Author: Sefa Yürükel

The People’s Movement İn Turkey Must Besiege the Palace and Seize Power to Govern

For a long time, the people’s movement in Turkey has been expressing its reaction in squares and streets. However, these actions have only managed to warn the government rather than shake it. The uprisings in Maltepe, Saraçhane, and other cities have demonstrated strong opposition, but since they were not linked to a decisive strategy, they failed to create an impact that could truly shake the government. The main reason for this is the lack of leadership and the fact that opposition parties, especially the CHP, have not guided the process effectively but rather attempted to contain and limit these movements.

However, a people’s movement should not only aim to warn the government but also to overthrow it and establish a new order. Walking the streets repeatedly or holding ineffective rallies will eventually exhaust and demoralize the masses. People want actions that produce results. If the current protests do not advance to the next stage, they will remain nothing more than controlled demonstrations led by the opposition, failing to bring about the desired resignation of the government.

Besieging the Palace and Forcing the Government to Surrender Is Essential

Forcing the government to resign and seizing power requires the people’s movement to escalate into a more radical and decisive phase. This phase involves centralizing mass street movements, organizing them, and ultimately targeting the core of the ruling power. As long as demonstrations in various cities across Turkey remain massive but confined within a limited strategy, the system will not change, and the government will continue to stay in power.

At this point, the people and the opposition face two choices: either remain trapped within the passive protests orchestrated by the CHP and other parties or transform the people’s movement into a political force by creating its own leadership and directly aiming for power. If the second path is not taken, the process will remain a controlled pressure valve managed by the opposition, allowing the government to absorb the unrest and maintain its position.

A Practical Strategy for Success: Mass Encirclement and Forcing Resignation

To ensure that the people’s movement achieves results, the following steps must be taken:

1. Establishing Organized and Centralized Leadership: The movement must create a vanguard and leadership structure. Disorganized and leaderless protests may generate short-term pressure but cannot achieve ultimate transformation.

2. Moving from Squares to the Palace: Protests should no longer be confined to public squares or marches but should directly target the center of power. Long-term blockades should be established at strategically determined locations.

3. A Sustained and Expanding Action Plan: The movement should not be limited to one-day or one-week demonstrations but must establish a continuous resistance front. Throughout history, successful people’s movements have only achieved results when they sustained their momentum.

4. Clear Demands Directly Targeting the Government: Instead of merely calling for justice or democracy, the movement must adopt a clear discourse demanding the resignation of the government.

Today, the protests orchestrated and contained by the opposition fail to unleash the true power of the people. If the people’s movement genuinely seeks change, it must move beyond marches and rallies and adopt a strategy aimed at seizing power. When the palace is besieged and the government is forced to resign, that is when real transformation will occur.

April 4, 2025
The New US and Europe, the Collapse of the Neocons, and the Rise of Asia: The Dawn of a Multipolar World Order
From World War I to the present, the global order shaped by the US and Europe has undergone a significant transformation, especially in the post-Cold War era, with the collapse of neocon policies and the rise of Asia. This shift has accelerated the transition to a multipolar world order, leading to the redefinition of military, economic, and geopolitical dimensions in international relations. In this context, Turkey’s strategic position and historical legacy also play a crucial role.
1. World War I, the Foundations of the Modern International System, and the Atlantic Order
World War I marked a turning point in modern international relations, reshaping global power dynamics. The post-war order sought international cooperation and balance of power following the devastating effects of the war (Demir, 2020). In the second half of the 20th century, the Atlantic Order, led by the United States, emerged as a global system within the framework of mutual deterrence policies with the Soviet Union (Brzezinski, 1997). However, the dissolution of the Soviet Union in the 1990s altered the fundamental parameters of this order. The rise and fall of neoconservative policies paved the way for new strategic orientations (Mearsheimer, 2001; Özdemir, 2025).
1. Historical Process: From World War I to the Cold War
2.1 World War I and Reconstruction

World War I profoundly altered Europe’s political landscape, leading to the collapse of old empires and the emergence of new state systems. The conflict laid the foundation for future international relations by shaping the power struggles and alliance policies of the 20th century (Aras & Yılmaz, 2019). Post-war treaties and reconstruction efforts positioned the United States as an emerging economic and military power.

2.2 World War II and the Formation of the Atlantic Order

World War II restructured the global order, with the United States emerging as the leader of the Atlantic Order through its military and economic dominance. The Bretton Woods system and international financial regulations solidified the US dollar as the global reserve currency, establishing a cornerstone of the capitalist world system (Kissinger, 2014; Nye, 2004).

