Despite all our objections as animal rights defenders, the amendments to the law entered into force after being published in the Official Gazette on 14 July. All animal rights advocates know that this law does not protect animals, but those who earn profits from animals.

So, what changes in terms of animal rights with the "LAW ON THE PROTECTION OF ANIMALS AND THE LAW ON AMENDMENT IN THE TURKISH CRIMINAL LAW"?

HAVE ANIMALS BEEN TAKEN OUT FROM THE STATUS OF PROPERTY?

The law contains many contradictions. With this law, it has been announced that animals will be accepted as "life, not property”. However, there is not a clear and straight statement in the law regarding the termination of the status of property issue.

WILL IT BE POSSIBLE TO BUY ANIMALS FROM THE PET SHOPS?

There has been a perception in society that the sale of animals in pet shops is prohibited. With the amendment made in the law, there is still no obstacle to the purchase and sale of animals as goods, and they are even encouraged. It is not forbidden to sell animals in pet shops, but only to have cats and dogs. Cats and dogs will be produced in breeding farms and sold through the catalog at pet stores (pet shops). People will be able to go to the pet shop and buy the animals whose photos are in the catalog and whose conditions are unknown, from the production places allowed by the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry. Animal breeding places are places where animals are forcibly mated and abused. A law protecting the rights of animals should not allow them to be produced and sold. Currently, we do not have the right to complain about pet shops that have cats and dogs; because it is stated in the law that this ban will be implemented one year after the law comes into force. Thus, we see that those who treat animals as goods are given time to sell their cats and dogs. Again, no justice for animals! There is a law, but since there is no implementing regulation, the old practices continue, nothing has actually changed. Considering that the implementing regulation will also be issued in accordance with the basic lines of the law, namely the exploitation of animals for the sake of human interest, it is clear that it will not be a fair practice for animals and will not protect animals.

WHAT KIND OF PENAL SANCTION WILL BE APPLIED TO THE PERPETRATOR OF VIOLENCE TO ANIMALS?

Previously, only an administrative fine was given to the person who inflicted violence on an animal under the Misdemeanor Law. For the crime of "damaging property" in Article 151 of the Turkish Penal Code, it was considered as if one had damaged one's belongings. With the amendment in the law, the good news was given that animal violence will be punished with a prison sentence. Although cruelty to animals, torture, and sexual assaults are included in the scope of the Turkish Penal Code, the perpetrator is not allowed to be imprisoned with the specified penalties. In other words, since prison sentences are generally determined from 6 months or 1 year to 3 or 4 years, the perpetrator will not be imprisoned as long as the penalty is given below the lower limit or 3 years. In the event that the prison sentence is postponed and the announcement of the verdict is held back, when the legal period expires and other conditions are met, the crime does not even commit to the person's criminal record. Generally, the penalties are given at the lower limit. There is a small chance that the perpetrator will be sentenced to imprisonment of up to 3 years (up to 3 months in jail) if the sentence is given at the upper limit with public pressure and the judge's discretion, in situations that cause a lot of outrage in the society. Therefore, filing a lawsuit, being a follower, requesting involvement in lawsuits are of great importance for precedent decisions for animals. It is clear that the penalties are not deterrent. If a prison sentence was to be imposed in the amendment of the law, it should not be allowed to postpone the sentence and convert it to a fine, and the lower limit should be determined as 3 years. We can say that the current arrangement consists of persuading the public and deluding them.

HAS THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN “OWNED-NOT OWNED ANIMAL” DISAPPEARED?

As it has been said, the distinction between "owned and not-owned animals" has not been removed. A criminal complaint cannot be filed with the prosecutor's office against a person who commits violence to an animal living on the street - unless he is red-handed. First, a complaint can be made to the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry. If the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry deems it appropriate, it will be able to apply to the prosecutor's office to file a lawsuit. We know from the past years that even administrative fines were not collected and followed up against the perpetrators of violence to animals. With this law, it is a big lie to say that the distinction between "owned and not-owned animals" is abolished, since the right of the people and NGOs to complain is taken away. And yet, we know that most of the perpetrators who have been on trial and have never been on trial, will continue walking among us without going to jail. Again, NOTHING has changed!

