The Road to Peace in Syria

17 06 2017

by Harun Yahya

I have written in my previous articles that the only way to truly end the civil war in Syria was an alliance to be formed between regional countries such as Turkey, Russia and Iran and that the involvement of other foreign powers would not be able to offer a permanent solution. Therefore, it is great to see that new developments reflect this sentiment and a regional alliance is being built. The meeting that took place on December 20, 2016 in Moscow between the foreign ministers of Russia, Turkey and Iran, which resulted in a joint declaration, marked the beginning of this alliance.

The declaration dealt with crucial issues such as the preservation of the unity, independence and territorial integrity of Syria, the importance of a diplomatic solution rather than a military one and increasing the ceasefires across the region to allow the transfer of humanitarian aid to areas where they are urgently needed. Indeed, only days after this declaration, on December 30, 2016, a general ceasefire went into effect.

This alliance between the three key regional players marked the first time peace truly became a prospect for Syria since the onset of the crisis. It was also a clear reminder that the problems in the region can be solved only through the alliance and cooperation between these three countries. In fact, the Geneva meetings that were previously led by the US and Western coalitions failed to offer a solution or contribute to the peace process in the country.

The Moscow agreement also paved the way for the Astana talks, which represented a whole new era for the road to peace in Syria. During the Astana meetings, which were held on January 23-24, February 15-16 and March 14-15, it was decided that Russia, Iran and Turkey would be guarantors of ceasefire and that the three countries act as observers to ensure the continuation of the ceasefire. The UN, regime delegations and the Syrian opposition also accepted the decision.

In the summit held in Tehran on April 19-20, Iran, Turkey and Russia once again came together and agreed on the topics to be discussed during the fourth Astana meeting. They also discussed prisoner exchanges and decided to create four non-conflict zones in Syria.

The agreement signed by the three countries designated the non-conflict zones as Idlib, parts of Lattakia, Aleppo, Hama and Homs and Damascus/Eastern Ghouta as well as some parts of Daraa and Quneitra provinces.

In fact, President Erdogan and President Putin had already announced their agreement on the non-conflict zones in Syria when they met in Sochi before the fourth meeting. In other words, another very important step was taken towards lasting peace in Syria through an alliance between Russia, Iran and Turkey. For the first time, a new era of non-violence started in Syria. The decision on non-conflict zones also lent a positive atmosphere to the sixth stage of the Syrian talks held in Geneva.

Interestingly, certain Western media outlets seem to be in a state of panic in the face of these developments. Many analysts believe that the current display of strong collaboration and power between the Turkey, Iran and Russia nexus in the region meant a decline in US influence in the region.

The criticism campaign, led by some British media outlets as usual, portrayed the alliance of Iran, Russia and Turkey as an anti-NATO structure. For instance, The Economist announced that this friendship should be of concern to NATO.

TIME on the other hand, conjured up catastrophic scenarios because the non-conflict zones did not cover the entire country –even though this is only natural, since this is only the first step– and claimed that the solution was unacceptable for the opposition. In a pessimistic, provocative and divisive manner, it railed against a historic plan that promised to bring peace to this country, which has been ravaged by war for the past six years.

The panic seen among the British deep state members, the maestro of global imperialism, is clear proof that the two large Muslim countries of the region, together with Russia, are doing the right thing by cooperating to help Syria. Naturally, Iran, Turkey and Russia gaining power and influence in the region is not in the best interests of this deep structure, which has worked on its plans for the Middle East for centuries through countless plans and plots.

It is a historical fact that throughout history, there have been countless plans and plots to prevent and destroy the friendship between these three countries. Numerous embargos and sanctions were implemented against them. The significant military support provided to the PYD/PKK represents the latest efforts to make that terror group the fortress of the global imperial power at the heart of the region. In addition, efforts are underway to sow seeds of hatred and anger between the three countries by means of various provocations that focus on racial, sectarian and ethnic differences.

However, the good news is that throughout history, the three countries never fell into those traps. Despite the sundry plots and ruses, Iran, Turkey and Russia have maintained their friendship and alliance which always produced good results.

