Turkish Forum

Category: Ibrahim Kurtulus

  • Turkey’s new missiles target India

    Turkey’s new missiles target India

    Letter to Editor : Turkey’s new missiles target India, presage a new Kashmir push” by Michael Rubin

    Letter to Editor Sunday Guardian Ms Joyeeta Basu 
    Sundayguardianlive
    India 

    Dear Ms Joyeeta Basu: 

    First, a matter of basic accuracy and respect. The official name of the country is Türkiye, not “Turkey.” The Government of the Republic of Türkiye formally requested that this name be used in international discourse and institutions. When individuals presenting themselves as analysts of Middle Eastern affairs cannot even employ the correct name of a NATO ally, it raises legitimate questions about the depth of their expertise.

    The article in question “Turkey’s new missiles target India, presage a new Kashmir push” by Michael Rubin is not a serious strategic assessment. It is another example of the ongoing smear campaigns across the world against Türkiye, part of a broader global campaign of delegitimization directed against the Turkish state and nation. This issue has become another weapon in the international campaign to de-legitimize the Turkish state and the Turkish people.

    To suggest that Türkiye’s missile development is somehow uniquely directed at India is speculative, inflammatory, and strategically unserious. Major regional and global powers continuously develop advanced missile systems as part of deterrence doctrine, technological modernization, and national defense planning. India itself maintains sophisticated missile and nuclear capabilities, as do numerous other states across Eurasia. Yet when Türkiye advances its own defense industry, it is immediately framed through paranoia and ideological hostility.

    Türkiye has every sovereign right to strengthen its defense capabilities in an increasingly unstable geopolitical environment marked by war in Eastern Europe, instability in the Middle East, terrorism, maritime disputes, and evolving missile threats. Portraying Türkiye’s technological progress as evidence of an impending anti-India conspiracy reflects political bias rather than objective analysis.

    The article further descends into ideological caricature by attempting to portray President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and modern Türkiye through reductive Islamist stereotypes divorced from geopolitical reality. Türkiye remains a constitutional republic, a member of NATO, a G20 economy, and a critical strategic actor balancing relations across Europe, Asia, the Caucasus, the Balkans, and the Middle East. It is, in fact, A NATO Ally Against Authoritarian Threats.

    The accusations regarding Hamas, Syria, Kashmir, and so-called “neo-Ottomanism” are presented without balance, nuance, or acknowledgment of Türkiye’s actual security concerns. Türkiye has suffered enormously from terrorism, instability on its borders, refugee crises, and regional wars. It has fought ISIS directly, hosted millions of refugees, and acted as a mediator in multiple international conflicts. Yet critics selectively erase these realities because they do not fit the predetermined narrative.

    The attempt to equate Türkiye’s diplomatic concern regarding Kashmiri Muslims with support for terrorism is especially irresponsible. Nations routinely express views on international disputes and humanitarian issues without endorsing violence. Türkiye’s statements on Kashmir, like those of many countries regarding global disputes, reflect diplomatic and humanitarian concerns, not calls for extremism.

    More troubling is the broader pattern behind such rhetoric. Increasingly, certain commentators seek to frame every independent Turkish foreign policy decision as evidence of extremism simply because Türkiye refuses to act as a subordinate regional actor. Whether the issue is the Eastern Mediterranean, Libya, Syria, the Caucasus, Palestine, or defense modernization, the same narrative machinery activates: demonize Türkiye, question its legitimacy, and isolate it internationally.

    This is not objective analysis. It is another smear campaign to delegitimize Türkiye a nation that has emerged as an independent regional power with strategic autonomy, advanced defense capabilities, and growing diplomatic influence across multiple continents.

    Ibrahim Kurtulus
    Community Activist 

    Turkey’s new missiles target India, presage a new Kashmir push

    Turkey’s new missiles target India, presage a new Kashmir push

  • Letter to New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani’s Closest Ally – Mr. Ali Najmi Advisor

    Letter to New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani’s Closest Ally – Mr. Ali Najmi Advisor

    Letter to New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani’s  Closest Ally –  Mr. Ali Najmi 

    Mr. Ali Najmi 
    The Law Office of Ali Najmi
    32 Broadway Suite 1310
    New York, NY 10004

    April 4, 2026

    Dear Mr. Najmi,

    At the outset let me ask:  Are Christian Armenian lives more precious than the 2. 5 million Muslim lives to you and Mr. Mamdani that were  killed / lost in World War 1 ?