WHAT WILL HAPPEN TO THE ANIMALS IDENTIFIED AS A "DANGEROUS RACE"?

If you live with a dog defined as a "dangerous breed", you must have the dog neutered within 6 months after the law comes into force, and apply to the Ministry of Agriculture with the sterilization certificate. People who meet these conditions will be able to feed these breeds and walk them with a muzzle. These dogs are not allowed to enter public places and playgrounds. This article, which seems to have reduced victimization, does not offer a permanent solution for animals; and discrimination and racism still continue. There is no regulation regarding the rehabilitation and nesting of breeds identified as dangerous in shelters. No dog is dangerous, it is human who breeds them, raises them as aggressors, and uses them as weapons. Efforts should be made urgently to provide a suitable home and a safe environment for dogs imprisoned in shelters who have not committed any crime.

WILL THE NUMBER OF PETS WILL BE INTERVENED?

Another issue is the restriction on the number of animals in the houses. In the past months, Özlem Zengin stated that "a maximum of 3 dogs will be kept in a house." Her words were met with a great reaction by animal lovers and animal rights defenders, and a step was taken back in this regard. In the amended law, it is stated that "precautions to prevent harm and discomfort to the environment caused by the adopted animals" will be determined by the implementing regulation, and this shows that the number of animals we open our homes to will be the next. While the rights of the animals who cannot live on the streets and the people who take care of them should be protected; we can see that instead the rights of people who are uncomfortable with the animals, who pump out enmity and complain about them are protected.

MUNICIPALITIES ARE STILL THE DEATH CAMPS!

The municipalities with the highest number of animal rights violations have not been included in the scope of penalty. However, additions were made to Law No. 5199 under the title of Municipalities' Responsibility. With these additional articles, metropolitan municipalities, provincial municipalities, metropolitan district municipalities with a population of more than 25 thousand, and other municipalities were obliged to establish animal shelters for the protection, care, and rehabilitation of homeless, weakened, or danger posing animals. Municipalities with a population of less than 25 thousand will collect animals and send them to the nursing homes of other municipalities. These transfers will pave the way for the animals to be displaced, lost, thrown into the forests, and confined to the concentration camps we call the death camps. We do not accept the normalization of these death camps and the isolation of animals living on the streets. For instance, the situation is not different in Fethiye Municipality Temporary Animal Nursing Home, where animals that are defined as "forbidden breeds" and that have been confiscated or abandoned by the Municipality are kept on concrete floors that are out of the sun. We know that tagged animals, whose vaccination and sterilization process have been completed, are kept in captivity in the shelter, they are not returned to the place where they were taken, and they are condemned to live in their own filth. Nursing homes should be opened in every district and cooperation with civil society should be established, the necessary budget should be allocated, and its control and follow-up should be carried out. Municipalities should immediately stop isolating animals in concentration camps and send them to death; act with the awareness that animals are neighborhood residents and aim to solve the problems they face on the streets.

Animal captivity houses have not been closed, they are not being closed either. Animal experiments and hunting have not been prohibited. Exploitation continues in every field. How long can the human species close their eyes, ears, and mouths while all these atrocities continue before our eyes and the screams of animals are getting louder every day? This law raises the bar to continue human cruelty to animals. We will see this more clearly with the implementation regulation. However, we can achieve legal gains in favor of animals as more people oppose the usurpation of the rights of animals, organize, realize that this is a struggle for justice and join this struggle.

Volunteer for Law for Life Initiative Özge Özgüner

Translator: İpek Laçin

(This article has been produced with support from the European Union, as part of the EU's Sivil Düşün Program. The content's responsibility solely belongs to Law for Life Initiative and does not reflect the views of the EU.)

Considering the unofficial figures, it is mentioned that there are nearly 7 million immigrants in Turkey. The wave of immigration from Afghanistan had begun before the Taliban took control of Kabul. Speaking to the BBC on 12 July, a human smuggler explained how the system that brings Afghans to Turkey works. According to him, at least 50-100 people cross the border every day. Depending on the day, this number can reach 300. In 2015, this figure was around 1000, 2000 people. The smuggler, who claims that the border crossings continue, thinks that the worsening of the situation in Afghanistan will increase immigration.

WORLD WITHOUT LIMITS!

