Cyprus-Forum.com

[Paul ZKTV]

The Western ruling elites are backed up with sophisticated intelligence services equipped with advance surveillance techniques and must know far better than you and me what is going on. They must have some sort of grand plan or strategy, but I can't fathom what it is.

its the give em enough rope and they will hang themselves ...nutters (like DD) always push their luck ,that why
the roman always has a slave saying "Hominem te memento" ...

[Lordo]

There are various overlapping possibilities. Turkish intelligence has a long history of using agents provocateurs who infiltrate various movements and incite them into staging extreme acts that suit the government. Perhaps they infiltrated the Gulenists in the army and incited them to stage what appears to have been a very poor attempt at a coup. Perhaps they had good intelligence from people embedded among this group that the coup was coming and so the authorities were ready and prepared. Perhaps the whole thing was indeed simply staged. What is for sure is that Erdoğan will use this to push forward his plans to establish a dictatorship. The talk has been for some time of a final push coming to end the last vestiges of judicial independence and it is telling that one of the first reactions to the attempted coup was the suspension of around 2745 judges. No judges had any involvement in the coup attempt as far as I know! I wonder if the Western leaders who all leapt to Erdoğan's defence citing grounds such as support for the rule of law will have any comments on this move, given that the separation of powers and independence of the judiciary are vital for the continuation of the rule of law.

it was reported that erdogan was planning to pick up the gullenists prosecutors judges and the military officers on saturday which explains why they went on the attack without a good plan.

[Tim Drayton]

There are various overlapping possibilities. Turkish intelligence has a long history of using agents provocateurs who infiltrate various movements and incite them into staging extreme acts that suit the government. Perhaps they infiltrated the Gulenists in the army and incited them to stage what appears to have been a very poor attempt at a coup. Perhaps they had good intelligence from people embedded among this group that the coup was coming and so the authorities were ready and prepared. Perhaps the whole thing was indeed simply staged. What is for sure is that Erdoğan will use this to push forward his plans to establish a dictatorship. The talk has been for some time of a final push coming to end the last vestiges of judicial independence and it is telling that one of the first reactions to the attempted coup was the suspension of around 2745 judges. No judges had any involvement in the coup attempt as far as I know! I wonder if the Western leaders who all leapt to Erdoğan's defence citing grounds such as support for the rule of law will have any comments on this move, given that the separation of powers and independence of the judiciary are vital for the continuation of the rule of law.

it was reported that erdogan was planning to pick up the gullenists prosecutors judges and the military officers on saturday which explains why they went on the attack without a good plan.

Yes, I mentioned that above (it's what the journalist Ahmet Şık, for whose views I have a lot of respect, has said). Of course, they might also have given them to understand that this raid was going to happen to incite them to make this move.

The amazing thing, I think, is that, to the best of my knowledge, nobody in the secular camp supported this attempted coup (and it is clear to me from the wording of the announcement the coupists made on TV that they were trying court the support of the secularists). I can't help wondering if this was held out as bait to provoke the secularists into coming out in support, and the consequences could have been far worse for those trying to defend the values of the Republic if they had.

[Jerry]

Yes, but the West could have had a pluralistic, democratic, secular Turkey had it wanted this. Instead it has supported the movement to overthrow the secular state over the past 35 years, which may soon achieve its final goals.

How could the West have had the sort of State it wanted in Turkey?. In most respects Turkey holds the upper hand, it can play the US off against Russia. We have witnessed the support Erdogan enjoys in the last couple of days, what could the West have done to Turkish society that would counter such fanaticism, how could it have instilled western ideals and tolerance in the Turkish people?
Or are you suggesting that the US should have conspired with the military in the past and inspired a more successful coup?

[Tim Drayton]

Yes, but the West could have had a pluralistic, democratic, secular Turkey had it wanted this. Instead it has supported the movement to overthrow the secular state over the past 35 years, which may soon achieve its final goals.

How could the West have had the sort of State it wanted in Turkey?. In most respects Turkey holds the upper hand, it can play the US off against Russia. We have witnessed the support Erdogan enjoys in the last couple of days, what could the West have done to Turkish society that would counter such fanaticism, how could it have instilled western ideals and tolerance in the Turkish people?
Or are you suggesting that the US should have conspired with the military in the past and inspired a more successful coup?

It's a very long story and you have to trace Turkish modern history back to events since the 1980 coup to see that the movement to overthrow the secular republic, while bankrolled by Saudi Arabia and the other Gulf states (and I can understand why the the ruling families of the latter would feel threatened by a successful, secular republic in the neighbourhood in terms of the aspirations it would create among their own populations), could not have happened in a Western client country without at least having the tacit approval of Western powers. No, Islamists did not come to power by some chance, or because one fine day they just happened to win a democratic election because this was the popular will. The Islamists started out by infiltrating people into various key parts of the state, starting out with the police force which they had full control of by the end of the 1980's, and then key ministries, the judiciary and the civil service. They only finally created a political party to come to power in 2002 after they already controlled a great deal of the state. Leaving all that aside, the fact that Western leaders can come out with sickeningly hypocritical comments supposedly in support of democracy and the rule of law in Turkey in condemning a coup attempt, while remaining totally silent about the way the current Turkish regime rides roughshod over the constitution and ignores the rule of law speaks volumes about their policies towards Turkey. Turkish society is very split and 50% adore Erdoğan and 50% detest him. Hitler also enjoyed a lot of support when he was at the peak of his power.

