Mediaboss Marketing

Hillary Clinton admitted at a womens event that she supported the Syrian missile strike, though she said it wouldnt make much difference. She also called Syria and North Korea wicked problems, taking several jabs at President Donald Trumps foreign policy.

The former secretary of state was the featured speaker at the Women for Women International luncheon in New York City on Tuesday, being interviewed on stage by CNNs Christiane Amanpour. Clinton started with a pointed appeal to Trump.

I am going to publicly request that this administration not end our efforts making womens rights and opportunities central to American foreign policy and national security, Clinton said.

That request comes a day after an internal Trump administration memo called for ending the Let Girls Learn program, former First Lady Michelle Obamas signature education initiative for girls in developing countries.

Syria is one of those wicked problems, Clinton said after Amanpour asked her about Trumps decision to launch airstrikes against a Syrian air base after President Bashar Assads forces allegedly used chemical weapons to attack civilians.

Clinton said she supported the US missile strike, but not publicly because that wasnt my role. However, she continued, I am not convinced that it really made much of a difference, and I dont know what kind of potentially backroom deals were made with the Russians.

Theres a lot that we don't really yet fully know about what was part of that strike, she added. And if all it was was a one-off effort, its not going to have much of an effect.

Read more

Amanpour then asked Clinton about North Korea, which the former secretary of state also described as one of those wicked problems.

While Trump is right to focus on a regional effort to basically incentivize the North Korean regime to understand that it will pay a much bigger price primarily from China, if it pursues this reckless policy of nuclear weapons development and missiles to deliver them, Clinton believes the president is handling the crisis with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un incorrectly by offering to negotiate in the absence of a broader strategic framework.

She was quoted as saying during a private speech in 2013 that she had confronted Chinese officials about North Korea, telling them: "So China, come on. You either control them [North Korea] or we're going to have to defend against them." Trumps nominee to be the ambassador to China, Terry Branstad, made similar remarks in his confirmation hearings on Tuesday, saying there are things China can do diplomatically and economically to influence North Korea.

Clinton discussed how her husband, President Bill Clinton, negotiated with Kims father, Kim Jong-il, over the countrys plutonium program. The current situation, she said, is a result of President George W. Bush walking away when there was evidence North Korea was cheating, instead of negotiating to get rid of the uranium program, too.

So negotiations are critical, but they have to be part of a broader strategy, not just thrown out on a tweet some morning that hey, lets get together and see if we cant get along, and maybe we can, you know, come up with some sort of a deal, Clinton said, referring to Trumps propensity to conduct policy on Twitter. That doesnt work.

When asked about budget cuts by the Trump administration specifically to the State Department and the US Agency for International Development (USAID) Clinton thanked Defense Secretary Jim Mattis for being one of the only voices telling Trump that diplomacy and development matter.

At a National Security Advisory Council meeting at the end of February, Mattis told members: If you dont fund the State Department fully, then I need to buy more ammunition ultimately.

Read more

Clinton expanded on Mattis remarks, noting, You cannot talk about pursuing diplomacy and development that will be to the benefit of the United States, to our security, to our values and interests without understanding then that were left with just one tool in the toolbox, namely the military tool.

That is a necessary tool, but it should be only one of three. And diplomacy and development should be the first efforts, she continued. Im hoping that, because of voices like Jim Mattis and others, that that will begin to influence the administration.

Amanpour asked Clinton about a wide range of issues involving women, dating back to when the then-first lady represented the US at the United Nations Fourth World Conference on Women in Beijing, China in 1995.

Overall, theres been a lot of progress made on womens rights since 1995, Clinton said, but have we made enough? No, we havent.

Echoing her remarks at the Beijing conference that womens rights are human rights and human rights are womens rights, Clinton said that part of what I really believe is that womens rights is the unfinished business of the 21st century. There is no more important, larger issue that has to be addressed.

See the original post:
'One-off strike won't make a difference': Hillary Clinton criticizes Trump on Syria, N. Korea - RT

Turkeys president Recep Tayyip Erdogan is seeking stronger ties with the worlds largest democracy, India, at a time when he is at odds with most of the western democratic countries. Most notably, during his two-day visit to India, he met with Prime Minister Narendra Modi and attended a special convocation at one of Delhis prestigious universities, Jamia Millia Islamia, where he was conferred with an honorary doctorate.