2.3 The Cold War and Bipolar Order

During the Cold War, the ideological and geopolitical rivalry between the US and the Soviet Union structured global politics into a bipolar system. This period was defined by military alliances such as NATO and the Warsaw Pact, reinforcing the importance of balance-of-power strategies in international relations (Ikenberry, 2011).
1. The Post-1990 Period and the Evolution of Neocon Policies
3.1 The Transformation of the Post-Cold War Era

The collapse of the Soviet Union in 1990 radically changed the global order. Under a unipolar system, the US pursued neoconservative policies, particularly in the Middle East, through military interventions and NATO expansion, aiming to reshape geopolitical routes (Mearsheimer, 2001; Zakaria, 2008). However, the implementation of these strategies resulted in economic and political costs over time.

3.2 The Collapse of Neocon Policies and Alternative Approaches

By the late 2000s, neocon policies in the US and Europe began to face increasing scrutiny. Economic crises and unsuccessful military interventions led to a shift towards more pragmatic foreign policy approaches (Walt, 2018; Cook, 2025). This transformation contributed to the decline of the US-led global paradigm and the emergence of new power centers—particularly China and Russia.
1. The Rise of Asia and the Multipolar World Order
4.1 China’s Industrial Rise and Strategic Moves

The current international system is being reshaped by China’s rapid economic and industrial expansion. China’s dramatic increase in production capacity has surpassed the US’s post-1945 manufacturing dominance. Additionally, strategic initiatives such as the Belt and Road Initiative have strengthened China’s regional and global influence (Allison, 2017; Kaplan, 2012).

4.2 Russia’s Repositioning

Since 2008, Russia has pursued military modernization and strategic projects such as the Arctic Northern Route to redefine old power balances. Operations in Ukraine and regional security initiatives have reinforced Russia’s role as a key actor in Eurasia (Ersoy, 2018; Bremmer, 2012).
1. Turkey’s Strategic Position: A Historical Perspective
5.1 World War I and Its Aftermath

Turkey’s geopolitical position was shaped by the dissolution of the Ottoman Empire and the challenges of post-World War I reconstruction. The Treaty of Lausanne and the Turkish War of Independence laid the foundation for Turkey’s foreign policy strategies, emphasizing independence and neutrality (Aras & Yılmaz, 2019).

5.2 The Cold War and Beyond: Active Neutrality Policy

During the Cold War, Turkey remained under NATO’s security umbrella while maintaining its geopolitical balance. The Montreux Convention and regional strategic initiatives enabled Turkey to develop balanced relations with both Europe and Eurasia (Ersoy, 2018).
1. Conclusion
The historical trajectory from World War I to the present illustrates the continuous evolution of the global order. The Atlantic Order, shaped by the US and Europe, initially expanded through neocon policies after the Cold War. However, the subsequent rise of Asia and Russia’s strategic maneuvers have challenged the unipolar system, signaling the emergence of a multipolar world order.

References
• Allison, G. (2017). Destined for War: Can America and China Escape Thucydides’s Trap? Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.
• Aras, B., & Yılmaz, A. (2019). “Geopolitical Transformation and Regional Power Balances in Turkey.” Journal of International Relations, 14(3), 45–68.
• Bremmer, I. (2012). The J Curve: A New Way to Understand Why Nations Rise and Fall. Simon & Schuster.
• Brzezinski, Z. (1997). The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives. Basic Books.
• Cook, R. (2025). “The British Financial Empire: Aiming to Destroy the US.” Retrieved from: https://hvodinali.wordpress.com/2025/03/14/british-financial-empire-aims-to-destroy-us/
• Cox, M. (2012). Power Shifts, Economic Change and the Decline of the West? International Relations Journal, 26(4), 369–388.
• Demir, Ö. (2020). “The New World Order: Geopolitical and Economic Perspectives.” Strategic Analysis Journal, 9(2), 105–123.
• Ersoy, G. (2018). “Multipolar World Order and Turkey’s Strategic Choices.” Ankara University Journal of Political Science, 22(1), 89–112.
• Fukuyama, F. (1992). The End of History and the Last Man. Free Press.
• Huntington, S. P. (1996). The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order. Simon & Schuster.
• Ikenberry, G. J. (2011). Liberal Leviathan: The Origins, Crisis, and Transformation of the American World Order. Princeton University Press.
• Kissinger, H. (2014). World Order. Penguin Press.
• Mearsheimer, J. J. (2001). The Tragedy of Great Power Politics. W. W. Norton & Company.
• Nye, J. S. (2004). Soft Power: The Means to Success in World Politics. Public Affairs.
• Walt, S. M. (2018). The Hell of Good Intentions: America’s Foreign Policy Elite and the Decline of U.S. Primacy. Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
• Zakaria, F. (2008). The Post-American World. W. W. Norton & Company.