And now Iran, Turkey and Russia joining forces to bring peace to Syria, and acting in complete accord, is going to be further proof that such sinister games cannot and will not succeed. Particularly, it is crucial that two Muslim fraternal countries, Iran and Turkey, continue to strengthen their bonds of brotherhood and friendship without paying any attention to sectarian differences, open their borders and engage in the highest level of economic, political, social and strategic cooperation. By the grace of God, their alliance will be the strongest assurance of peace, stability, development and welfare in the region.

 

The writer has authored more than 300 books translated in 73 languages on politics, religion and science. He may be followed at @Harun_Yahya and www.harunyahya.com


2nd International Conference on The Origin of Life and The Universe

26 05 2017

The Technics & Science Research Foundation (TSRF) Held the 2nd International Conference on The Origin of Life and The Universe at the Istanbul Ritz-Carlton Hotel

On May 21st, 2017, the Technics & Science Research Foundation (TSRF), the Honorary President of which is Mr. Adnan Oktar, held its second annual International Conference The Origin of Life and The Universe at the Ritz-Carlton Hotel in Istanbul, Turkey.

Focusing on the question of “What are the origins of life?” the TSRF’s The Origin of Life and The Universe Conference drew a line in the shifting sands of the scientific community, declaring boldly that evidence for God’s Creation exists plainly in such fields as genetics, biology, paleontology, physics, chemistry and astrophysics.

  

Unique among creation-oriented groups, TRSF is THE ONLY Islamic-based organization providing scientific evidence that collapses Darwinism and refutes false claims of evolution. TSRF also endeavors to establish cordial relations between three divine faiths namely Islam, Christianity and Judaism. To this end, TSRF frequently hosts events, which feature Christian, Jewish and other leading theologians, scholars, intellectuals and scientists from around the world.

Attended by approximately 500 participants, The Origin of Life and The Universe Conference featured two sessions of speakers, morning and afternoon (see attached).

In addition to the papers presented on topics ranging from the nature of viruses to the complexity of the human cell, conference goers viewed several exhibits of fossils, dating back millions of years and proving that living things remained unchanged and did not evolve. The audience also enjoyed performances of musicians and the Istanbul Dance Factory.

For further information or interviews about Technics & Science Research Foundation or The Origin of Life and The Universe conference, contact:

Technics & Science Research Foundation (TSRF):

Technics & Science Research Foundation (TSRF) is a non-governmental organization established in Istanbul in 1990

The TSRF operates in a progressive, democratic and pro-human rights line in its activities and with total commitment to spread moral values globally. The work of the TSRF is inspired by the books of its Honorary President, Mr. Adnan Oktar, a prominent Muslim intellectual of our times, who writes under the pen-name Harun Yahya.

Contact: http://srf-tr.org/contact/

2nd International Conference On The Origin Of Life And The Universe

Conference schedule:

THE RITZ CARLTON HOTEL

21st May, Sunday

10:00    MORNING REFRESHMENTS

10:30    OPENING

Short movie on the Origin of Life and the Universe

Opening speech

The TSRF Foundation opening speech

The presentation film of the honorary president of TSRF

11:00    SESSION 1

Moderator Zuhal Mansfield will introduce the speakers

Dr. Fazale Rana – “DNA’s Inspirational Design”

Dr. Fabrizio Fratus – “Evolution: Myth or Reality?”

Dr. AJ Roberts – “Why Would a Good God Create Viruses?”

Q&A Session

12:25    ‘ISTANBUL DANCE FACTORY’ DANCE SHOW

12:45    LUNCH BREAK

14:00    SESSION 2

Moderator Zuhal Mansfield will introduce the speakers

Dr. Carlos Alberto Cossano – “Informatics Records and Proteins Production”

Dr. Paolo Cioni – “Psyche and The Crisis of Materialist Reductionism”

Dr. Oktar Babuna – “Secret Beyond Matter”

Q&A Session

15:15    DARBUKA PERCUSSION RHYTHM SHOW

15:35    COFFEE BREAK/REFRESHMENTS

16:00    CLOSING SPEECH

Jeff Gardner – “Picture Christians Project”

16:15    PLAQUE CEREMONY

 

Conference speakers:

SCIENTISTS WHO PARTICIPATED IN THE CONFERENCE

Dr. Fazale Rana, PhD.

