Turkish Forum

Tag: Turkey-US

  • Letter to Senator Chris Van Hollen

    Letter to Senator Chris Van Hollen

    Senator Chris Van Hollen
    730 Hart Senate Office Building
    Washington, DC 20510
    Phone: (202) 224-4654
    Fax: (202) 228-0629

    RE: Rebuttal to Senator Van Hollen’s Assertions Regarding Türkiye and U.S. Policy

    April 7, 2025 

    Senator Chris Van Hollen,

    Your recent commentary during the Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing concerning Tom Barrack’s nomination as U.S. Ambassador to Türkiye, and your subsequent public statements, reveal a deeply flawed and intellectually inconsistent approach to U.S.-Türkiye relations. Your assertions, particularly regarding the nomenclature of Türkiye, the Ekrem İmamoğlu case, the CAATSA sanctions, and the broader characterization of Türkiye’s governance, warrant a rigorous and unequivocal rebuttal.

    Firstly, the persistent disregard for the Republic of Türkiye’s formal request to be addressed as “Türkiye” is not a trivial semantic matter. It constitutes a profound act of diplomatic disrespect, undermining the very principles of sovereignty and national identity that the United States purports to uphold. To continue employing the outdated “Turkey” is to perpetuate a colonial vestige, a relic of a bygone era that fails to acknowledge the nation’s contemporary self-determination.

    Secondly, your critique of the administration’s response to the Ekrem İmamoğlu case, couched in the rhetoric of “stability” versus “democracy,” reflects a superficial understanding of Türkiye’s legal and political complexities. The legal proceedings against İmamoğlu, regardless of their political ramifications, must be contextualized within Türkiye’s established legal framework. To conflate legitimate legal processes with authoritarianism is to engage in a disingenuous exercise in political grandstanding. As Time Magazine aptly observed, “Istanbul’s Rebuke of Erdogan Shows That Democracy Lives in Türkiye,” highlighting the nation’s vibrant democratic processes and the robust participation of its citizenry. To selectively isolate İmamoğlu’s case while ignoring the broader context of Türkiye’s democratic engagement is an act of selective perception.

    Furthermore, your stance on the F-35 and S-400 issue is riddled with inconsistencies and strategic myopia. The imposition of CAATSA sanctions, while presented as a matter of principle, has demonstrably weakened NATO’s southern flank. The United States’ refusal to provide Türkiye with the Patriot missile system precipitated its acquisition of the Russian S-400, a decision born of necessity, not malice. Moreover, your conspicuous silence regarding the operation of Russian-made S-300 systems by other NATO members—Greece, Bulgaria, and Slovakia—exposes a glaring double standard. This selective application of punitive measures undermines the integrity of the alliance and emboldens adversaries who exploit such internal divisions.

    The narrative you and others propagate, portraying Türkiye as an “authoritarian” state, is a gross oversimplification. Türkiye, despite its challenges, operates as a functioning democracy, characterized by active political participation, a diverse media landscape, and regular elections. President Erdoğan’s electoral victories, achieved through high voter turnout, attest to the strength of Türkiye’s democratic mandate. The legal actions taken against certain journalists, while subject to scrutiny, are part of broader efforts to ensure responsible and unbiased reporting. To ignore the diversity of viewpoints present in Türkiye’s media landscape is to deliberately misrepresent the facts.

    Your selective indignation regarding legal proceedings in Türkiye contrasts sharply with your silence on similar issues within the United States and other Western nations. The prosecution of whistleblowers like Edward Snowden and Julian Assange, the detention of individuals at Guantanamo Bay without trial, and the use of extrajudicial drone strikes all raise profound questions about the application of democratic values. Are these not examples of the same “democratic backsliding” you so readily condemn in Türkiye? Further, your silence regarding the corruption charges against prominent figures in France, England and the United States, such as the French Far Right Leader, Former Mayor of Liverpool Joe Anderson, and Former Governor of Puerto Rico, Wanda Vázquez Garced, exposes a deeply troubling inconsistency. Your selective outrage reveals a political agenda, not a principled stance.

    Furthermore, the documented instances of U.S. foreign aid being directed to entities with ties to terrorist organizations, as highlighted by Gregg Roman’s testimony before the House Oversight and Government Reform Subcommittee, demand your attention. To ignore such egregious breaches while fixating on Türkiye’s legitimate security concerns is an act of profound intellectual dishonesty.

    The orchestrated campaign to delegitimize Türkiye, characterized by the exploitation of digital platforms and non-governmental organizations, constitutes a deliberate assault on the nation’s sovereignty and existence. This sustained effort to demonize Türkiye, to paint it as a villain, is not merely a diplomatic disagreement; it is a calculated attempt to erode the nation’s rightful place on the world stage.

