Turkey

[ORAC]

An interesting article, with relevance to Turkish interests in the Middle East, and the possible future of NATO.

The Naqshbandi-Khalidi Order and Political Islam in Turkey (http://www.capx.co/external/understanding-turkeys-shift-to-political-islam/)

.............Under the AKP, official Islam and the education system as a whole has undergone monumental changes with far-reaching consequences. These changes, from the mosque to the classroom, are intended to enable Erdoğan and his entourage to shape and mold the worldview of generations of Turks. And that worldview, with some idiosyncratic twists, is based on the heavily anti-Western Naqshbandi-Khalidi tradition. In other words, Turkish official Islam and its education system are gradually being taken over by the Khalidi worldview, both in terms of political control and through newly indoctrinated cadres. Moreover, under the AKP, the Diyanet has become increasingly politicized. In numerous mosques, reports surface of sermons given by imams that support and glorify AKP and President Erdoğan.

In sum, recent education reforms have increased the religious content of the education system, leading many schools to be transformed into Imam-Hatip schools, to the point that 10-15 percent of Turkey’s middle and high school students now study in such schools. Their education, as well as the sermons of the mosque imams, have come to be increasingly marked by the beliefs of the Naqshbandi-Khalidi order, and politically aligned with the AKP. It is obvious that this will have profound consequences of a political as well as socio-cultural nature for decades to come.

Conclusions

...............The rise of the AKP has been paralleled by the rise of religious communities as political forces. These groups have played the role of voluntary associations in a Tocquevillean sense, filling the vacuum arising from the weakness of secular voluntary associations in Turkey. But unlike most voluntary associations in the West, these groups are motivated by a strong political agenda, which includes reshaping society in their own image.

In this regard, an important paradox should be noted. Traditionally, Turks have tended toward relatively liberal schools of thought in Islam, such as the Hanafi school of jurisprudence, which grants considerable space to the interpretation of religious law. By contrast, Arab and Kurdish Islam has tended toward the more Orthodox schools of thought—the Hanbali and Shafi’i schools of thought, based on the Ashari tradition, which are much stricter and allow considerably less room for interpretation.

Secularization efforts since the mid-nineteenth century have had an effect on Turkish Islam exactly contrary to their intent. They occurred in parallel with the rapid spread of the Naqshbandi-Khalidi order and its offshoots across Turkey, which brought an understanding of religion deeply colored by Arab and Kurdish traditions to the country. The creation of the Republic of Turkey and the radical policies of secularization in the field of education led to a breach with the more liberal religious approach that had formed the core of official Ottoman Islam. With the introduction of electoral democracy in the 1950s, the religious vacuum came to be filled by social movements that were almost without exception products of the Naqshbandi-Khalidi tradition, and thus brought Turkey more in line with Middle Eastern interpretations of Islam. Indeed, to a considerable degree, this explains the foreign policies of the AKP government, whose ideological character is radically different from the Ottomans. The Ottomans were seldom if ever motivated by religious zeal. What this suggests is that if Turkey’s religious, educational and political space comes to be controlled entirely by Naqshbandi-Khalidi ideology, Turkey will irrevocably become a Middle Eastern country...........

[t43562]

With every action, there is a reaction and my opinion (based on nothing more than living in Turkey for a few months) is that the secularisation efforts spent their force and the pendulum swang back but I wouldn't over rate the religious types or underrate the secularists. Witness the HDP's gaining support from quite a lot of non-Kurdish Turks which is quite revolutionary. I think the pendulum will do some more swings before coming to rest.

Given the history, Turks are extremely nationalist and therefore not particularly enamoured of any nation other than theirs. Nobody is more mistrustful and unfriendly than the Ataturk fans who hate the AK party. Britan particularly is viewed in a slightly odd way - they go on and on about Chanakkale (Gallipoli to us) but at the same time have a little admiration, thinking us less technically competent than the Germans but nevertheless incorruptible and powerful - just not necessarily friendly. They think the same about the US roughly and don't trust its motivations. Many people are inclined to believe the numerous conspiracy theories involving the US doing deals with Erdogan to help him stay in power. These sort of negative attitudes to the west don't make them one iota more in favour of an Islamic changeover. So I wouldn't read too much into the "western outlook" stuff.

I naturally associate with the anti-Erdogans because it's not possible to have much of a conversation with anyone else so I admit I have their bias and I can't be hopeless about the future because they are not hopeless. There are many battles to be fought and no foregone conclusion.