The stories of this human smuggler, who hides his name and face, almost make us question what kind of world we live in. We are living in a world where human life is no longer important. On the one hand, people trying to escape from their homes, their homeland, without taking any belongings with them, perhaps leaving their loved ones behind, and trying to hold on to life in countries where they do not speak the language, on the other hand, today's human traffickers, who carry these people from country to country under terrible conditions to earn some money. The dirty trade between them demonstrates how irregular migrants are brought into the system and how the system works.

Afghan smuggler says he started human trafficking business after he came to Turkey. He states that other Afghans like him are doing this job in Turkey by adding that there are also Turks among them. He describes the process of a person who wants to leave Afghanistan with the following words: “Those who want to come to Turkey from Afghanistan find a smuggler there. His relatives may have come before. He asks them and finds the smuggler. Smugglers work with each other. They take the man… On their way from Afghanistan to Iran, they first go to Pakistan. I don't know the Pakistani part exactly. When they go to Iran, there is a city called Bam, they first go there. Then they go up to Isfahan from there. They are on their way from Tabriz to Hoy. They also come here (Turkey) from Hoy. To the Doğu Beyazıt or Van side.”

The smuggler says that migrants mostly walk while crossing the borders, and are taken by car inside the country. He explains the cooperation between smugglers by saying that Afghanistan's smuggler leaves the migrants to Pakistani smugglers, Pakistani smugglers leave them to Iran's smugglers, and Iran's smugglers leave them to Turkey's smugglers. He states that the cost of going from Afghanistan to Iran is 500 dollars per person, while it is 1000 dollars to come to Turkey. The cost of crossing to Europe via Turkey is much higher.

According to the smuggler's statements, these human traffickers establish cooperation between them through telephones. He says that they communicate with immigrants through applications called Whatsapp and Imo. They do not cross borders with immigrants. They give some directions like “Walk for two hours from here, then our men will pick you up at the border.” Their organization is also highly developed. There are high-level employees and lower-level employees in the field in the human trafficking business. And the shepherds helping them! He says that the shepherds inform them whether there are soldiers at the borders in return for money.

SECURITY ON THE TURKEY-IRAN BORDER

The Turkish-Iranian border consists of an area of 560 kilometers. In order to prevent illegal crossings and smuggling activities and to increase security at the border, a security wall is being built on Van's 64-kilometer border with Iran. The wall, which was started on the Iranian border of Van's Çaldıran district, will extend to Doğubayazıt in Ağrı and Yüksekova line of Hakkari. A wall is planned to be built on the entire 295-kilometer border of Van with Iran by the end of the year. The wall, which is 3 meters high, 2 meters 80 centimeters wide, and 7 tons of concrete blocks, does not protect the border alone, it is only a helpful factor for the border troops. As a matter of fact, it shouldn't be easy to maintain such a long line.

The smuggler also talks about the security measures on the Turkey-Iran border. He underlines that the flow of irregular migrants has decreased relatively due to the effect of the pandemic, but that the reduction of measures with the arrival of summer also causes an increase in their number. The smuggler, who stated that fewer soldiers were deployed in some parts of the borders, clarifies the contrast between Iran and Turkey on this issue. When Turkey expands the measures and increases the number of soldiers, Iran leaves, and when Iran increases security, Turkey relaxes.

He also expresses his views on the built wall as follows: “The wall is not too high. They put ladders over the wall, they dig under the wall. So the wall prevented our work, but not that much.” Here, it is important to taken under control by soldiers rather than overcoming the concrete blocks. He adds also that the shepherds on the Iranian or Turkish border say, “Now it's available, pass thought quickly.” Even worse, he claims that the soldiers also cooperate for money. He states that he does not know about the Turkish soldiers, but that the Iranian soldiers left the border empty: “(Iranian Soldiers) They are informing us. They say there are only two hours left, whatever you do.”

