Does the government want to end terrorism!

For those who follow current developments even from the sidelines, those who have at least some political literacy, and those who know the political Islamist mentality in Turkey even a little bit, the answer to the question in the title of this article is actually clear.

This issue is usually brought to the agenda before elections, as terrorist organizations increase their activities, attack our soldiers, and news of martyrs arrives.

The political arena stirs with familiar sentences and familiar rhetoric. The stories of the martyrs are told on television, their homes, mothers, fathers, and siblings become the subject of a few news reports, and the pain experienced is ground down by the millstone of the daily agenda.

Then these are forgotten, everything returns to normal, until the next terrorist attack!

Unfortunately, this is the painful truth in Turkey!

The political Islamists, who have been in power since 2002, have been largely successful in transforming society in line with their own mentality.

By now, a strong reflex against terrorism does not emerge in society; instead, the religious and nationalist segments are aligned behind the government with reckless rhetoric.

Those who object to this are accused of being traitors and are demonized.

What really needs to be done so that these pains are not experienced over and over again?

The rational strategy to be applied in the fight against terrorism is not found in the lost chest of the pirate Blackbeard.

If you want to learn, the detailed prescription for fighting terrorism is written in books where experts who have made this their concern have distilled examples from around the world, and have written by swallowing the dust and soil of the field and inhaling and feeling the smell of gunpowder and blood.

Those who are curious can look at the old publications of the closed War Academies and the articles of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs Strategic Research Center (SAM) from the 1990s.

But beyond these, there are important names from the foreign service and the military in this country who know the strategic dimension of the fight against terrorism very well.

Let us try to explain it through its main outlines as far as we have read, learned, and remembered.

If you want to get results and you have the power, you must first destroy terrorism at its source!

This is the most important thing.

When you achieve this, you can ignore the rest.

If the terrorism directed at your country originates from the lands of other countries, you need to have a strong diplomacy in addition to your military power.

You have to proceed with an approach aimed at getting results, not with empty rhetoric. Just like in the process of removing Abdullah Öcalan from Syria. Whoever is feeding terrorism, they should not think that what you say is hollow.

If that doesn't work, then you will neutralize the leadership cadre.

You will eliminate the chain of command within the organization. This is exactly the reason why the organization reached the point of collapse after the capture of Abdullah Öcalan! In other words, the issue of cutting off the head of the snake!

Then it is necessary to dry up the organization's source of militants and financial resources.

The recruitment into the organization should be zeroed out. This points to the sociological and psychological aspect of the issue, which is at least as important as drying up terrorism at its source. Considering that the terrorist organization is a full-fledged narco-structure today, it is necessary to point out the importance of receiving international support to prevent this.

The last and most important item is the cutting off of the political and logistical support provided by the countries that use the terrorist organization as a pawn!

This is exactly where the crux of the matter lies.

If you cannot do the last item, if you cannot ensure that the political and logistical support given to the organization is cut off, unfortunately, the rest will be empty talk. Those who have read a little about this issue also know that 80 percent of the fight against terrorism is diplomacy and 20 percent is military. It is not possible for military success to come without diplomatic success.

Let us underline this with a thick pen.

If Turkey wants to get results after this stage and save the country from this trouble, it must absolutely and definitely talk about the terrorism issue "strategically" with the USA, Russia, the EU, and Israel.

It is obvious that the show meetings held to be sold to the domestic audience, where they beat water in a mortar, are of no use other than window dressing.

Everyone knows that the USA and the EU are at the forefront of those supporting the terrorist organization.

The USA openly provides weapons and training support in northern Syria. It is doing its best to turn it into a garrison state in the region.

The EU, on the other hand, has both political and financial support. Secret service agents of EU member countries are practically running wild in northern Syria and the Kurdish region of Iraq.

Even the deaf sultan in Baghdad knows that the organization is in close contact with Belgium, the Netherlands, Germany, France, and the UK.

Although Russia appears to be in the background, it is no secret that it is in close contact with the organization. Moreover, it has legitimized the terrorist organization politically by allowing it to open an office in Moscow. It uses the organization as it wishes, when it wishes; when necessary, it can openly put this on the negotiating table as a threat element.

Let us say it clearly; Turkey cannot ensure that the USA cuts its support for the terrorist organization without making it feel that it will harm its strategic interests globally and regionally.

In other words, if it wants news of martyrs to stop coming, it needs to hurt the USA in some way, even at the risk of retaliation from the other side.

Those in Washington should know that the cost of losing and even making an enemy of an ally like Turkey is not cheaper than supporting a terrorist organization.

If it proceeds by analyzing the pragmatism of the Washington administration in foreign policy well, it is not possible for Turkey not to get results. It would be enough to look at the diplomatic relations the USA has conducted over the last 50 years to see examples of this.

So what can Turkey do?

In the first stage, what comes to mind is; the US bases in Turkey could be closed, its military personnel could be kicked out, but more importantly, it could suspend the 1980 Defense and Economic Cooperation Agreement, which draws a broad framework of cooperation between the two countries, while also taking into account the possible adverse consequences.

It could terminate military operations carried out in third countries both bilaterally and within the framework of the NATO mission.

It could normalize its relations with Syria and put pressure on the US presence in that country.

It could even send a message that Turkey could reconsider its place in the global equation.

Here, let us recall the answer İsmet İnönü gave to the Johnson letter.

There is Ukraine, there is the Black Sea...

We could extend the list... As long as a strong political will is put forward.

Against the EU, Turkey has a huge "refugee" trump card in its hand. Not with empty words, but if Turkey seriously puts this trump card on the table, it will not be possible for the EU to remain indifferent.

Because the leading EU member countries see the refugee issue as an existential problem. If Turkey opens the gates, the foundations of Western civilization could even be shaken!

However, the Russia issue is troublesome.

Because, the Moscow administration, which establishes an asymmetric relationship with every country it is not an enemy with, has tied Turkey's hands in many areas, especially the energy issue. But it is possible for traditional Turkish diplomacy to find a political maneuvering space here as well. As long as the political will makes a decision in this direction and reinforces its political position with the support it receives from the people.

Now let us stop here and ask the 10-point expert question of the day.

Can the current political Islamist government in Turkey, which owes its existence and legitimacy to across the Atlantic, do these things, can it talk about this issue strategically with the USA, the EU, and Russia, which provide all kinds of support to the terrorist organization, can it dare to do so? Can it risk the consequences?

By referring to the title of the article, let us leave the answer to this question to the reader and put a period to our article.