My impression is that all countries have a certain amount of stupidity which has to be devoted to something. Here it might be the odd ideas of the AK party that are soaking it up at the moment. In the UK it might be those Corbyn supporters or the UKIP (sorry that's just my personal opinion of course). One key thing to think about when you're trying to change things is this: what new form of harmless stupidity are you going to introduce to take over the thing that you are attempting to remove?

[t43562]

Just a last thought: my wife is a teacher so she is very concerned by all the things mentioned in the article. As I understand it the education system was pretty much created by those very western-influenced types at the start of Ataturk's period. I believe they actually learned building as part of their course - so they could go out to some area and build the schoolhouse before starting to teach.

Their attitude is extremely strong minded to my ears, and being a teacher is an important thing here - it gives me the feeling of the women's version of national service. You might get educated in a city but if you pass the very stringent civil service exams then you are likely to get sent out to some village in the back of beyond. I am actually posting this from one such place - perhaps not all that isolated but quite basic.

The general belief is that some religious types have been aided in getting through the exams and there are regular cheating scandals but I was still impressed at the effort to defend the civil service from the ignorant and lazy.

It is actually much more profitable to work in private schools but government service has great cachet here. I suppose it's hard to be fired.

Anyhow to come to the point, I think that there are quite a lot of people with a degree of commitment to doing education properly and although it can't prevent the AK nonsense I think there is some doubt about how effective its attempt to pervert things can be.

There have certainly been protests by the teachers about the increased hours of religious education.

[thing]

My impression is that all countries have a certain amount of stupidity which has to be devoted to something. Here it might be the odd ideas of the AK party that are soaking it up at the moment. In the UK it might be those Corbyn supporters or the UKIP (sorry that's just my personal opinion of course). One key thing to think about when you're trying to change things is this: what new form of harmless stupidity are you going to introduce to take over the thing that you are attempting to remove?

Probably one of the most perceptive posts I've ever read on Pprune. Have a :D.

[glad rag]

Probably one of the most perceptive posts I've ever read on Pprune. Have a :D.

Really? Do you not keep abreast of current affairs?

[Chugalug2]

thing:-
Probably one of the most perceptive posts I've ever read on Pprune.Or one of the most complacent? I believe that the German cognoscenti felt that Hitler and the Nazis could be controlled, but that in the meantime were a useful bulwark against the Communists and the Left. That "certain amount of stupidity" was to cost hundreds of millions of lives...

Must declare an interest though, as one of the stupid who support UKIP. It really depends on which is the greater stupidity I guess, UKIP or the EU's agenda to become a European Super State...

[thing]

Really? Do you not keep abreast of current affairs?

Of course not.

Must declare an interest though, as one of the stupid who support UKIP. It really depends on which is the greater stupidity I guess, UKIP or the EU's agenda to become a European Super State...

I think the OP used UKIP and Corbyn to illustrate his point, not to push an agenda.

[Chugalug2]

thing:-
I think the OP used UKIP and Corbyn to illustrate his point, not to push an agenda. Indeed, and I used the EU to illustrate my point that one person's "stupidity" is another's defence against a perceived greater stupidity, which possibly compromises his take on the situation in Turkey.

[thing]

I wasn't making comment on the greater part of his thread or any of his perceived political slant, just the part that I quoted. I happen to think his comment about each country having a certain amount of stupid and the need to be careful when replacing it was perceptive. How you define stupid is entirely up to you.

[Chugalug2]

thing:-
his comment about each country having a certain amount of stupid and the need to be careful when replacing it was perceptive. How you define stupid is entirely up to you. And that makes it one of the most perceptive posts on PPRuNe? Random!

[thing]

Yes, I happen to think so. I would also defend your right to disagree.

[t43562]

Must declare an interest though, as one of the stupid who support UKIP. It really depends on which is the greater stupidity I guess, UKIP or the EU's agenda to become a European Super State... Sorry, I shouldn't have introduced that point. I don't want a superstate either but I'm an immigrant so UKIP isn't my favourite party and I think I could explain to you because you make such well reasoned posts on other subjects but I don't think it's the right thread for doing that.

I think Hitler doesn't apply to Turkey for too many reasons - there's no recent wartime humiliation, no economic disaster and the AK party has nothing like the level of support. Also Turks aren't Germans and have their own failure modes which are not the same.

I also contest the use of the word "complacent". It's different to explain that something is not a foregone conclusion from saying that one should be complacent. What I would say is that if you treat people as if you expect them to be an enemy then that is what you will eventually get.