    I acknowledge your recent remarks concerning my position on the characterization of the events of 1915- World War 1, as well as the references made to my professional background. I respond to clarify the issues raised and to ensure the discussion remains grounded in principle, law, and evidentiary standards rather than insinuation.

     During our text messaging Sunday April 26, 2026 , rather than engaging with the facts, Mr. Najmi, you have chosen to rely on personal diversions that have no bearing on the historical and legal questions at hand. This approach prioritizes personal antagonism over evidence-based debate. I maintain that this discussion should be guided by judicially tested evidence and documentation, rather than irrelevant personal attacks.

    The central issue is not whether history can be studied or discussed by scholars, but whether the legal classification of grave international crimes such as genocide can be definitively established outside a competent judicial process. In my view, such determinations properly fall within the jurisdiction of established legal bodies, including international courts and tribunals or competent human rights mechanisms. Scholarly interpretation, particularly when selective or ideologically driven, should not substitute for formal legal adjudication where such serious legal characterizations are concerned. A determination of genocide requires rigorous evidentiary review, adversarial testing, and cross examination within an appropriate judicial framework.

    Sir, it is important to separate historical inquiry from legal adjudication. While historians may contribute to contextual understanding, legal determinations of this magnitude are ultimately the responsibility of impartial tribunals. This distinction is fundamental to the integrity of international law.

    Sir, no one disputes that the early 20th century was marked by immense human suffering across multiple communities during the collapse of the Ottoman Empire and the First World War. This includes significant losses experienced by 2.5 million Muslims as well as Armenians and others. A balanced historical understanding must acknowledge all such suffering without selective omission. The legal argument advanced here is often misunderstood. The absence of the 1948 Genocide Convention at the time of the events in question does not preclude accountability under international law. 

    Indeed, precedents such as the Nuremberg Trials demonstrate that mass atrocities were prosecuted as crimes against humanity under existing principles of international law. Furthermore, later international tribunals, including those for Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia, confirm that judicial mechanisms are routinely established after the fact to determine responsibility based on evidence and due process.

    Armenian Prime Minister Pashinyan January 24, 2025, during a meeting with members of the Armenian diaspora in Zurich, Switzerland. said ” How is it that there was no agenda for the Armenian Genocide in 1939, and how is it that the agenda for the Armenian Genocide appeared in 1950? How did it happen?”

    United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon April 16, 2015 said “Armenian deaths during World War I were not genocide”

     U.S. Supreme Court Rejects Armenian Allegations.

    European Court of Human Rights, ECHR on December 17, 2013 (Perincek vs Switzerland)  that the events of 1915 cannot be proven to be genocide or compared to Jewish Holocaust.

    The continued efforts by segments of the Armenian diaspora to advance interpretations of history that Türkiye considers inaccurate have long been a matter of concern. In this context, Türkiye’s 2005 proposal to establish a joint historical commission with Armenia remains unfulfilled. If the evidentiary basis is as clear as asserted, engagement with such an initiative would seem constructive.

    Perhaps, Mr. Najmi and Mr. Mamdani,  might consider taking a leading role in pursuing a legal avenue to definitively clarify the matter at the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), International Criminal Court (ICC), International Court of Justice (ICJ) an effort that could, in your view, bring resolution and recognition to the Armenian position. You or Mr. Mamdani can Mr. Najmi become a hero to the Armenians.

    Mr Najmi,  Are Christian Armenian lives more precious than the 2.5 million Muslim lives to you and 

    Mr. Mamdani that were killed in World War 1

    Mr. Najmi, I am quite curious as to why you think that I, and many others in my position, do not deserve a right you so readily claim for yourself ?

    Finally, attempts to resolve or prejudge such deeply contested historical and legal issues outside of proper judicial forums risk undermining both legal standards and constructive dialogue. For that reason only competent international judicial bodies not selectively curated scholarly consensus or politically motivated narratives are appropriate forums for definitive legal determinations of genocide.

     Also, Using of the outdated term “Turkey” in official communication is a insult to a honorable people and Nation. The nation has formally adopted the name “Republic of Türkiye,” which has been recognized by the United Nations and numerous international bodies. Addressing countries by their chosen names is a basic element of diplomatic respect and cultural decency. Mr. Mamdani should, get it right !

    Accordingly, I respectfully decline to accept the characterization set forth in your statement and that of Mr. Mamdani.

    Until a verdict of genocide can be reached by a “competent tribunal ” after “due process” where both sides of the conflict are properly represented and evidence cross examined, the term genocide should be preceded by the qualifier “alleged”.

