by the Pakistani army. Images of anarchists taking on Indian forces with nothing more than stones in their hands have been used to create David vs. Goliath imagery. In a war of perception being played out especially on social media, such images have the power to tilt sympathy toward the underdog. What has largely gone unnoticed in this war of ideas, however, is the repeated use of Islamic State flags and other militant Islamic symbols. Zakir Musa, Burhan Wanis successor, has been more forthright in declaring: Our stones and weapons should not be to fight for Kashmir. Use them for the supremacy of Islam andto enforce Sharia.

Erdogans appeal for a war against terror, therefore, reeks of hypocrisy. This running with the hares and hunting with the hounds malaise has been the bane of the fight against terrorism. While Erdogan himself prefers to brutalize the Kurds and wink at the slaughter of the Yazidis, he displays no remorse in encouraging the Pakistani army, which continues in its relentless campaign of bleeding India through thousand cuts. Irony died a thousand deaths as a leader who rounded up coup leaders pitilessly refusing to rule out the death penalty and has been brutal in his dealings with the Kurds talked patronizingly of keeping channels open for global peace.

Pakistan, however, has received a shot in the arm from Erdogans verbosity. It has played its terror cards deftly ever since the Chinese finalized the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), which connects the restive province of Xinjiang to Gwadar near Karachi. Like a bankrupt businessman willing to rent his shop to the highest bidder, Pakistan has virtually ceded its territory through which CPEC traverses to China.

The $46 billion that China proposes to invest in developing the corridor is expected to give a massive boost to an ailing Pakistani economy with a GDP growth rate of 5%. In addition to the economic push, Pakistan also assumes that the Chinese, like an anxious investor, will not allow India to undertake any military option against Pakistan despite massive provocations in Kashmir. The Pakistanis aim to use Chinese investment to ensure military protection, which they believe will follow.

Presumably cocooned under Chinese protection, the Pakistani proxies will therefore become more brazen in their attacks in Kashmir as summer advances. Summer is often when infiltration from Pakistan increases as snow melts, and it is generally the time when terrorists not only attack, but also prepare for winter.The beheading of Indian soldiers, thelooting of banks, terrorists audaciouslyattacking security forces, mobs relentlesslypelting stonesand young women turning furiously aggressive are ominous signs for Kashmir and India.

The views expressed in this article are the authors own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observers editorial policy.

Photo Credit: DonkeyHotey

Join our community of more than 1,800 contributors to publish your perspective, share your narrative and shape the global discourse. Become a Fair Observer and help us make sense of the world.

Read this article:
Erdogan Adds Fuel to Fire: Expect a Hot Summer in Kashmir - Fair Observer