Analysis, Middle East, Side Feature

Background to Granting Turkish Citizenship to Syrian Refugees

After President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s announcement during an Iftar organisation in Kilis to grant citizenship to Syrian refugees who want to become Turkish citizens, the issue has come to discussion in Turkey and in the European Union. (Source: News Agencies)

Comment:

President Erdogan’s statements regarding citizenship for Syrians are on the agenda until now. The Turkish society is so to speak split into two parts over this issue. On the one side there are the AKP and Erdogan supporting media and voters, and on the other side the opposition parties and their voters… Before clarifying the issue it is worth noting the following: First of all, a number of important political developments took place in Turkey following Erdogan’s recent visit to the USA. These can be summarized as follows:

  1. President Erdogan made former Prime Minister Davutoglu to resign from office and assigned Binali Yildirim as Prime Minister.
  2. Prime Minister Binali Yildirim changed the discourse with regards to Turkey’s foreign policy from “zero problem-policy with the neighbours” to “increasing friendships and reducing hostilities”.
  3. Based on this discourse; there followed the treacherous agreement with the Jewish entity and the re-instalment of the relations with the Kafir Russia after the downing of the Russian fighter jets.
  4. Furthermore, there are statements by government officials and in particular statements by Prime Minister Yildirim himself of re-installing relations with butcher Assad. Moreover; the statements of even a six-month transition government including Assad…
  5. Statements by government officials of re-establishing relations with Egypt.
  6. And finally, bringing forward the right for citizenship for Syrian Muslim refugees in Turkey.

These kind of moves and switches in foreign policy by the AKP government and in particular President Erdogan reveal a truth: And that is the incompetence and pitifulness of America in Syria. These steps of the AKP government or Erdogan cannot be assessed in a way regardless of America. Especially Erdogan’s switch in foreign politics can absolutely only be explained through America’s orders to him and his government. Notwithstanding the economic dimension of the agreements with the Jewish entity and Russia, in actual fact, Syria is the main focus. In other words; the agreement with the Jewish entity, the ending the crisis with Russia, as well as the need for turning a new page with Egypt are all purely related to America’s policy in particular towards Syria and in general towards the Middle East. Consequently this shows that America has put a new plan into operation for Syria. Accordingly, the aim was to make Turkey politically more active in the Syria issue, and to assign it with a new mission in this regard. This is because along with the US, Russia and Iran are also in a dilemma and depression in Syria. It seems impossible for them to sustain the war there. In fact, it is also to evaluate the recent attacks in Istanbul, Baghdad and Saudi Arabia within this context. That is why America wants to try every method to escape the Syria deadlock. Therefore it is possible to interpret citizenship for Syrian refugees from this point of view. In this respect, Prime Minister Binali Yildirim expressed not to grant citizenship to those who disturb peace in Turkey and who were involved with terror. Of course this is quite difficult to detect. Additionally, no matter how much the government explained to whom to grant citizenship, there is still full cloudiness on this issue. Who will be granted citizenship? Are these persons in any relation with the Syrian regime or the opposition? Or will they have any contribution to America’s plan of a transition government in Syria?  Or are these people regarded as a vote-reservoir to pass the referendum for President Erdogan’s idea of the presidential system and a new constitution? Of course it is possible to produce more questions of this kind. So, all these questions need to be answered by the government. Consequently, to evaluate the government’s steps in foreign politics regardless of America or Syria means drifting away from the whole sight of the picture.

Yılmaz ÇELİK