     WHAT THE WORLD NEEDS NOW IS TRUTH AND HONESTY, NOT SELECTIVE MORALITY.

    Respectfully,

    Ibrahim Kurtulus

    Community Activist 

    From: EMI P
    Date: Thu, May 7, 2026 at 3:43 AM

    Back page of the French daily Le Petit Journal, dated 24 November1896 (Armenians attacking a mosque):
  • Leadership, accountability and the voice of the Turkish American community

    Leadership, accountability and the voice of the Turkish American community

    Staten Island Advance Newspaper Prints Editorial about Turkish Consul General Ahmet Yazal, New York in Newspaper.

    Since his appointment, Turkish Consul General Ahmet Yazal has become a focal point of concern.

    Clink onto Link Below to Read Editorial about Turkish Consul General Ahmet Yazal, New York 

    Leadership, accountability and the voice of the Turkish American community

    • Published: Apr. 22, 2026, 6:00 a.m.

    In every diplomatic post, leadership carries not only authority, but a profound responsibility to represent, protect and unify the people it serves. For the Turkish American community, the role of Consul General is especially significant. It must bridge Ankara and the diaspora, uphold dignity and respond firmly to external challenges particularly in moments when Türkiye faces criticism or misrepresentation in international media.

    Since his appointment, Turkish Consul General Ahmet Yazal has become a focal point of concern among segments of the Turkish American community. These concerns are not rooted in hostility toward Türkiye. Rather, they reflect a desire for stronger advocacy, clearer communication, and a leadership approach that fosters inclusion instead of division.

    One issue that has resonated deeply is the sentiment among community members, including respected elders, that their voices and contributions have not been adequately recognized. For a community that takes immense pride in its history, including the sacrifices of Turkish soldiers in the Korean War, this perception is especially painful. Honoring that legacy should be a unifying principle.

    Equally troubling is the perception that criticism or questioning of leadership is discouraged or met with coordinated pushback from loyal supporters of Consul General Ahmet Yazal. Many describe an environment where individuals who raise concerns feel targeted, intimidated, harassed or subjected to efforts to delegitimize their voices by Turkish Consul General Mr. Yazal foot soldiers. Whether formal or informal, this dynamic has created a chilling effect within the community.

    There is what many now describe as a “silent majority” within the Turkish American community — individuals who share similar concerns but hesitate to speak publicly. Their reluctance stems from fear of backlash, including harassment, intimidation or reputational harm. When individuals feel constrained from expressing their views, the strength and unity of the community suffer.

    Public accountability, including for Consul Generals, is not “anti-Türkiye” or “anti-government.” It is a fundamental democratic principle. Communities must be able to apply pressure when officials appear unresponsive or when gatekeepers attempt to silence inconvenient voices. Labeling criticism as “weaponizable” risks becoming a method of suppressing legitimate dissent.

    At a dinner on March 12, 2026, Turkish Consul General Ahmet Yazal emphasized the importance of civic voice, stating:

    “Most importantly, in the country where we reside, let us learn about and take ownership of the rights and opportunities available to our communities, and let us not forget our right to have a voice in this land.”

    This is an important message. However, it must be applied consistently. Encouraging individuals to speak must also include the freedom to question leadership without fear.

    The Turkish American community deserves leadership that listens from Ankara and does use foot soldiers to silence inconvenient voices. Open dialogue, accountability and mutual respect remain essential to strong representation.

    https://www.silive.com/opinion/letters/2026/04/leadership-accountability-and-the-voice-of-the-turkish-american-community.html

    (Ibrahim Kurtulus is a Dongan Hills resident.)

  • Challenging Malliotakis Cyprus Claims

    Challenging Malliotakis Cyprus Claims

    Response to US Congresswoman Nicole Malliotakis

    Guarantor Rights vs. Political Rhetoric: Challenging Malliotakis Cyprus Claims

    Congresswoman Nicole Malliotakis statement on Türkiye’s actions in Cyprus is not only deeply one-sided, but it also disregards the legal, historical, and strategic realities governing the island.

     First and foremost, Türkiye is not an external interloper in Cyprus. Under the internationally recognized Treaty of Guarantee, Türkiye is a guarantor power a status that explicitly grants it the legal authority and obligation to ensure the security and constitutional order of the island, particularly for Turkish Cypriots. To characterize Türkiye’s defensive posture as a “violation” while ignoring this binding framework is a selective interpretation of international law. It is also striking that Congresswoman Malliotakis remains silent on the extensive and longstanding presence of foreign military forces on the island particularly the British sovereign bases and the increasing military cooperation between the Greek Cypriot administration and outside actors. These forces operate without guarantor rights, yet their expansion is somehow deemed acceptable. This double standard raises serious questions about the objectivity of her position.