Now this will upset you but I think one of the best things you could do to influence the situation would be to make it much easier and less brutally expensive for Turks to visit the UK and learn English and a bit about UK culture which they are interested in and ignorant of. That would buy you far more chance of helping the people who are likely to be positive towards the west and more influence than a squadron of helicopters in my opinion.

[Chugalug2]

Thing, kind of you to say so, but I wonder if Voltaire would agree? :E

t43562, I don't challenge your knowledge of Turkey, which is clearly greater than mine. I was merely trying to express my reservations about predicting the attitudes and ambitions of other countries or races. This country has already done far too much of that in recent history and rather spectacularly got most of it wrong. You will excuse me I hope if I am a little reserved in accepting your assurances that Turkey is a case of "nothing to see here, move along please".

As to making it easier and less expensive for Turks to visit the UK and absorb our culture, are you saying that we specifically target Turkey to prevent that? The "English" schools that proliferated here and were a cover for illegal immigration have been shut down, but AFAIK we haven't closed the doors to genuine tourists. The cost of course is another matter. Perhaps a word with Mr O'Leary?

[t43562]

And I wasn't trying to predict them either but to point out that one should see as much as possible the situation as is so that one can take the right actions. Like in a garden you have to see what the positive opportunities are - which plants there are and how to help them grow.

There certainly are dangers here as everywhere and it's so overwhelming in a way that one wonders how civilisation can possibly survive. Even in the UK there is really a constant battle to keep the ship afloat and even though it seems like it is sailing on, I feel that it could still fall apart with some bad choices or at least be out of action and leave the world a more frightening place to be in. I have certainly seen civilisation go backwards and I fear all the time that it could happen again.

In a way this is why I think people with roughly the same game plan need to try to help each other even if they're not from the same country.

As for the UK there are some extremely expensive requirements for visas to do with trying to pre-charge people for use of the NHS. As far as I know this is exactly the kind of thing that stops university students and young people (who are the ones you can actually influence) from being able to afford to go.

People with English here get jobs in businesses that deal with the UK e.g. medical tourism from the UK to Turkey (not the other way you'll note) is one that I'm familiar with. This is the reward for their efforts in learning our language and it's a status symbol which everyone in the extended family knows about and is impressed by. It adds to the notes of discord when some other idiot gets up and says silly things about the west.

[Chugalug2]

Turkey was an important and stalwart ally in the Cold War, fighting alongside us as long ago as the Korean War. In many ways the World was a more orderly place then, being divided up into East and West, with "client" states doing in the main as bid by their respective Super Powers. All that is now changed, enemies becoming friends and vice versa, not unlike the changes that happened immediately post WW2. I don't classify Turkey, still in NATO, in any way as an enemy of the UK, quite the reverse, but the "Arab Spring" (more a descent into "Nuclear Winter") has affected all the Middle East and is now at the borders of Turkey itself. Of course we all hope that it stops right there and starts to recede, but Turkey has its own agenda, no matter who rules there, and is clearly not entirely in lock step with the West (which is only shuffling along, rather than marching, itself).

At the end of the day, Turkey will do what it sees as best for itself. Of course our Foreign Office and the State Department will try to influence what that is, but I doubt they will have much success. I take your point that Turkey isn't pre-war Germany, but that country was a cultured ex-Ally of this country before WW1, yet that didn't prevent the blood letting that ensued in two World Wars. That is mankind, I'm afraid. We are a belligerent and ambitious species. When we boldly go where no man has gone before we will take that with us, and heaven help the Romulans and Vulcans that we encounter along the way...

Hopefully we will invest in our own (UK's) security by having a big stick and talking softly. That, and only that, is our protection. The same, I would suggest, goes for Turkey. It is weakness rather than strength that is the cause of war, but that will be labelled by many as "stupid"...

[melmothtw]

...and Vulcans that we encounter along the way...

And there I was thinking this thread had sod all to do with military aviation.

[ORAC]

Syrian civil war: Could Turkey be gambling on an invasion? (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/syrian-civil-war-could-turkey-be-gambling-on-an-invasion-a6844171.html)

[whiowhio]

"Hopefully we will invest in our own (UK's) security by having a big stick and talking softly. That, and only that, is our protection. The same, I would suggest, goes for Turkey. It is weakness rather than strength that is the cause of war, but that will be labelled by many as "stupid"..." Chugalug2" 6Sep15

:D

Age and experience engender simple logic! :ok: WW

[ShotOne]

"Big stick...That and only that is our only protection..." No, No, No! I agree the size of our stick is important. But our security derives, as it has for a long time, from positive relationships with other states, whether that be alliances, nudging neutrals towards benevolent neutrality or even avoiding outright conflict where we have disagreements.