BORDERS SHOULD NOT BE THE ONLY ADDRESS TO FIGHT MIGRATION

The number of walls built against security threats is increasing worldwide. As of today, concrete walls appear to protect borders in more than 70 countries. However, it would not be right to expect that these walls will completely stop the flow of migration. Walls certainly have psycho-political effects. However, although such walls help reduce the number of people who can pass through the concrete blocks, it is inevitable that migrants will move towards areas where no walls are built and determine new routes. In addition, the entire border line between Turkey and Iran does not consist of land suitable for building a wall. It is said that measures such as the number of ditches, wire fences, and watchtowers at the borders, the number of sending of more military units, the constant monitoring of the borders with unmanned aerial vehicles are said to be increased. However, the fact that the topography of the border is mostly mountainous is an indication that these measures do not work well everywhere. In particular, the control of mountainous, rugged, and high-altitude regions will become more difficult in winter conditions.

The biggest cost of irregular migration is experienced in security and social areas. The economic cost is also huge. Borders must be highly secured to limit migration. However, there must be things to be done before the migrants reaches the border. A smuggler's words shed light on the outline of the plan that had to be drawn. It is necessary to announce sternly that the borders in Turkey are closed and that no irregular migrants will be accepted under any circumstances. Realizing the impassability of the border can be a factor in deterrence. However, there is a need for continuous and strict security checks.

And above all, borders should not be the only address in the fight against immigration. Various measures should be taken for all parts of the country. However, the most important thing is to identify and punish the groups that involved in illegal business in Turkey, and to start the fight against the smuggling mafia as soon as possible. It is possible to understand the gravity of the matter from the words of the smuggler. “I am not afraid of being arrested. We don't have much danger. We are at the top level… There is a possibility that more low-level people will be caught… (Some smugglers) are working with the Mafia. Some of them have men in the police.”

Dr. Selmin Seda Coskun

However, it was quite clear. If we consider that the US lost the war in Afghanistan and left the country because it did not want to bear any more costs, we can see the fact that this loss was a sad adventure that covered the entire 20 years that the US soldiers were there, not the developments in the last one or two years. Afghanistan is a country that has not yet been able to build its own nation-state, manages inter-tribal struggles only with weapons, and resembles the Middle Ages in terms of human rights. The Afghan National Army, which was established by the USA, could not escape from being a community of people formed by various ethnic, sectarian and sect groups, and therefore it has been always far from national unity. The Afghan state system that the US tried to build was not a system that prioritized the people and could not go beyond the effort spent on the interests of the elites. However, US troops were the Afghan National Army's merely source of military, technical, and intelligence. The Afghan army's lack of resources, military skills and weak motivation to fight for whom and how has brought weakness against the Taliban today after the US made its decision to withdraw completely.

This is an indication that the US has not been able to manage the process well in the Afghanistan mission from the very beginning. The Taliban's takeover of power also dealt a major blow to the 'war on terror' rhetoric. The US withdrawal seems like a setback in the struggle between democracy and authoritarianism, so that the Western-style liberal interventionism model collapsed in Afghanistan. From now on, it seems difficult to support similar initiatives by the allies. However, does this not contradict Biden's rhetoric of "America is back" when he took office?

AMERICA IS BACK!

Member states, which lost confidence in NATO during the term of former US President Donald Trump and came to the point of questioning NATO's functionality, had realigned with the new President Joe Biden. At the NATO summit held last June, common threats were discussed again, and the belief that a tight working environment between the Allies would resume had been aroused. The phrase 'America is back' had become the most used expression in foreign policy. Now it is nothing but an ambiguous confusion of meaning. As a matter of fact, the withdrawal of the USA from Afghanistan as if to reward the Taliban has prompted the allied states to reconsider the direction of Washington's decisions.

According to the CIA reports, the Taliban's takeover activities could take place between 6 and 2 years after the full withdrawal of the USA from Afghanistan. The Taliban, however, increased its power in areas it had occupied through conflict while the United States had not yet withdrawn its troops and other foreign missions were still in the country. Finally, it entered Kabul as if receiving a key delivery. With the departure of the country's President Ashraf Ghani, the Taliban took over the seat of the new Afghan government. Now, watching the developments in Afghanistan with concern, the NATO allies realized that they had to think twice before they clearly understood what the USA wanted to do and without stopping behind the policies of President Joe Biden as an ally. The uninterrupted conversation traffic of European states reflected their anxiety over the rapid decline of Kabul.