    In conclusion, your assertions, Senator Van Hollen, are predicated on a selective application of facts, a profound disregard for diplomatic norms, and a conspicuous double standard. A more balanced and intellectually rigorous approach is imperative if the United States is to maintain a constructive and mutually respectful relationship with its vital NATO ally, Türkiye.

    Ibrahim Kurtulus

    Community Activist 

  • Letter to Staten Island Advance News Paper Editor

    Letter to Staten Island Advance News Paper Editor

    Ibrahim Kurtulus 
    425 Jefferson Ave 
    Staten island, NY 10306 
    6462677488

    Letter to Staten island Staten Island Advance Editor 

    To the Editor :

    Republic of Türkiye (Former Name Turkey):  Global Diplomacy, Undermined by Congresswoman 

    Nicole Malliotakis

    Türkiye has long been a cornerstone of regional stability, bridging East and West through diplomacy, trade, and security. Its strategic significance to NATO and its role in counterterrorism, humanitarian efforts, and mediation cannot be overstated. Yet, Congresswoman Nicole Malliotakis, through her positions and actions, consistently undermines U.S.-Türkiye relations, jeopardizing national interests.

    Türkiye’s diplomatic acumen has been repeatedly demonstrated. In the ongoing Gaza crisis, Türkiye is mediating the release of hostages through its intelligence and diplomatic channels. U.S. Ambassador Jeff Flake has praised Türkiye’s ability to “engage adversaries and mediate complex negotiations.” Similarly, Türkiye facilitated the release of American basketball star Brittney Griner in 2022, mediating between the U.S. and Russia. These examples highlight Türkiye’s role as an indispensable partner.

    Congresswoman Malliotakis’ actions, however, risk alienating this vital ally. She has supported resolutions criticizing Türkiye’s government, ignoring its importance in U.S. efforts to counter Russian aggression and ensure Middle Eastern stability. Former US Ambassador James Jeffrey has aptly noted, “Demonizing Türkiye is not the answer,” underscoring the need for constructive engagement.

    As a NATO member, Türkiye controls access to the Black Sea, playing a critical role in containing Russian aggression. It has also been pivotal in combating terrorism, targeting groups like ISIS and the PKK, recognized as a terrorist organization by both Türkiye and the U.S. Ambassador Flake acknowledged Türkiye’s contributions, stating, “Improved U.S.-Türkiye relations advance a range of issues essential for American National Interest and security.”

    Despite this, Malliotakis has aligned with groups sympathetic to the PKK/YPG, Radical Islamic Cleric Fethullah Gulen, undermining counterterrorism collaboration. Her policies jeopardizes joint security initiatives vital to U.S. national interests.

    Türkiye is an emerging economic power and a gateway for trade between Europe, Asia, and the Middle East. Strengthening economic ties with Türkiye offers significant opportunities for American and Staten Island businesses. Yet, Malliotakis’ divisive rhetoric obstructs such efforts, limiting growth and collaboration.

    Moreover, her approach risks emboldening adversaries like Russia and Iran, who exploit divisions within NATO. By sidelining Türkiye, Malliotakis compromises regional stability, endangering both American and allied interests.

    President Biden recently emphasized Türkiye’s role in Gaza negotiations. Trump to understands Turkiyes role. This reflects an understanding of Türkiye’s value as a partner in achieving global stability. Congresswoman Malliotakis, however, continues to promote policies that strain this relationship, prioritizing political agendas over national security.

    It’s time to recognize Türkiye as a trusted ally and reject the divisive narratives perpetuated by figures like Malliotakis. Strengthening U.S.-Türkiye relations ensures a safer, more prosperous future for both nations. Anything less undermines the very fabric of American diplomacy and security.

    Ibrahim Kurtulus

    Dongan Hills

  • Turkey-US Tension Develops Over Al-Qaeda Member

    Turkey-US Tension Develops Over Al-Qaeda Member

    By: Deniz Zeyrek Translated from Radikal.

    The media coverage of U.S. Ambassador Francis Ricciardone’s meeting with journalists this week focused mostly on the DHKP-C suicide attack [at the U.S. embassy in Ankara], his criticism of the judiciary and Kurdish problems. But the picture the ambassador painted shows that the current state of bilateral ties is not very promising, let alone human rights violations in Turkey. The two countries are deeply divided on Iraq, Syria, Israel and Iran. Now they have also a crisis over al-Qaeda.