     Moreover, recent actions by the Greek Cypriot side inviting external military actors and deepening defense alignments have contributed significantly to rising tensions. These developments have effectively transformed the island into a forward operating platform, increasing its exposure to regional threats, including those emanating from Iran. In such an environment, Türkiye’s measures are not provocative they are precautionary and rooted in its legal responsibilities.

     Let us be clear: Turkish Cypriots have an inherent right to security. Türkiye, as a guarantor, has both the right and the duty to protect them. One must ask what would the United States do if a directly linked population under its protection faced escalating regional threats? What would any sovereign nation do to safeguard its national interests against actors like Iran? The answer is obvious. Yet when Türkiye, a NATO ally, exercises these rights, Congresswoman Malliotakis choooses to ignore the legal framework and instead advances legislation that risks upsetting the delicate balance on the island. Lifting the arms embargo on Cyprus is not a step toward stability it is a move that could accelerate militarization, deepen divisions, and undermine prospects for a negotiated settlement.

     Her argument that such a move would benefit American jobs further weakens her position. U.S. foreign policy cannot and should not be reduced to a transactional exercise in defense contracting. Stability in the Eastern Mediterranean requires balance, diplomacy, and respect for existing treaties not policies that risk emboldening one side while isoleting the other.

     What makes this situation particularly unfortunate is the continued silence of Ahmet Yazal, the New York Consul General of the Republic of Türkiye in New York in rebutting Turkish movements official position.  At a time when misleading narratives about Türkiye appear regularly in major American tabloids and coming from Congresswomen Malliotakis , one would expect stronger public engagement in defending the country’s reputation. Diplomacy requires more than ceremonial presence and walking two dogs; it requires active communication when misinformation circulates widely. Not Opinion, but official government policy.

    Finally, the pattern is clear. Congresswoman Malliotakis rhetoric consistently aligns with the positions of the Greek Cypriot administration, while dismissing Türkiye’s legal rights and security concerns. This is not constructive diplomacy it is political advocacy that risks inflaming an already sensitive geopolitical issue. 

    Türkiye has made its position unequivocal: it will continue to take all necessary measures, within its legal rights as a guarantor power, to ensure the security of Turkish Cypriots and to protect its national interests. Durable peace on the island will not come from partisan narratives or legislative escalations, but from a balanced and honest recognition of the rights and responsibilities of all parties involved.

    Respectfully,

    Ibrahim Kurtulus 

  • New York Turkish Consul General Ahmet Yazal

    New York Turkish Consul General Ahmet Yazal

    For over 35 years, I have held US elected officials members of US. Congress, US, governors, US, senators, and community leaders accountable by questioning and, when necessary, criticizing their actions. In the United States, this kind of scrutiny is not only accepted, it’s a fundamental part of civic engagement.

    What’s troubling is the double standard I’ve experienced. The same people who remain silent when I criticize U.S. officials react very differently when I raise concerns about Turkish diplomats. Instead of open dialogue, I face intimidation, threats, and harassment both directly and indirectly directed by Turkish Consul General Ahmet Yazal.

    Criticism of any public official, including consuls general, should not be labeled as anti country or anti government. Holding officials accountable is not an attack on a nation; it’s a necessary way for communities to voice concerns and demand better representation. Labeling dissent as harmful or “weaponizable” is often just a tactic to silence inconvenient voices rather than address the issues being raised.

    Respectfully,

    Ibrahim Kurtulus
    Community Activist

  • Silence about  terrorist origination Fethullah Gulen foot Soldiers in New York

    Silence about  terrorist origination Fethullah Gulen foot Soldiers in New York

    New York  Turkish Consul General Ahmet Yazal  / Silence about  terrorist origination Fethullah Gulen foot Soldiers in New York  

    Since the appointment of Consul General Ahmet Yazal, there has been little visible public response or outreach regarding activities in New York involving individuals believed to be linked to  the terrorist origination Fethullah Gulen and their engagement with various NGOs. This silence is raising questions as many in community  are wondering whether enough attention is being given to the issue in New York by Consul General Ahmet Yazal about the terrorist origination , and whether Turkish interests are being actively represented and protected, especially considering the responsibility to the Turkish public. Yazal is just collecting his $12,000 salary and waiting for his retirement and walking his two dogs. (picture attached) 

    Respectfully,

    Ibrahim Kurtulus
    Staten Island, New York