REFLECTIONS FROM RUSSIA AND CHINA

Concern about the direction of the situation with the Taliban's takeover the power in Afghanistan seems important not only for the West but also for the US allies in the region. The US's rhetoric about withdrawing from the Middle East and focusing on Asia were making the powers acting with the US in the region worried for a while. After 20 years of struggle, the full withdrawal of the US from Afghanistan, as if rewarding the Taliban, will require a rethinking of the alliance groups in the Middle East. At this point, one of the most important factors concerning Turkey is the course of the relations of the non-state armed organization PYD-YPG, the extension of the PKK terrorist organization located in northern Syria, with the USA; the second will be Russian and even Chinese influence, which is very likely to increase in the region.

If international terrorism finds a place in Afghanistan with the new Taliban administration, this situation will concern the entire region, including Pakistan which supports Taliban, and even Russia and China. At first glance, Russia and China seem pleased with the US withdrawal. In particular, China may have the opportunity to influence Afghanistan and the region more with this move of the USA. However, the fact that those of the Muslim minorities in China who are against Beijing crossing the existing border into Afghanistan and collaborating with the Taliban may disturb China. Russia seems pleased as well that the US is now sharing the same fate in the lands where it was defeated during the Soviet period. However, the possible increase in instability and violence in the region may result in spillovers to neighboring countries. This is a worrying situation for Russia. That is why China and Russia seek to establish close relations with the Taliban today.

HIGH FORESIGHT OF AMERICA!

It seems that while the Taliban was a non-state armed organization, today it is a candidate to enter the international community as an actor. Besides Russia and China, Turkey will also recognize the Taliban as the official government of Afghanistan. Even the United States left, saying that channels of dialogue with the Taliban were open. European states are giving signals to take a similar stance, as well. Against the Taliban who said, "There will never be a democratic system in Afghanistan,”, there seems to be an understanding that the quest to cut ties with Afghanistan and isolate the Taliban will only bring more chaos.

What exactly does the US want to do? 20 years of struggle, billions of dollars spent, many soldiers sent, thousands of casualties… Giving Kabul to the Taliban as if they were handing the key without firing a single bullet must be due to the US's high foresight about what will happen next (!). Could this foresight be to use the country's resources against the rising China instead of wasting it in other lands?

Dr. Selmin Seda Coşkun

Well then, will this law protect animals? Of course not. The law will not protect the animals but the people who earn money through animals and public institutions that do not fulfill their responsibilities. Despite all the reactions, the ruling party AKP enacted this law stubbornly, ignoring the years of struggle of animal rights defenders. Some details will become clear when the implementing regulation of the law is published. However, I can tell from my experience that these details will not have good results on animals. For example, the law will be able to interfere with the number of animals in the houses with the implementation regulation to be issued via the phrase in article 3 of the law, “...precautions to prevent harm and disturbance by adopted animals to the environment are determined by a regulation to be issued by the Ministry.”

Let's check now what this law covers, which AKP deputies are trying to market by calling it a

revolutionary law, and whether this law is really a revolution.

First of all, there is not even the definition of animal in the law, whereas according to the recommendation report by the Parliament’s Animal Rights Research Commission, it was recommended to define animals as sentient beings; but this article did not find a place in the law like the other recommendations of the commission. In other words, AKP deputies are misinforming the public when they state that "animals are not property but living beings".

The statement that "the sale of animals in pet shops is over" is also a big lie, because only the sale of cats and dogs is banned however reptiles, birds, rodents, and others will continue to be sold in pet shops. If you want to buy cats and dogs, you will be able to buy them through breeding farms by choosing them from the catalog provided by the pet shop. You cannot allow animals to be produced and sold and then call it “animals are not property, but they are living beings”. AKP informed the public as “The distinction between adopted and not adopted animals do not exist anymore, and prison sentence will be given for animal cruelty.” However, the fact of the matter is that if there is no red-hand in the violations to the rights of stray animals, the right to complain has been taken away from people. In order to initiate an investigation for the incident, a written application must be made to the Office of the Chief Public Prosecutor by the provincial and district directorates of the Ministry of

Agriculture and Forestry. In other words, they have taken away our right to complain and given this right to the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, which sees animals as property. Penalties, on the other hand, are a great deception because killing animals can be punished with imprisonment from 6 months to 4 years, rape and torture from 6 months to 3 years, and animal fighting (other than traditional ones) from 3 months to 2 years. However, sentences under 3 years can be postponed in Turkey, so in practice, the perpetrators will not actually go to jail.