An expert in biochemistry, Dr. Fazale Rana is working in the field of biochemistry, genetics, and synthetic biology. With two books, many articles, a document and a podcast on the scientific evidence of Creation to his credit, Rana has given various television and radio interviews along with more than 500 speeches in universities, conferences and churches around the world. The articles he wrote were published in peer-reviewed scientific journals such as Biochemistry, Applied Spectroscopy, FEBS Letters, Journal of Microbiological Methods and Journal of Chemical Education. While studying biochemistry, he realized that evolutionary scenarios cannot explain how life began and life must have been originated by a Creator. After this awareness, Rana devoted himself to explaining this fact to people.

Dr. Anjeanette “AJ” Roberts, PhD.

Dr. Roberts has PhD’s in chemistry from Tulsa University and in the fields of molecular biology and cell biology from Pennsylvania University. Between 1997-2001, Roberts carried out studies on viral pathogens and inoculation at Yale University. Between 2006-2013, she was an Assistant Professor at Virginia University, Department of Microbiology and head of the Microbiology, Immunology and Infectious Diseases Program. Between 2013 and 2015, she continued her studies as a guest researcher at the Rivendell Institute at Yale University. Roberts has published articles in peer-reviewed scientific journals and participated in many national and international scientific conferences all around the world. She was granted the NIH Award of Merit for her studies on infectious diseases. Currently, she carries out studies on subjects such as harmony between science and faith, and the evidence of Creation on the biochemical level.
Jeff Gardner – Founder and CEO of The Picture Christians Project

In 2007, he co-founded International Catholic Media, a global humanitarian, media and communications company, and became the Board Chairman.  In 2013, he launched The Picture Christians Project, which aims to educate society about the lives of Christians around the world and to find solutions to their unique conditions. Jeff Gardner is one of the few photographers and media specialists who frequently travel to the Middle East and document the experiences of Christians, refugees and terror victims in countries like Iraq, Syria, Jordan and Egypt by talking to them. Gardner’s writings and photographs have been published in numerous national and international media outlets and publications, and he is frequently featured as a Middle East specialist in various media organs and publications such as EWTN, Relevant Radio, National Catholic Register, Aletia, Conservative Review, Newsmax, Fox News and Sean Hannity.
Carlo Alberto Cossano

Carlo Alberto Cossano is a Health Informatics Project Manager, who is also an expert in clinical pathology analysis laboratory and pathological anatomy laboratory information systems. He works in Dedalus Healthcare Systems Group in Italy.

 

 

Dr. Paolo Cioni, MD.

Paolo Cioni is an Italian psychiatrist with long-term hospital and academic experience. He has written many publications in cooperation with leading Italian editors in the field of psychiatry. His latest work, published in English, is Paranoia: Between Leadership and Failure (CreateSpace, 2015) where he initially examined paranoia at a personal psychiatric level and continued his examination at sociological and political levels.

Mr. Fabrizio Fratus

Italian Sociologist. His doctoral thesis was on “Scientific Creationism” and “New scientific discoveries about the origin of life and men”. At the moment, his activities include raising public awareness about moral corruption in society, the family institution becoming increasingly degraded, and the increasing loneliness of the people. He carries out these activities with a team of young people. He founded the Anti-Evolutionist committee in Italy. He has five books on this subject, the names of which are as follows: God or Darwin?, Myth or Real?, The Lie of Evolution, Science and Faith.

Conference website:

http://www.theoriginoflife.net/

 

 


The End of “The Great Game”

17 05 2017

by Harun Yahya

In the early 19th century, the strategic location of the Middle East, sitting directly between the British Empire and her colony India, made the deep state of the British Empire focus their attention on the Middle East. Securing and obtaining the control of the routes to her colony with the hopes of establishing new colonial areas in the process, became a veritable obsession for it.

However, it wasn’t only Ottoman Empire that became a target in the process due to her key territories like Egypt, Suez, Palestine, Iraq and Basra. Iran also had a very highly strategic position in the region.