Before Erdogans arrival in New Delhi, some of his surrogates were already in the town speaking at different events about how India and Turkey as two great democracies can and should forge a mutually beneficial relationship. The idea is good at its face value. But there are serious differences and problems that cast a shadow at any potential alliance between India and Turkey.

First and foremost, no matter how hard Erdogan and his team try to convince Modi that their relationship with India is independent of their relationship with Pakistan, it is not really a fact.

Not only the families of Turkeys president Erdogan and Pakistans Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif share personal bonds, the state ideology in both these countries is more or less the same.

The once staunchly secular state, Turkey, has now been turned into a system where all political moves of the regime are endorsed by a cohort of financially and morally corrupt religious leaders - which is typically what happens in theocratic countries.

Pakistan, on the other hand, has always been a theocracy. Furthermore, both these states current politics is deeply rooted in political Islam.

In terms of people-to-people connect between India and Turkey, and Pakistan and Turkey, Pakistan outnumbers India with a huge margin. Not to suggest that the friendship between Turkish and Pakistani people is a threat to India, but the fact that not many Indian and Turkish people know each other leads to a situation where stereotyping and having prejudice about one another is rampant.

In Turkey, where all Pakistanis would be treated as brothers, most Indians would usually be mocked as cow-worshippers.

Despite Erdogans preposterous claim that under his leadership Turkeys democracy has strengthened over the years, it can hardly be denied that it is under unprecedented crisis. Photo: Reuters

This doesnt mean that the Turkish people are detestable - on the contrary, they are very hospitable and kind. But due to little people-to-people connect, they are hardly aware of Indias diversity and plurality.

Given the strong personal bonds between the leaders, deep-rooted ideological similarity between the states and the people-to-people connect, Pakistans leverage over Turkey is far more than that of Indias.

In such a situation, Turkeys relationship with India cannot be independent of its ties to Pakistan - and therefore expecting Turkey not to side with Pakistan on issues where there is a dispute between India and Pakistan would be nave.

The Kashmir issue and Indias desired membership of the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) are the two most obvious issues where Turkey stands firmly behind Pakistan.

Not long ago, Turkeys foreign minister Mevlut Cavusoglu said his government fully supports Pakistans position on Jammu and Kashmir, and he also backed Islamabads demand to send an Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) delegation to the Kashmir Valley to investigate the alleged human rights violations there.

On Indias bid to become a member of the NSG, Turkey opposed India last year because Pakistans application was not being considered.

Secondly, despite Erdogans preposterous claim that under his leadership Turkeys democracy has strengthened over the years, it can hardly be denied that it is under unprecedented crisis. With the recently concluded constitutional referendum - which Erdogan won controversially - the country is closer to one-man rule.

In the aftermath of the attempted coup of July 15, 2016, at least 1,34,194 officials, teachers, bureaucrats and academics have been sacked from state institutions; 1,00,155 people have been detained; 2,099 educational institutions have been shut down; 7,317 academics have lost their jobs; and 4,317 judges and prosecutors have been dismissed. By all standards, it is a crackdown of an alarming proportion.

Indian democracy, with all its flaws, fares much better than the Turkish democracy. India is slowly asserting itself on the global stage as a country which takes pride in its democracy, demography and demand.

If India really wants to become a significant global player in the democratic world, it must not ignore the gross human rights violations going on in countries like Turkey - particularly because the scale at which rights violations have taken place there, many Indians have also been badly affected.

A number of Indian students who were studying in some of the 15 universities that have been shut down in the wake of the coup attempt had to return home without completing their education. Some Indian academics who were employed at these universities became jobless and their bank accounts were blocked by the Turkish authorities for months.

Its no surprise that due to such serious problems with fundamental rights in his country, Erdogan is at odds with the western democratic countries. As he tries to discover new friends in India, the Indian leadership should note that neither his ties with Pakistan will let him become a true friend of India nor is it in Indias larger interest to befriend an internationally isolated authoritarian leader.

Also read:Hard-hitting questions Indian media must ask Erdogan when he meets Modi

Originally posted here:
Why Turkeys president Erdogan is no friend of India - DailyO

ANKARA President Tayyip Erdogan said on Tuesday the European Union must open new chapters in Turkey's accession process, otherwise Ankara had nothing to discuss with the bloc and would say "goodbye".