[ORAC]

Washington Times: World War III inches closer as Turkey says it may enter Syrian conflict (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/feb/7/l-todd-wood-world-war-iii-inches-closer-turkey-say/)

The reason Russia is possibly building a new airbase on the Turkish border inside Syria became clearer today as Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan hinted Turkey could enter the war on the side of the anti-Assad forces who Russia has been primarily targeting. The Syrian government made major gains against the Sunni opposition in recent weeks as the Syrian city of Aleppo looked to fall from the opposition’s control. Turkey has repeatedly urged the American-led coalition against ISIS to do more to help the anti-Assad forces.

“We don’t want to fall into the same mistake in Syria as in Iraq,” Mr. Erdogan said, recounting how Turkey’s parliament denied a U.S. request to use its territory for the 2003 invasion of Iraq. “It’s important to see the horizon. What’s going on in Syria can only go on for so long. At some point it has to change,” he told journalists on the return flight from a tour of Latin America, reported Bloomberg News.

When asked if Turkey could enter the Syrian conflict, Mr. Erdogan said, “You don’t talk about these things. When necessary, you do what’s needed. Right now our security forces are prepared for all possibilities.”

To Russian President Vladimir Putin, Mr. Erdogan said, “What are you doing in Syria? You’re essentially an occupier.”

Late last week, Saudi Arabia stated it could send ground troops into the fight to support Sunni forces. Now other Gulf states seem to be following suit.

“A real campaign against Daesh has to include ground elements,” Anwar Gargash, U.A.E. minister of state for foreign affairs, said when asked if the emirates would send ground troops to fight Islamic State, using an Arabic acronym for the group. “We’re not talking about thousands of troops, but we are talking about troops on the ground that will lead the way, that will train, that will support,” Mr. Gargash said at a news conference in Abu Dhabi on Sunday. American leadership of such an effort “is a prerequisite,” he added.

The Syrian civil war is now becoming a confusing, full-fledged, proxy war for Shia against Sunni, East against West, terrorism against the Western, civilized world. This is the result of American abdication of leadership in the region and across the globe.

[ORAC]

Hurriyet: Taking the road to disaster in Syria (http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/taking-the-road-to-disaster-in-syria.aspx?PageID=238&NID=94864&NewsCatID=503)

[Lonewolf_50]

This is the result of American abdication of leadership in the region and across the globe. It is also a result of the American politicians being at least somewhat sensitive to the war weariness of the American public, and various sectors of the American public voicing opposition to "let's have another bit of war just because we can" attitude that's been the calling card of three baby boomer presidents in a row (in varying degrees of severity). I note that the Washington Times tends to have an editorial slant that trends anti Obama most of the time, and I think that you can go back a few years and see Washington Times editorials making noise about various red lines in Syria.

[ORAC]

Russia warns of 'new world war' starting in Syria (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/russia/12153112/Russia-warns-of-new-world-war-starting-in-Syria.html)

Russia warned of “a new world war" starting in Syria on Thursday after a dramatic day in which Gulf states threatened to send in ground forces.

Foreign and defence ministers of the leading international states backing different factions in the war-torn country met in separate meetings in Munich and Brussels following the collapse of the latest round of peace talks. Both Russia and the United States demanded ceasefires in the long-running civil war so that the fight could be concentrated against Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (Isil) - but each on their own, conflicting terms.

But the Gulf states, led by Saudi Arabia, staged their own intervention, saying they were committed to sending ground troops to the country. Their favoured rebel groups have been pulverised by Russian air raids and driven back on the ground by Iranian-supplied pro-regime troops. They said their declared target was Isil. But the presence of troops from Gulf states which have funded the Syrian rebels would be taken as a hostile act by the Assad regime and its backers, and a sign that they were committed to staking their claim to a say in the final Syrian settlement.

Russia issued a stark warning of the potential consequences. "The Americans and our Arab partners must think well: do they want a permanent war?" its prime minister, Dmitry Medvedev, told Germany's Handelsblatt newspaper in an interview due to be published on Friday but released last night.

“It would be impossible to win such a war quickly, especially in the Arab world, where everybody is fighting against everybody. All sides must be compelled to sit at the negotiating table instead of unleashing a new world war.”........