(.) Sefa Yürükel, MA ( Master of Arts) University of Aarhus , 1997.
Anthropologists and Ethnographer
March 16, 2025
The Future of Europe: Russia’s Guarantee and the New Geopolitical Center of Gravity
In contemporary international relations, geopolitical realities continue to be shaped by historical processes and geographical interactions. This article argues that Europe’s security architecture must be reconsidered within an uninterrupted framework of engagement with Russia. While the concept of a Europe without Russia may be theoretically plausible, it is insufficient in terms of a realistic understanding of security and stability.
1. Introduction: The Limits of a Europe Without Russia
In an era of continuously evolving global power dynamics, it is becoming increasingly difficult for Europe to define its security solely through internal dynamics. Moving beyond traditional Western perspectives and recognizing Russia as a security guarantor enables the construction of a more balanced and sustainable international system (Mearsheimer, 2001; Brzezinski, 1997). In this context, while the idea of a “Europe without Russia” may be debated in theory, in practice, it fails to offer a realistic solution when historical, cultural, and strategic connections are taken into account.
1. Historical and Strategic Context
Europe’s geographical position has historically ensured constant interaction with the East. Although the post-Cold War period saw tensions between Russia and Europe due to ideological differences and security concerns, the geopolitical perspective reveals an unavoidable interdependence between the two regions (Öniş, 2007). The cultural and economic ties along Europe’s eastern borders demonstrate that Russia is not merely a competitor but also an indispensable element in maintaining regional stability.
1. Geopolitical Analysis: Seeking a New Balance
Geopolitics is one of the most fundamental factors shaping international relations. Viewing Russia solely as a threat disregards historical and geographical realities (Nye, 2004). Conversely, under Russia’s security umbrella, Europe can achieve the flexibility and adaptability required for a multipolar world order.

Within this framework, a new geopolitical center of gravity emerges:
• Geographical Balance: Positioned between the Atlantic and the rising China/India axis, this center could restructure power dynamics and establish regional stability.
• Regional Actors: Countries such as Turkey and Iran should be integrated into this new order due to their geographical and cultural proximity, thereby strengthening regional cooperation (Doğan, 2018).
• Diplomatic Approach: Moving beyond decades of rivalry and hostility, constructive dialogue and joint security mechanisms must be established. In this context, the reconstruction of the security architecture can only be achieved by overcoming historical animosities.
1. Visionary Approach and Policy Recommendations
Future-oriented strategic approaches should not focus solely on military or economic power but also prioritize diplomatic and cultural cooperation. The following recommendations can lay the foundation for a new geopolitical order:
• Multi-Layered Security Mechanisms: Europe’s traditional security structures should be redefined with Russia’s active participation, ensuring a comprehensive system that protects the interests of all actors.
• Deepening Economic Integration: Economic cooperation will reinforce political and military security, while joint infrastructure projects will enhance interdependence in energy and trade.
• Cultural and Academic Dialogue: Emphasizing historical ties and shared cultural heritage can replace hostility with friendship-based relations. In this regard, joint academic research and cultural initiatives should be encouraged.
1. Conclusion
The notion of a Europe entirely disconnected from Russia is incompatible with both historical and strategic realities. If Russia is recognized as a security guarantor and constructive relations are established, it could become a cornerstone of a new multipolar world order. The longstanding cycle of rivalry must be replaced with balanced and mutually beneficial relationships. In this context, the integration of actors such as Turkey and Iran as a stabilizing force between the Atlantic and the rising East will help materialize this geopolitical vision.

References
• Brzezinski, Z. (1997). The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives. New York: Basic Books.
• Doğan, H. (2018). New Geopolitical Balances: Turkey, Iran, and Regional Security. Istanbul: Academic Publishing.
• Mearsheimer, J. J. (2001). The Tragedy of Great Power Politics. New York: W.W. Norton & Company.
• Nye, J. S. (2004). Soft Power: The Means to Success in World Politics. New York: Public Affairs.
• Öniş, Z. (2007). Transformation in Europe-Russia Relations: Security, Economy, and Culture. Ankara: Siyasal Kitabevi.