    About This Article

    Summary :Recent remarks by the U.S. ambassador to Turkey suggest that bilateral ties between the two states are waning, with Turkey’s stance toward al-Qaeda member Suleiman Abu Ghaith being a point of contention, writes Deniz Zeyrek.Publisher: Radikal (Turkey)
    Original Title:
    Turkey-US Tension Over Ghaith
    Author: Deniz Zeyrek
    First Published: February 7, 2013
    Posted on: February 8 2013
    Translated by: Sibel Utku Bila

    Washington has already complained of Turkey’s failure to take a clear stance against al-Qaeda militants fighting Assad in Syria and its reluctance to fully join the global alliance against the financing of terrorism, especially of al-Qaeda. Nowadays Washington is irked that Suleiman Abu Ghaith, a prominent al-Qaeda figure, is treated as an ordinary asylum seeker in Ankara.

    ‘Outside actors’ in Syria

    The U.S. ambassador may argue that Turkey and the United States have similar approaches on Syria, but the situation on the ground is quite different. In Ankara’s view, the clout of al-Qaeda affiliated groups in Syria and the risk of a sectarian conflict are being exaggerated, but those groups will grow stronger if Assad’s departure is further delayed.

    Ankara denies that jihadists are being allowed to use Turkish territory. The United States agrees that foreign groups will become stronger if the transition process is protracted, but is already alarmed over their presence in Syria. Commenting on the issue, Ricciardone said: “It is a complicated question with no easy answers. We are concerned about outside actors. We are worried that they are obstructing and high-jacking the struggle of the Syrian people. That is a very serious worry! The reason why we are so cautious [on Syria] is that we want to make sure of whom we are supporting.”

    Terrorist or ordinary asylum seeker?

    Prime Minister Recip Tayyip Erdogan often accuses Westerners, especially Europeans, of tolerating terrorists active in Turkey. However, the picture that Ricciardone paints indicates that Turkey itself differentiates between “my terrorists and the terrorists of others” when it comes to issues of “terrorism” that Westerners focus on. The ambassador argues that the problem stems from Turkey’s failure to straighten its legislation on terrorism and points to the controversy in Turkey over the draft law on money laundering and terror financing.

    A fresh problem that erupted ten days ago has fuelled the debate on double standards. It emerged that Suleiman Abu Ghaith, a senior aide of Bin Laden, had entered Turkey from Iran and settled in a hotel in Ankara. He was detained at the bequest of the United States, but was soon released on grounds he had committed no crime in Turkey. The authorities continue to hold him as “a guest” because he does not have a passport.

    Washington has asked to interrogate Ghaith and take him to the United States under an agreement on the extradition of criminals. However, it has not been allowed to do so, with Ankara digging in its heels and asking for some papers. What irks the Americans most is the prospect of Ghaith being deported to Iran or another country of his choice instead of being handed over to them. Tough bargaining over Ghaith is currently under way between Washington and Ankara.

    Concerns over a Kurdish state

    The United States and Israel both believe that the emergence of a Kurdish state in the north of Iraq will be at odds with their regional strategies. They believe that such a development would divert energy supply routes to the Strait of Hormuz, which is controlled by Iran. The issue has led to disagreements between Ankara and Washington.

    Ricciardone’s comments on the topic are extremely delicate but amount to a virtual lesson of foreign policy. Iraq’s territorial integrity, which used to be a “red line” for Turkey back in 2003, is today an indispensable condition for Israel and the United States, who worry that Iraq’s break-up would produce a second large Shiite state alongside Iran and result in full Iranian control over the Persian Gulf.

    When Ricciardone says that Turkey should “have access to and become a route for not only 20% of the oil and gas in Iraq but 100%, and that high-quality Turkish goods should be sold not only in Erbil and Sulaymaniyah, but also in Basra and Baghdad,” he is in fact criticizing Turkey’s regional vision. He implies that Ankara is failing to see the forest for the trees.

    Turkey-Israel tensions

    The United States sees good relations between Turkey and Israel as a “must” for its regional strategies and wants Turkey to end the heavy sanctions it is imposing on Israel. Turkey, however, is not only refusing to move an inch back but is adding new sanctions. Most recently, Turkey on Jan. 23 vetoed Israel’s membership in the International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA), ignoring insistent U.S. advice to the contrary.

    The Turkish media had reported that the first foreign trip of new U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry would be to Turkey, and that Prime Minister Erdogan would visit Washington in February. It turns out, however, that foreign ministry undersecretary Feridun Sinirlioglu’s recent visit to Washington has resulted in a conclusion that it is too early for Kerry to come to Ankara, and for Erdogan to go to Washington. In response to a question on the issue, Ricciardone said the new U.S. secretary of state had a very busy schedule, that no date had been fixed, and that he would visit when mutual schedules permit. With respect to Erdogan’s prospective visit to Washington, Ricciardone said that “it seems possible this year,” which is a noteworthy expression.