[Jerry]

Yes, but the West could have had a pluralistic, democratic, secular Turkey had it wanted this. Instead it has supported the movement to overthrow the secular state over the past 35 years, which may soon achieve its final goals.

How could the West have had the sort of State it wanted in Turkey?. In most respects Turkey holds the upper hand, it can play the US off against Russia. We have witnessed the support Erdogan enjoys in the last couple of days, what could the West have done to Turkish society that would counter such fanaticism, how could it have instilled western ideals and tolerance in the Turkish people?
Or are you suggesting that the US should have conspired with the military in the past and inspired a more successful coup?

It's a very long story and you have to trace Turkish modern history back to events since the 1980 coup to see that the movement to overthrow the secular republic, while bankrolled by Saudi Arabia and the other Gulf states (and I can understand why the the ruling families of the latter would feel threatened by a successful, secular republic in the neighbourhood in terms of the aspirations it would create among their own populations), could not have happened in a Western client country without at least having the tacit approval of Western powers. No, Islamists did not come to power by some chance, or because one fine day they just happened to win a democratic election because this was the popular will. The Islamists started out by infiltrating people into various key parts of the state, starting out with the police force which they had full control of by the end of the 1980's, and then key ministries, the judiciary and the civil service. They only finally created a political party to come to power in 2002 after they already controlled a great deal of the state. Leaving all that aside, the fact that Western leaders can come out with sickeningly hypocritical comments supposedly in support of democracy and the rule of law in Turkey in condemning a coup attempt, while remaining totally silent about the way the current Turkish regime rides roughshod over the constitution and ignores the rule of law speaks volumes about their policies towards Turkey. Turkish society is very split and 50% adore Erdoğan and 50% detest him. Hitler also enjoyed a lot of support when he was at the peak of his power.

I see,I suppose the infiltrating Islamists you refer to were connected to Gulen. Listening to some of the Western leaders' reactions, some appeared to be backing both sides, I sensed support for a return to democracy - that could be interpreted either way. No doubt a successful coup would have resulted in a civil war and another Syria situation, that begs the question "who would benefit from a coup that failed?"

[Lordo]

50% do not addore him tim, i would say about 30%. the democracy in terggy leaves a lot to be desired. the system gives akp votes that were given to parties that did not exceed the dam system they have. and of course the system was set up by the military.

[Tim Drayton]

It's such a huge issue but let's try to put it into a simple formula. First answer the question: Is Turkey a fully independent sovereign state, or is it at least to some extent a Western client state? If you go for the first option, you may well conclude that the present state of affairs in Turkey simply reflects the right to self determination of the Turkish people. On the other hand, if you go for the second option, then logically, the West bears at least some responsibility for what's happening there.

[Tim Drayton]

...
Listening to some of the Western leaders' reactions, some appeared to be backing both sides, I sensed support for a return to democracy.
...

OK, I entirely missed any such comment. If there were any, I apologise for misreading where the West stands (although I would appreciate quotes and links, if possible).

[Tim Drayton]

50% do not addore him tim, i would say about 30%. the democracy in terggy leaves a lot to be desired. the system gives akp votes that were given to parties that did not exceed the dam system they have. and of course the system was set up by the military.

I don't know about that. Don't forget that fascist regimes ruthlessly crush all opposition and dissenting voices and set up huge propaganda machines with which they bombard the masses with populist nationalist or religious propaganda (the precise dose depending on the variety of facism) creating a mass upswell of support for the regime. Let's not forget how gradually all non-regime newspapers and TV stations in Turkey using various subterfuges have been shut down or taken over, how using various subterfuges newspapers have been forced to sack journalists who are critical of the regime, how there are now only about three non-regime newspapers left and various means are employed to prevent them from being circulated widely, how frequently one now sees the identical banner headline screaming out from most and on occasions all of the regime newspapers, of all the show trials and imprisoned journalists and intellectuals, that an amazing amount of the judiciary's time is now spent dealing with prosecutions for insulting the president, indicating the extent to which it has become a vehicle for oppression ... against the background of events like these you can eventually engineer a situation in which 50% of the population blindly supports the regime .. and then you reach a situation in which naive people will come along and, since the voices of the 50% who oppose what is gong on have been silenced and are not to be heard, shrug their shoulders and ask what the problem is if the regime enjoys such mass support.