As a part of its plan to secure the control of the region, British government at the time put into action what the historians now call the ‘the Great Game’ between 1830-1895 against the Russian Empire, which it considered as one of its biggest rivals to her colonial order in India.

The game was based on the idea of turning the Ottoman Empire, Iran and the Emirate of Bukhara into buffer states to stop the southward advance of Russia. This way, it had hoped, it could stop Russia from having land access to India and preventing it from gaining ports in the Persian Gulf or Indian Ocean, which could pose a treat to the sea trade routes of the British.

During the process of great game, the British deep state surrounded Iran from the south and made it a half-colony, all the while robbing its natural resources and securing concessions in all industries.

In the meantime, in a bid to weaken the country, it used twisted movements like Babism, and Bahaism, which were created by the British deep state in the first place, to fuel sectarian clashes, for assassinations, riots, terror and unrest. The most prominent spies of the British deep state would be chosen amongst these perverted sects. Maneckji Limji Hataria, the emissary of the British India administration in Iran, led the mentioned project of creating unrest. [i]

The famine resulted in the death of some three million people between 1870-1871, wiping off almost one third of the country’s entire population. Ibrahim Kızılbas Zencani maintains that the England of the time deliberately caused the famine by gathering the food on the market and transferring it to India:

Forget about donkeys and horses; people begun to eat dogs and cats in the cities. In some places, people would start eating human flesh… There were countless bodies strewn on the streets eaten by dogs. On the roads between villages, bodies of women, children, elderly and young people that had starved to death, were lined up...’

The discovery of oil in Iran in 1908 became the key factor in the 20th century Iran policy of the British deep state, which was marked by military campaigns, social-economic projects, political interventions and political coups.

In 1913, the British government secured a contract that practically made the entirety of Iranian oil British property. Only six years later, it imposed an agreement, which gave it control of the Iranian army and treasury.

Although Iran had declared its neutrality during WWI, the British invaded southern Iran. Capturing the region up to Kazvin, and gaining control of areas under the rule of the Qajar Dynasty, they became the sole power in the country and once again employed the method of causing famine to weaken it, all the while blocking the aid efforts of countries like the Ottoman Empire and the USA.

After two years of famine, the Iranian population, which was 20 million in 1917, dropped to 11 million in 1920. British journalist Donohoe wrote about the painful scenes during those years in his book “With the Persian Expedition“:

There are countless humans that fell on the ground on the side of the street… they are dead… they are rotten… between their dried fingers, pieces of grass stick out… they tried to beat their starvation with grass… their eyes have sunken back, they are only skin and bones… they don’t really look like humans…They crawl on all fours on the side of the street…’

As the disaster was unfolding, the Bahai’s, which the British deep state was using as killing machine, unleashed a fresh wave of terror in 1916.

Although Iran declared its neutrality once again during WWII, the troops of Great Britain didn’t refrain from invading a large part of Iran and left in its wake a country struggling with poverty and starvation.

Even though the country was in the grips of famine and poverty, it was actually home to one of the world’s largest oil reserves. The reason behind this surprising dilemma was the British Anglo-Persian Oil Company (AIOC), as it had been controlling the country’s oil since the beginning of the century. Known as BP today, AIOC managed to increase its annual profit in 1950 to 200 million pounds, while Iran was making only 16 million pounds in profits.

Since 1908, Britain had been considering Iranian oil its own property and was fiercely protective of it. It had been using the country’s oil to meet its energy needs for over half a century, while the Iranian people were struggling with hunger and death.

Mohammad Mosaddegh, who was elected as Prime Minister with massive popular support in May 1951, started the National Iranian Oil Company and transferred the entire oil industry, which was under British control, to its Iranian counterpart. The British immediately responded with a series of economic and political sanctions against Mosaddegh for landing a massive blow to their biggest source of income. Mohammad Reza Shah also began to pressure the Mosaddegh government. However, when these efforts failed, a military coup was planned to overthrow Mosaddegh.

Upon the request of the British, US President Eisenhower instructed the CIA to organize a coup. After having organized many anti-government rallies throughout the summer of 1953 by means of the month-long ‘Operation Ajax’, the CIA carried out the coup with General Fazlollah Zahedi as the coup’s leader.