Let's see whether the statement "Zoos, dolphin parks and circuses are banned" reflects the truth:

Dolphin parks will not be closed, on the contrary, these facilities will be legalized with a new regulation. While opening of new dolphin parks is not allowed in Turkey, the existing 10 dolphin parks will not be closed either. It is forbidden to bring new animals to the existing facilities, to enlarge the existing facility and to transfer the facility. However, if these prohibitions are violated, a fine of 25 thousand Turkish Liras per animal will be imposed on these torture houses, which can be considered like a reward for the dolphin park owners. The statement that the dolphin parks will be closed in 10 years has also been added by the general assembly. The commission report recommended that these parks should have been closed within 2 years, however AKP accepted that this torture would continue for 10 more years.

They have changed the name of the zoos to "natural life parks". The phrase “Real or legal persons can establish natural life parks suitable for the ethology and habitat of animals and allowing their free movement.” has been added to the law. We know that natural life parks in Turkey are no different than zoos. Moreover, we should not accept that animals are still seen as exhibits in 2021. Animals are individuals who have emotions and can feel.

The establishment of circuses has been banned in Turkey. You might think at first what a nice arrangement that is, however when you learn that there is already no animal circus established in Turkey, that these circuses come from abroad, and that the lawmakers know this very well; the arrangement does not sound that good.

The regulation regarding animals which are defined as dangerous is also not satisfactory. Dangerous breeds will be determined by the ministry. Will the Ministry create a list, and will this list be renewed periodically? Will a board be formed to create this list? Who will be on this board? How will these animals be determined? There are no details about these issues. If the ministry creates a list and updates it regularly, the number of animals identified as dangerous may increase.

Apart from this uncertainty, the details that are clear are as follows: If you live with an animal that is defined as a dangerous breed, the animals can stay with you on the condition that you provide ID for these animals within 6 months, and you wear them a muzzle and walk in uncrowded places. However, these banned breeds who are already sentenced to life imprisonment in shelters and do not have a family, will not be able to be adopted and their persecution will continue.

There are no sanctions on municipalities; the penalty for abandoning pets is 2000 Turkish Liras; traditional animal fighting is free; there are no regulations regarding hunting, fireworks, fur farms, phaetons, and animal testing. Of course, this law is not revolutionary, on the contrary, it does not solve any problems just like the many other laws enacted by the AKP. Instead, the problems that will arise in practice seem to increase the rights violations experienced by animals.

Volunteer for Law for Life Initiative – Coordinator of Animal Rights Monitoring Committee

Fatma Biltekin

Translator: İpek Laçin

This article has been produced with support from the European Union, as part of the EU's Sivil Düşün Program. The content's responsibility solely belongs to Law for Life Initiative and does not reflect the views of the EU.

SEA BREEZE 2021

For the first time, NATO launched a military drill with non-member countries in the Black Sea, consisting of 32 countries, including Turkey, and 5 thousands soldiers. This drill, which will last until July 11, is held every year under the name Sea Breeze, but this year it has been a true international drill. However, the more important factor that emerged due to the large-scale nature of the drill has been the reaction of Russia. Defining the drill as an "anti-Russian attempt" for provocation, Russia claimed that "Ukraine is armed under the guise of the drill". As you may remember, when NATO conducted a drill called Sea Shield 21 with 18 ships and over 2 thousands soldiers in March this year, Russian submarines were immediately deployed to the region. At that time, this drill aimed to increase the cooperation between the naval forces of Romania and other NATO member countries. The reason why the drill was kept wide this year, however, can be interpreted through the Western wing's expansion strategy towards Eastern Europe against Russia and the approval of NATO's entry into the Black Sea, especially through Turkey. In such a situation, it is clear that Turkey has a difficult task. If Turkey will no longer make an extra effort to keep NATO out of the Black Sea, this will undoubtedly affect the relations with Russia in the new period. Of course, the large participation of the Turkish Armed Forces in the NATO drill taking place these days is not the only reason for Russia's negative attitude towards Turkey. Considering the fact that Turkey is seeking to re-integrate with the West in the military contexte, it is possible to say that Turkey has made a new opening in the Black Sea and Eastern Europe. It is possible to see this most clearly in the rapprochement of Turkey-Ukraine and Turkey-Poland.