His comments came after European Commissioner Johannes Hahn, who oversees EU membership bids, told Reuters Turkey under Erdogan had turned its back on joining the bloc.

"From now on there is no option other than opening the chapters you have not yet opened. If you do not open (them), goodbye," Erdogan said at a ceremony to mark his return to the ruling AK Party.

(Reporting by Ercan Gurses and Ece Toksabay; Writing by Daren Butler; Editing by Tuvan Gumrukcu)

PARIS France's presidential rivals, centrist Emmanuel Macron and the far-right's Marine Le Pen, go head-to-head on Wednesday in a televised debate in which sparks are sure to fly as they fight their corner in a last encounter before Sunday's runoff vote.

WASHINGTON/MOSCOW U.S. President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin on Tuesday moved to ease the tension from U.S. air strikes in April against Russian ally Syria, expressing a desire for a Syrian ceasefire and safe zones for the civil war's refugees.

Original post:
Erdogan says Turkey has nothing to discuss with EU unless new accession chapters opened - Reuters

Ozay Mehmet

Ugurs frustration with president Recep T. Erdoan (RTE)is understandable, not his interpretation of the Turkish referendum or especially his call for a formal suspension of the EU accession talks. Ugur is kicking a dead-horse. These talks are effectively suspended anyway, and RTE is a grievously wounded politician. He may not last long.

In the meantime, the better advice for the EU response would be cool patience, and democratic choice. Stay the course and diligently support democratic moves in the country. CHP is challenging his legitimacy, now taking the case to the European Court of Human Rights. Lets see what the Court will decide.

Even more ominously, a revolt is gathering strength within the AKP. The party lost as much as 10 percentage points in the referendum with traditional AKP voters. Erdogans latest gambit is to take direct control of the party. He ordered an extraordinary general assembly for 21 May 2017.

RTE is now an angry politician. He is furious for having lost big cities like Istanbul and Ankara. He is aiming to punish those inside the party for these losses, but the political dyke is bursting. This time he may not prevent a collapse. His imminent cabinet shuffle is likely to lead to further fragmentation within ranks, and there is talk of Abdullah Gul, the former (and highly respected) president and others forming a new party.

In the next presidential elections, set for 2019, or possibly earlier, RTE could well be defeated, if confronted by a credible runner. In any event, there is widespread disapproval of the one-man rule in Turkey. The war against PKK is raging with no end in sight. In the referendum, it cost RTE the Kurdish vote. His Syrian adventure remains unclear and his relations with the USA and Russia are increasingly vague.

Turkish economy has slowed down and inflation is now nearing double-digits. Tourism is almost 20% down. Unemployment is rising. Erdoans key economic advisors are marginalized, and may be axed. The pro-EU Ali Babacan sits on the side-lines.For the EU to now take Ugurs advice and declare unilateral suspension, or worse, termination of accession talks, would be overkill. No need for such irrational behavior. Better to wait and watch Turkish events for the next few weeks and months.

The referendum exposed RTEs vulnerability and may yet be his undoing. Sincere democratic voices in Europe must diligently work reinforcing pro-democracy movements inside Turkey. It is not too late to save Turkish democracy. In the past, the EU helped countries escape fascism or communism. It makes good sense to do it now in the Turkish case. For its own energy security and refugee crisis management this is, surely, the wiser course.

Ozay Mehmet, Ph.D (Toronto), Senior Fellow, Modern Turkish Studies, Distinguished Research Professor, International Affairs (Emeritus) at Carleton University, Ottawa, Canada.

Originally posted here:
Erdogan On Borrowed Time - Social Europe

An earlier Firstpost article theorised that Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoan's visit to India has provided fresh fillip to India-Turkey relations. Buttressing this point, the author produced two major reasons in his argument: first, the regional contexts in which the two countries India and Turkey are working to support each others role. Second, Turkeys "normalised" ties with Israel has a stabilising role in the region, which is key to the India-Turkey relations.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi with Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan. PTI

While the second factor was clearly at play when Erdoan visited India since Turkey has signed a reconciliation deal with Israel, the first premise does not stand to scrutiny given the Turkey-Pakistan close relationship. Most surprisingly, many analysts, including the above author, have conveniently skipped the ideological angel of Erdoan's visit to India. It is important to unravel as to what political and economic agendas the Turkish President has pursued during his visit to India. But it is equally important to delve deeper into the ideological motives of the current Turkish President in view of his affinity to political Islamism. From an Indian Muslim's point of view, a far more important question is: how will India tackle the theoretical persuasion of Erdoan or Erdoanism for the Muslims?