The great game that the British deep state started in early 1800 continues even today for Iran, Turkey, the Middle East not to mention the Islamic geography in general. The method is invariably the same: Inciting conflicts by means of sectarian, ethnical, racial differences so that in the end Muslims begin fighting each other. The only thing that changes are the names and faces; in the past, the Bahais were used. Today, it is MI6 Shias, MI6 Sunnis and Salafists.

However, today the British deep state is completely exposed. Soon, Muslims will put and end to their separation and disagreements and join their forces around the unifying spirit of the Qur’an. When this happens, the great game of the British deep state will come to a definitive end and not only the Middle East but the entire world – including the British people – will then find peace and security.

[i] Şahbazi. Abdullah, ‘Manekci Hateria and Bahayigeri-e Avvaliye’, 29 Bahman 1388/18 February 2010 , ‘Bahayism’ p.22.

 

The writer has authored more than 300 books translated in 73 languages on politics, religion and science. He may be followed at @Harun_Yahya and www.harunyahya.com


Turkey is on the Verge of a New Age…

10 05 2017

by Harun Yahya

According to unofficial results, with a turnout rate over 85% and a 51.4% vote share, the Turkish people voted “YES” for the new constitution in the referendum held on Sunday April 16th. With this result, the amendments to 18 articles of the current constitution were approved.

Some of the important amendments are as follows:

Removal of the current parliamentary system and the introduction of the “Party-Affiliated Presidency” system and removal of the office of the Prime Minister.

The President is given the title “Head of State” and is given extensive authorities, including  executive authority.

Parliamentary and Presidential elections will be held every five years instead of four.

The age to stand for office is lowered to 18 from the current 25.

New regulations on the structure and assignments of the Supreme Council of Judges and Prosecutors.

During the referendum process, the biggest debate was on the widespread concern over the fact that the new constitution could cause a nationwide risk of division  in the future by paving the way for a federal system in Turkey. President Erdogan and Prime Minister Binali Yıldırım often made statements pointing out that such concerns are irrelevant and no one can attempt to dismantle the unity and integrity of the country. However, after the increased criticisms indicating that a mere verbal assurance was not enough, the articles carrying the risk of division  were revised and overhauled.

One of the biggest surprises of this process was that the MHP, one of the most adamant opponents of the AKP, supported the ruling party. Thus, the new Constitution was approved by the Parliament by achieving the necessary vote majority thanks to the MHP’s support.

Since the April 16 referendum was ultimately a vote for constitutional and systemic change, it would not be an accurate assessment to dedicate the results to the ruling or the opposition party, or personally to Erdogan. On the other hand, we shouldn’t ignore some important factors that contributed to the distribution of votes in the campaign process.

For example, many voters who were indecisive or even initially determined to vote “NO”,  gravitated towards “YES” as a reaction to the rallying of certain circles, who are radically against the texture of Turkish society, their standards of judgment and national sensitivities, around the slogan “NO”. The most important ones among these circles, who were despised by the great majority of the Turkish population, are:  A number of communist organizations, members of the PKK terrorist organization, homosexual support groups, members and the supporters of the terrorist organization FETO, a number of traitors who revealed state secrets to the media, fled abroad and still cooperate with various Western governments, some artists, journalists and writers who, at every opportunity, complain about Turkey to foreign countries and institutions.

Moreover, the persistent “NO” campaigns of the mainstream media groups, think tanks and NGOs and their especially appointed writers and propagandists operating under the Western umbrella have also caused serious deviations towards “YES”, because these circles are famous for their unjust attacks, hatred and humiliation campaigns directed towards Turkey, Muslims and elected legitimate government and politicians in Turkey for years.

Assuming the role of apostle of democracy at every opportunity, as a matter of fact these circles have maintained their usual policies rather than respecting the democratic decision of the people at the end of the referendum: For example, in an article published after the referendum by Foreign Affairs, the media outlet of the Britain-driven CFR think tank of the US, it is emphasized that Turkey is headed into division by comparing the results to the darkness before the midnight.