TURKEY'S UAV SALES TO UKRAINE AND POLAND

As it is remembered, Bayraktar TB2 armed unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV), which is actively used by Turkey in Syria and Libya, was sold to Ukraine as 6 UAVs and 3 ground control stations after Qatar and Azerbaijan. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov had warned Turkey not to send arms to Ukraine and made statements to Turkey that Ukraine encourages "militarist feelings”. Despite this, Turkish President Erdoğan, who hosted the President of Ukraine Volodymyr Zelensky, had announced that the cooperation between Ukraine and Turkey would be developed, and stated that the cooperation between the two countries was by no means an attempt against third countries. Turkey, as a NATO member, decided to make an agreement with Poland, an Eastern European country, to sell UAVs for the first time in its history. According to the signed 'Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Systems Procurement Contract’, it is foreseen that the first delivery will be made in 2022 and the export will be completed within 2 years. With the sale of 24 Bayraktar TB2 UAVs to Poland, Ankara's theses, strengthened by its military cooperation in Eastern Europe, deserve its share of truth. It is seen that Poland, which feels the Russian threat as widely as Ukraine, has also increased its resources for defense with the UAVs purchased from Turkey. In this way, it increases its reconnaissance and surveillance capability along the Russian border. In short, Poland buys these vehicles to use against Russia. It should not also be forgotten that after Ukraine and Poland, the sale of UAVs to Hungary is also in Turkey’s agenda, and that there are even initiatives in countries such as Slovenia, Slovakia and Czechia. This situation shows that Turkey is following a foreign policy strategy in the Eastern Europe area based on UAV sales.

RUSSIAN REACTION

The large participation of the Turkish Armed Forces in NATO's Black Sea drills might be interpreted by Russia as Turkey's tendencies to bring NATO into the Black Sea. On the other hand, Turkey's rapprochement with Ukraine and Poland by engaging in arms trade is an indication that Turkey has made an opening in the Black Sea and even in Eastern Europe. However, most probably, Moscow will not be pleased if Turkey, which has made defense exports one of its foreign policy targets, consolidates its military-intelligence sphere of influence in the near geography of Russia On the other hand, merely Georgia and Ukraine remained in the Black Sea, two non-NATO countries apart from Russia. With the membership of these countries, all countries except Russia which has a coast on the Black Sea, will become NATO members. Russia, with this regard, will not allow the Black Sea to turn into a NATO sea. However, Turkey's recent attempts seem against Russia which sees the Black Sea as its inland sea. It may be inevitable for Russia to show this pressure through Turkey.

IDLIB CASE

In the light of all these developments, it would not be wrong to say that Russia is uncomfortable with Turkey's policies. However, it is not yet clear whether the sanctions that may come from Russia will remain only in rhetoric or whether some concrete initiatives will come. The most critical area is Syria, in this sense. Turkey and Russia are more at odds with Syria than with Libya and Nagorno-Karabakh. It is almost certain that the subject of Idlib is included in the file prepared by Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov, who visited Turkey on June 29. Every attack by Russia and Assad forces in Idlib triggers very important processes for Turkey. The initiation of a new wave of migration by people whose living conditions are getting difficult in the conflict zone is a grave issue especially for Turkey. The policy of triggering immigration is a punch thrown by Russia in Turkey's soft stomach. Therefore, it is not unreasonable to predict that Russia will use its military and political superiority against Turkey, especially in Syria, with such a policy in the forthcoming days. As a matter of fact, it is clear that Russia has used Syria as a trump card against Turkey and will not hesitate to continue to use it. Turkey's recent activities in the Blacksea are not escaped the attention of Russia. Considering this situation, it may be inevitable for the relationship between Turkey and Russia to evolve into a more tense structure.

Presidential elections will take place in France in April 2022. However, the results of the provincial and regional parliamentary elections, held yesterday in France served as a rehearsal for next year’s general election. What the results show is Emmanuel Macron and Marine Le Pen, the two finalists in the previous presidential election, may not be on the front page next time. Le Pen and Macron saw their hopes dashed at the regional level. Now the headlines in the French press are asking: Will the Macron-Le Pen duel continue?