[A_Van]

The situation changes more quickly than those paperback writers can type their words of panic:


Syria: World powers agree to 'cessation of hostilities' - CNN.com (http://edition.cnn.com/2016/02/12/middleeast/syria-talks/index.html)

[ORAC]

That will be the ceasefire agreed between the USA and Russia, which only covers the factions on the ground - who haven't been asked or agreed - and which allows the USA, Russia, France et al to continue attacks against "jihadist" groups - with Russia to continue its attacks around Aleppo and the U.K. already stating air attacks against ISIS will continue.

Best bit of paper since the Minsk Protocol......

[ORAC]

Can Erdogan bully Turkey's armed forces into invading Syria? (http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2016/02/turkey-syria-erdogan-eagerness-for-military-intervention.html#)

"............So, all this boils down to whether the Turkish Armed Forces (TSK) will put up enough resistance to Erdogan’s intention to drag Turkey into the war. The ultimate answer remains to be seen, but all indications so far suggest the army has been reluctant to participate in a military intervention since the Syrian conflict began. The latest reports indicate the military leadership is standing its ground. A front-page story Feb. 10 in Hurriyet conveyed the military’s hesitance about an intervention, referring to a “senior official” who was discernible as a military officer.

“The General Staff has two important decisions concerning a military deployment by the international community in Syria. First, the United States is aware it cannot pass a [UN] resolution because of Russia’s attitude, and therefore it is not making any preparations to that effect. Second, the TSK is not going to set foot in Syria without a UN Security Council resolution,” the report read.

Over the years, Erdogan has proved to be a leader who occasionally steps back but tends to never compromise, always playing a zero-sum game. In response to any loss of power, he reflexively resorts to using power again. His sense of grandeur and the cult of personality he has built around himself have only reinforced this political persona.

Having cornered himself in Syria, Erdogan again wants to use force to break free. And the only force he has at his disposal is the TSK, which seems reluctant to be exploited for that purpose. In short, the resistance the TSK puts up to Erdogan is the only mainstay that Turkey presently has to avoid an adventure doomed to drag it into a catastrophe."

[ORAC]

Syria: World powers agree to 'cessation of hostilities' - CNN.com

Ho hmm..... Putin finding out he has as much control as he has in Ukraine... another quagmire....

Syria conflict: Bashar Assad vows to retake whole country (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-35561845)

[ORAC]

Turkish forces shell Kurdish camp in Syria, reportedly hit govt forces (https://www.rt.com/news/332380-turkey-shells-northern-syria/)

The Turkish army has shelled Kurdish targets near the city of Azaz in northwest Syria, including an air base recently retaken from Islamist rebels, with a massive attack. It also hit Syrian forces across the border, according to media reports.

Anatolia news agency reported that the Turkish military hit Syrian government forces on Saturday, adding that the shelling had been in response to fire inflicted on a Turkish military guard post in Turkey’s southern Hatay region.

Turkish artillery targeted Syrian forces again late on Saturday, according to a military source quoted by RIA Novosti. The attack targeted the town of Deir Jamal in the Aleppo Governorate........

[glad rag]

Twas as I stated before, the Kurds have held the line against ISIS, but now both Turkey and Saudi Arabia will attempt to eliminate them.

And we will standby and just let it happen.

[Rosevidney1]

The preoccupation with Regime Change has caused far more troubles than it can ever have been expected to solve yet our politicians are convinced that getting rid of Assad is and remains the main aim. I support the Russian involvement in Syria as they are achieving their aim of destroying rebel forces. We on the other hand are just fannying around, waving our hands ineffectually and having yet more talks. As these talks involve many speakers and interminable speeches we can see they are (with the lack of action) doomed to failure. The Kurds deserve their own homeland but none of the countries involved will give that idea the time of day. I wish the United Nations was 'fit for purpose' but it obviously isn't.

[ORAC]

At least five killed in car bomb attack in Turkish capital Ankara

At least five people were killed and 10 others were injured in a bomb attack on Feb. 17 targeting shuttles carrying military personnel in the Turkish capital Ankara late yesterday.

Ankara Governor Mehmet Kılıçdar said the attack was carried out with a car bomb. The attack occurred in the center of the city, hundreds of meters away from the top military headquarters, parliament and prime minister's office.

“We are looking into details of the explosion,” Turkish Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu said. "Terror has attacked treacherously in Ankara. We curse this attack," AKP spokesman Ömer Çelik said on Twitter.

According to locals, the sound of explosion could be heard from many spots around the capital.