The article titled “Analysis of Turkey” by Steven A. Cook of  Foreign Policy, included the accusations that the results of the referendum closed a chapter of the modern history of Turkey, and that the Turks who voted YES, intentionally or unintentionally, damaged the Turkey that Atatürk established.

In their extensive report on referendum, the British Times claimed, “Erdogan’s victory left a divided Turkey behind”.

Martin Chulov, the Middle East correspondent of the British The Guardian, has commented on the referendum result as “Erdoğan getting backing to strengthen his autocratic grip on Turkey” in his opinion piece that he wrote in Istanbul.

Similar reports and commentaries about the referendum in Turkey even preceded the Easter celebrations in some of the Western media. The live broadcasts and the headlines of the newspapers gave immediate priority to the referendum and the results were reported concurrently.

On the other hand, the various factors that triggered an increase in NO votes signaled that there are important issues that need to be considered urgently by the AKP and the Government. NO votes dominated within the intellectual circles who attach great importance to modernity, art, aesthetics and quality and who are seriously disturbed by any intervention in women’s freedom in style of dress, lifestyle and behavior, as well as in the coastal regions and the big cities of the country. This suggests that the government should place more emphasis on these issues or should emphasize that it does so.

The fact that these issues are not handled as competently and that some people and sections of the ruling base are following an exact opposite attitude towards these vital issues have caused NO votes to be the majority in the regions we talked about. Even though Mr. President and Mr. Prime Minister are personally paying particular attention to vital issues such as quality, modernity and the comfort and freedom of women, it is certain that the necessary emphasis should be placed on these issues and special policies should be followed in order to eliminate these concerns.

In the end, anyone who cast YES or NO is still one of the precious children of this country, except for some small groups we mentioned above. The result could have been NO instead of YES; in that case Turkey would have continued on its path of peace, democracy and brotherhood, as it does right now. The important thing is to never forget that respecting the results is a requirement of democracy and to never appease  provocateurs who are trying to extract provocative material from both situations.

Source:

https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/turkey/2017-04-16/after-erdogans-referendum-victory
http://time.com/4741834/turkey-referendum-erdogan-divided/
RIP Turkey, 1921 – 2017
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/apr/16/erdogan-gets-backing-to-strengthen-his-autocratic-grip-on-turkey


Referendum Evaluation

2 05 2017

by Adnan Oktar

On April 16, Turkey went to the polls for a referendum for an amendment to its constitution, including the new administration system.

In this election, where the turnout rate reached a high level of 85%, “yes” votes took the majority with 51.4%, hence the “Party-Affiliated Presidential System” was approved.

Indeed, voter turnout rates are extremely important in terms of democracy and the ability for people to voice their opinions. In this regard, Turkey is among the top countries in the world. Turkey was ranked 44th in the world according to the International Democracy and Election Assistance Institute’s survey on average participation rates for the parliamentary elections from 1945 to 2001, with a turnout rate of 81.3%. Turkey ranked second among OECD countries according to the turnout numbers for elections held in 2011 reported by the Washington-based Pew Research Center.

However, election turnout rates are very low in many of the Western countries. For example, in the most recent US elections, in which Donald Trump was elected as president, the turnout rate was 54.9%. Europe also has low election turnout rates. For example, in the 2014 European Parliament elections, the turnout remained at 43%. While voter turnout in the elections in Germany where Angela Merkel won was recorded at 73%, for the elections held in Britain in 2011 the turnout rate remained at 41%. Meanwhile, voter turnout for the Brexit referendum in Britain was 72.2%, while the turnout rate in Scotland’s independence referendum was 84.59%, a number closer to the turnout rate of the recent referendum held in Turkey. In the Netherlands, the 2016 referendum resulting with the cancellation of the trade agreement signed between the EU and Ukraine only had a voter turnout rate of 32%.

Therefore, when voter turnout is taken into consideration, it can be clearly seen that the will of the people in Turkey is strongly and directly reflected in the number of votes cast.

Referendums, by nature, are democratic choices in which many technical details are discussed in the light of different views and different perspectives, many points are examined at length, and finally, conscientious evaluations are reflected in the vote.