Erdoan's global political agenda is referred today as Erdoanism. The deeper ideological roots of Erdoanism emanate from the Turkish conservatism (muhafazakrlik). Though he calls himself a "conservative democrat", any form of democracy is not acceptable to him unless it comes under the purview of his Islamist ideologues. Candidly exposing the outcomes of Erdoanism in the post-secular Turkey, the veteran Turkish journalist, Mustafa Akyol writes in Foreign Policy:

It is no secret that President Recep Tayyip Erdoans 'New Turkey', which was hailed five years ago as the shining model of a Muslim democracy, now looks rather bleak. Turkey makes the news today not because of its domestic reforms and regional 'soft power', but because of its increasingly authoritarian regime and frequent terror attacks."

Given this ideological ambition of Erdoan, the question is: how does Erdoans diplomatic visit to India augur well for the secular and democratic credentials of the country? An earlier article in Firstpost has succinctly answered this: "It is staggering to think that Erdoan who wields power as a repressive, paranoid autocrat and has cemented his position through a dubious referendum has the temerity to lecture a democratic India on 'human rights'."

In his "lecture" at Jamia Millia Islamia, Erdoan said that he was delighted to receive the Doctors of Letters from a university which has played a pivotal role not only in Indias freedom movement but also in the Khilafat movement in the 1920s. In fact, Khilafat or Caliphate is the only ideal system of governance for the political Islamists even in this day and age of flourishing democracy. It is not difficult to see why this particular visit is a glad tiding for the Erdoanists in Turkey and their sympathisers and supporters in India who consider him the future Islamic caliph or amir-ul-muminin (chief of the believers).

Interestingly, both Recep Tayyip Erdoan and Narendra Modi hailed the cultural synthesis between the Indian and Turkish communities. While Erdoan, during his address in Jamia, stressed on "cultural and educational cooperation" as potential areas to advance the Indo-Turkish relations, Modi in his meet with the Turkish President, reiterated his clich that Sufism is a common ground between Indian and Turkish cultures. In his speech, Modi also referred to Rumis notion of tolerance and pluralism celebrating the spiritual synergy between the two countries. But ironically, much against Modi's expectation, Erdoan is shifting from the age-old Sufi tradition of Turkey to the modern and attractive fashion of political Islam.

Professor Anwar Alam, who has previously taught international relations at Zirve University in Turkey writes: "With his aspiration of becoming a political leader of the Muslim world and in view of his Islamically lashed anti-West polarising discourses, Erdogan is fast becoming a source of Islamic radicalism across the Muslim world." This is a point that the former National Security Adviser (NSA) Shiv Shankar Menon has also noted in his latest work, Choices: Inside Making of Indias Foreign Policy (2016).

In his visit to India, the Turkish president mainly focused on "trade and terror" and said that terrorism has to be fought collectively. "It is unfair to associate terrorism with any specific religion," he said in his address at Jamia, particularly castigating the Islamic State and Al-Qaeda. Erdoan, who himself advances the theory of Khilafat or "Islamic caliphate", lambasts the Islamic State (ISIS)!

On the other hand, Erdoan endorses the religious extremism growing in his country in the grab of political Islam. As a political Islamist leader, he wants his own Islamic state in Turkey. Since the time his party, Justice and Development Party (abbreviated as AKP in Turkish) came to power, Islamism has been employed in Turkey in a brutal way to further the political ends. The Islamist leaders of this Turkish political party profess and practise Islam as an ideology, rather than a spiritual path. Thus, it is self-evident that they will end up with the creation of an Islamic caliphate, sooner or later, which will ultimately eliminate the country's deep-rooted liberalism and secular democracy. Given this ideological perspective, caution is warranted on the Indian government's bid to enhance ties with the political Islamist regime of the present-day Turkey.

Originally posted here:
Narendra Modi govt must act cautiously in dealing with Turkey's Erdoan, not fuel a radical Islamist fire - Firstpost