(.) Sefa Yürükel, MA ( Master of
March 15, 2025
“In the Shadow of Sectarian War: Turkey’s Collapse” ( poem)

A nightmare unfolds on Syrian land,
In BOP’s hand, Turkey’s role is a reprimand,
PKK has statehood, its borders expand,
HTS occupies, its people in command.

Erdoğan calls for genocide, a vile plea,
“Fight the Assad remnants,” he says, setting them free,
A massacre of a people, eyes dark with rage,
And that cruel politics, we silently engage.

With Turkish government’s hands, terror grew strong,
PKK in Syria, where it doesn’t belong,
Traitors within cheer as they watch with delight,
A nation’s future, decayed in the night.

Alevi blood spills on Syrian soil,
Sectarian strife, an ever-deepening toil,
In Turkish lands, these rotten schemes,
Turn brother against brother, shattering dreams.

HTS, entrenched in bloodied lands,
Radicalism thrives, Turkey’s stained hands,
A state forged through terror, brutality’s call,
And we stand silent, watching it all.

We are of the Great Middle East Project ‘s pawns, enslaved to this game,
The secular republic falls, we share the blame,
In Syria’s flames, every life lost,
Turkey’s shadow looms, but at what cost?

Erdoğan, the hand that legitimized PKK,
Turns a blind eye to HTS’s slay,
In Syria’s dark, we vanish away,
History will recall this betrayal, come what may.

Oh, Turkish people, awaken from this fire,
Our so-called allies now conspire,
In the Great Middle East Project ‘s plans, we shall disappear,
In the shadow of sectarian war, Turkey will fall, I fear.

By Sefa Yürükel
March 11, 2025
Norway

March 13, 2025
Poem of Resistance Against Genocide in Syria

Humanity is silent, its tongue turned to stone,

In Syria, a bell written in blood is sown.

Alevi and Christian, are their existence denied?

Questions lost in darkness, nowhere to hide.

Radical storms blow the fate away,

Every hole carved by torture, by death’s cruel sway.

By Jolani’s command, in HTS’s hand,

Hope collapses, screams vanish into the sand.

The Free Syrian Army, genocide in every town,

All the villages are wrecked, fear wears its crown.

In the eyes, pain; in the hearts, a crack,

Every soul, a pawn, lost to the brutal track.

With Erdoğan and Bahçeli’s hands at play,

Every pain grows, every tear turns gray.

Kalın, Fidan, silent in the shadows they stand,

The foundations of the Great Middle East Project’s destruction, seen by all in the land.

Genocide is not the suffering of one, but of the whole world,

Yet no one stops, no one sees, no flag is unfurled.

The dark path of Jolani and the FSA’s hand,

Disappears from sight, but leaves a mark on the land.

Oh world, now is not the time to remain mute,

Let’s follow justice, let’s find the route.

Every soul, every life is worth the fight,

Don’t forget this, let’s scream it out tonight!

Wake up again, those still sleeping in the dark,

Let’s ignite the fire of resistance, leave our mark.

If genocide not ends, humanity dies,

But if we resist, then victory is ours to rise!

By Sefa Yürükel

March 12, 2025

Norway

March 13, 2025
A Call for Humanity Against the Genocide in Syria ( Poem)

In the deep wound of Syria,

The hearts of Alevis and Christians bleed.

Radical winds blow,

The dark clouds of genocide loom, at any moment.

In the hands of Hayat Tahrir al-Sham,

In the hands of the Free Syrian Army,

Humanity dies, hope fades,

The existence of a people comes to an end.

The silent approval of the Great Middle East Project’s servants Erdoğan and Bahçeli,

The secret path of Kalın and Fidan,

While destroying the conscience of a nation,

The Turkish people will burn in this fire too.

Everyone’s eyes have gone blind,

Voices rose, but went unheard,

The doors of justice are shut,

We are all guilty, none of us have been judged.

We make a call to the whole world,

It’s time to stop the genocide,

A hope for Alevis and Christians,

It’s time to fight for humanity before it’s too late.

Defend secularism, uphold rights with honor,

In the midst of war, with conscience,

Let’s unite against war,

Let’s build our resistance on law and justice.

It is not to destroy a nation, a people,

But to unite, to shout together,

The heart of humanity is silent, its eyes are crying,

But we, together, will awaken the world.

By Sefa Yürükel

March 13, 2025

Norway

March 13, 2025