It is known that in these “crucial decision” elections, many people who share numerous common values vote for different outcomes and people may vote differently even though they share common ideals. So in these yes/no elections, voters who vote yes or no have in fact very significant common ideals, such as making the best decision for their country. In the end, even though the result of the election may be determined by just one vote to make a majority, the separation or division of the country over the results is out of the question.

On the other hand, it is also very important for everyone to respect the outcome of the ballot box after referendums where direct democracy is exercised. Again, when we look at other examples, such as in 2016 with the British referendum for a decision to leave or stay in the European Union, perhaps the most important referendum in world history, it resulted with majority voting to withdraw from the EU by a very small margin of votes. Only 51.89% was needed to withdraw from EU. In the referendum, on which 34 million British citizens voted, 17.4 million voted for withdrawal while 16.1 million voted to stay. As with all the referendums and elections held in Europe and America, democracy was put into process and this decision came into force after passing through certain stages. All British citizens who voted to stay only did so to make the future of Britain better. As a result, this decision did not lead to the polarization of the British people among themselves, nor to the division of society. The same is true for other referendums and elections in Europe.

When compared to the last election, it can also be seen that 10% of the voter base under the AK Party and MHP, who were advocating to vote yes, voted no. So it seems that this is not a polarization, but a difference of opinion specific to this referendum.

Even though the votes differed in the referendum for the new administration system in Turkey, in reality, the main point of view has been the same for the AK Party, MHP, and CHP. If we are to express this point of view as a common discourse, it would be: “The governance of Turkey with a stronger, more democratic and better system.” These three big political parties all wish for Turkey’s inseparable unity, and its citizens to live in the best, the most free, and the most beautiful conditions.

As a matter of fact, the inclusive speech made by Prime Minister Binali Yıldırım when the results of the referendum were announced is a confirmation of all these statements. In his speech, Mr. Yıldırım emphasized the solidarity and unity of our nation with the following words: “We will have different opinions and solutions, but in the end we will protect our unity and solidarity with everything we have. This is the beauty of democracy. Having different opinions does not mean having superiority over each other in any way. We said different things on public squares, we explained different things to the people. But the last word belonged to the people, they said yes and ended the discussion. We said whatever the people’s will, we would hold it in high esteem. Our people have chosen, and they approved the presidential system… This election showed the level of maturity of Turkish democracy to the whole world. We are first-degree equal citizens of the Republic of Turkey. The competition in the political arena will not break our unity and solidarity. We will build the future with confidence in the direction of the choice of our citizens. There is no loser in this referendum, but the winner is Turkey and its beloved people”.

Of course it is our greatest desire for politicians to use statements that embrace all people and invite them to love much more intensely and frequently. It is our primary wish of all politicians and administrators that “love, compassion, tolerance and inclusiveness” are prioritized in politics not only in Turkey, but in all democratic countries.

 

The writer has authored more than 300 books translated in 73 languages on politics, religion and science. He may be followed at @Harun_Yahya and www.harunyahya.com


A Key Project Drawing Russia and Turkey Nigh: The Turkish Stream

23 04 2017

by Harun Yahya

Anatolia has always served as a bridge between the East and the West in many ways. First of all, it was the route Christianity took to spread to the West of which one can still notice the traces. Scientific developments reached Europe through this channel and European pilgrims travelled to China, India, and the Middle East again through this route. Even the Silk Road, which has been revived with a new name recently, passes through Anatolia to finally arrive in Europe. Anatolia today undertakes a big responsibility of carrying the energy supplies the West needs from Russia: The Turkish stream.

Recently, many people have probably heard about this new energy project that was endorsed officially by Russia and Turkey in October 2016. However, this project isn’t newborn as many might think, it hit the headlines in 2014 and has been known by public since then. However, it goes further back to 2005 as Presidents Putin and Erdogan had a meeting in Sochi when they talked about constructing another pipeline under the Black Sea. It was not finalized as Turkey thought that expanding the current Blue Stream would be sufficient for Turkey’s energy needs.  Therefore, after a long pause the two countries ratified the energy deal in 2009. Back then, Blue Stream II was the name given to the possible pipeline project and there were negotiations and mutual contacts to finalize this initiative, however, the talks did not reach a conclusion. In 2014, in a meeting in Ankara, Putin mentioned the Turkish Stream project after a long period of silence and at the end of 2015, the crisis occurred and the links between the two countries came to a grinding halt for a short period. It is noteworthy to point out the importance of this project, since the Turkish stream was the first order of business Turkey said yes to when the relations started to normalize.