Details to follow...

[ORAC]

Hurriyet: Gearing up for the mother of all wars (http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/gearing-up-for-the-mother-of-all-wars.aspx?PageID=238&NID=95285&NewsCatID=425)

"Tensions are building up. It is as if several key actors are collaborating viciously to send the world into a catastrophe. Will it be a third world war, as some pundits have started talking about, or will it be the “mother of all wars” – as the propaganda minister of the devastated dictator Saddam Hussein of yesterday’s Iraq talked about while the Americans almost occupied all of Baghdad?

Obviously, where this region is heading is not a joyful place at all, even if the Iraqi quagmire or the hellish situation in Syria is miraculously brought to some sort of a normalcy. Was Iraq ever a normal place? Was Syria ever a peaceful country? The past dictator of Iraq and both the father and son al-Assads in Syria never allowed their countries to be a “normal country” – at least to large chunks of their societies. A look at the recent history of both two countries shows vividly that the peoples of both have been aspiring for normalcy for so long. Unfortunately, it won’t come anytime soon.

All key actors have become sources of aggravation making things worse. Turkey, on the one hand, has been stressing it will not allow its security to be threatened, while also bombarding key positions in Syria, an act that might be considered to be tantamount to stirring up a hornet’s nest. The Saudis and the Qataris, together with Turkey and some other 30 Sunni Muslim countries, have set up a Sunni alliance supposedly to fight a Sunni political Islamist, Salafist or jihadist group. Doesn’t this region has sufficient sectarian problems? Don’t the Saudis know well before initiating such a program that by doing so perhaps they could open Pandora’s Box to further strife, calamity and pain in the region?

Worse, aren’t the rulers in Ankara literate people? Isn’t the prime minister versed in foreign policy affairs as a professor who authored that “Strategic Depth” book, explaining to the international community what a great country Turkey has always been? Isn’t the president a graduate of an Islamist theology school where he received lectures on the glories of the Ottoman Empire, the sectarian problem in Islamic societies and, of course, the outstanding success of Muslim societies in fighting each other? Why, then, did Turkey not only participate in the Saudi-led Sunni alliance but more than that (as we have now discovered), the beast was fathered by Turkey’s well-versed premier?

The battle for Aleppo, the biggest city in Syria whose fall would cut off a logistical supply line to the “mild” Islamist opposition from Turkey, will determine the fate of al-Assad. Why have Russia, Turkey, the Democratic Union Party (PYD) – the Syrian wing of Turkey’s separatist Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) gang – and the Bashar al-Assad regime focused so much on the control of the Azez corridor? Simple: whoever controls that corridor will be in a strategic position to cut or allow supplies from Turkey to the opposition.

For Turkey, the stakes are very high. Its Kurdish opening strategy has collapsed, the government has been trying to restore government control over Kurdish-populated towns and cities of the southeast that have been turned into the dens of separatists during the three-year failed opening and Turkey is frightened of the creation of a hostile Kurdish state by the PYD along the country’s border with Syria. To prevent it, Turkey may even take the risk of engaging in a land war and engage directly in the Syrian war. Even before Turkey takes such action, irritated by Turkey’s long-range bombardment of the YPG and other military positions around the Azez corridor, Russia might test Turkey’s nerves by sending a fighter jet a few miles into Turkish territory. Will Ankara down that plane again and risk further devastating its already moribund ties with Russia because of the first jet downing in November 2015? Will NATO rush to Turkey’s help? If so, will there be a NATO-Russia confrontation?

The Turkish foreign minister declared that Turkey’s involvement in a land operation in Syria together with the Saudis, Qataris and some other Muslim states was on the cards. The Saudis made a similar statement. Furthermore, Saudi fighter jets have been deployed to the İncirlik Airbase in Turkey, and there are claims that they are preparing to start operative actions over Syria.

Every country, of course, has its own priorities and obsessions. As much as Turkey is obsessed with a probable Kurdish state being carved from Syrian territory, the Saudis are scared of the probable advance or spread of influence of Shiite Iran in its hinterland. Russia has been trying to best use the situation and coil up over Syria as the protector of the al-Assad regime. For the U.S. and the West, the prime target might appear to the Islamic State of Iraq and Levant (ISIL) terrorists, but control and security of energy resources and lines remain high on their agenda. The refugee crisis has become just an added source of attention for Europeans scared of the probability of an exhausted or frustrated Turkey opening the “flood gates” and allowing refugees to flood Europe.

Is this photograph not rather bleak?"