Anatolia has always served as a bridge between the East and the West in many ways. First of all, it was the route Christianity took to spread to the West of which one can still notice the traces. Scientific developments reached Europe through this channel and European pilgrims travelled to China, India, and the Middle East again through this route. Even the Silk Road, which has been revived with a new name recently, passes through Anatolia to finally arrive in Europe. Anatolia today undertakes a big responsibility of carrying the energy supplies the West needs from Russia: The Turkish stream.

Recently, many people have probably heard about this new energy project that was endorsed officially by Russia and Turkey in October 2016. However, this project isn’t newborn as many might think, it hit the headlines in 2014 and has been known by public since then. However, it goes further back to 2005 as Presidents Putin and Erdogan had a meeting in Sochi when they talked about constructing another pipeline under the Black Sea. It was not finalized as Turkey thought that expanding the current Blue Stream would be sufficient for Turkey’s energy needs.  Therefore, after a long pause the two countries ratified the energy deal in 2009. Back then, Blue Stream II was the name given to the possible pipeline project and there were negotiations and mutual contacts to finalize this initiative, however, the talks did not reach a conclusion. In 2014, in a meeting in Ankara, Putin mentioned the Turkish Stream project after a long period of silence and at the end of 2015, the crisis occurred and the links between the two countries came to a grinding halt for a short period. It is noteworthy to point out the importance of this project, since the Turkish stream was the first order of business Turkey said yes to when the relations started to normalize.

With the first line, Turkey will be able to meet its energy needs and with the second line Turkey will serve as a conduit to transport the gas to the South of Europe. The transmission of the gas in the West Line through Ukraine, Moldova, Romania and Bulgaria borders will be halted when the first line of the Turkish Stream commences. This will be a political advantage for Russia given its tension with Ukraine and an economic advantage for Turkey since it will receive the gas without a transfer fee or a toll, and it can capitalize by charging a fee to the end customer. Additionally, this will also provide a security advantage for Turkey.

Since natural gas is vital for countries that do not have their own energy sources and dependent on other countries, the EU is seeking new ways of supplying gas for their increasing energy needs. This new project will also have a positive impact on the ties between Turkey, Russia and the European countries. Balkan states will feel more secure to have an alternative route since the Ukraine conflict previously disrupted supplies and the gas was halted.

Today, the world is filled with conflicts and especially in the Middle East where surprises come often and it’s anybody’s guess as to what will happen next. Countries benefiting from having good relations with each other one day, may find themselves at odds the next day. Therefore as much as possible, countries opt for self-reliance to meet their own needs and do not want to rely upon others.  For example, if there is a disagreement with another country to which they are dependent on, contractual obligations could be affected and may result in a deep crisis. Countries having joint energy deals seem to be more meticulously aware in their relationships since their need to be at peace with each other is pertinent to satisfying their energy needs. Striving to form agreements on good terms for energy deals should serve as a good model for other countries that are willing to form alliances in the region. Countries should be at peace with each other, no matter what, with or without any such energy deals.  Such relationships could foster and mature very easily if each country behaves in a selfless manner.  Moreover, energy has been the one common denominator for almost every period in history, in which alliances were built, borders were drawn, and countries fragmented into blocs. In the past energy resources were the cause of major wars, yet it doesn’t have to be that way and in the future it can be the source of peace.  Every country relies upon and needs energy to survive, thus pacts and agreements based on energy can and will bring wealth and prosperity to the region. In this regard, a great responsibility falls on the political, religious and community leaders, and the patriotic citizens to change their view on how energy resources can be used beneficially for peace and who are ready to make sacrifices to achieve such goals for the well being of the region.

 

The writer has authored more than 300 books translated in 73 languages on politics, religion and science. He may be followed at @Harun_Yahya and www.harunyahya.com


Page 1 of 11212345...102030...Last »