WHAT DID THE VOTERS SAY THIS TIME?

THE OUTCOME OF 2022 HIGHLY MAINTAINS UNCERTAINTY

WHY IS THE LEFT PERFORMING SO LOW IN FRANCE?

HOW SHOULD TURKEY EVALUATE THIS RESULT?

In half of the Member States surveyed, the majority of respondents said they had little or no confidence in the EU, or that their confidence had been broken after last year's events. Majorities in France (62%), Germany (55%), Italy (57%), Spain (52%) and Austria (51%) now believe that the European project is “broken”. This view is particularly evident in France, because the belief that the EU is corrupt seems to be most firmly entrenched in France. Yet, despite the lack of public confidence, the belief that more cooperation is needed among EU countries remains widespread. In all countries surveyed, with the exception of France and Germany, most respondents indicate that the coronavirus crisis has brought about the need for greater cooperation among member states. In France, only 45% of respondents believe that more cooperation is needed within the EU. This rate is the lowest of all the countries surveyed! As a matter of fact, these findings, which form the basis of the report, also constitute the main point of the important discussions at the G7, NATO and EU summits.

WHAT SHOULD EUROPE CHANGE?

When asked what Europe needed to change after the Covid-19 pandemic, the most common response was the need to be able to develop a collective response to global crises. The ECFR survey also revealed a positive view on maintaining EU membership. In other words, the EU continues to have strong support in every country, and many are keen on further cooperation to make the EU a global player. 11 out of 12 Member States surveyed consider EU membership to be 'good for their country’. The exception to this is again France, where the most common response (29%) is that membership is "neither a good nor a bad thing".

ATTITUDES TOWARDS OTHER GLOBAL ACTORS

Regarding attitudes towards other global players, the ECFR also reveals that it has found that Europeans now see a world of strategic partners rather than natural alliances. All other global players, including China and Russia, are seen somehow as strategic partners. However, Europeans remain cautious about China, favoring a stronger response from the EU to violations of international law. In addition, more than 40% of respondents in Germany, Denmark, Austria and France see China as a “competitor". Interestingly, only 17% of those surveyed by the ECFR consider Russia an “enemy". This figure drops to 5-7% among Bulgarians, Italians and Portuguese.

RESULTS FOR TURKEY

According to the report, many people in Europe see Turkey, rather than China, as the EU's main competitor. The majority of respondents in France (53%), Germany (52%), Denmark (42%) and Sweden (40%) see Turkey as a “competitor” or “enemy” of the EU. Many Europeans want the EU to criticize Turkey when it violates human rights, the rule of law or democratic values. Regarding violations in Turkey, respondents in the Netherlands (69%), Austria (66%), Germany (63%), Denmark (63%) and Sweden (61%) were more likely to say they wanted a firmer stance from leaders. Criticism against Turkey in France is at the rate of 57%. This is much more than France's response to China (45%).

LESSONS FOR THE EUROPE FROM THE RESULTS

In short, the ECFR report, based on surveys, reveals that confidence in the EU has collapsed during the Covid-19 pandemic and that in countries like Germany, France, Spain and Italy the majority of citizens now think the European project is broken. According to the report's authors, Susi Dennison and Jana Puglierin, the results of this survey, which focused on citizens' attitudes a year after the start of the Covid-19 pandemic, should serve as a wake-up call to authorities in Brussels. They say it might face new questions about the purpose and legitimacy of the EU unless immediate action is taken to end Brussels' impression of its widespread ineffectiveness among Europeans, particularly among the bloc's founding members. The report authors also urge EU leaders to demonstrate leadership at this month's G7, NATO and EU-US summits. They warn that confidence in the already undermined need for European cooperation will not hold up in the event of further failures. The results can also be seen as an indicator to determine how the countries can reshape their relationship with Europe ahead of the parliamentary elections. But, as it is figured out, the most striking country of the results is France. It seems that the discussions will heat up whether there will be a 'Frexit' in the coming days. On the other hand, as long as Turkey continues to neglect the issue of human rights, it will have nothing to expect from Europe in the forthcoming days.      

As you may know, Prof. Dr. Ali Erbaş’s Friday sermon (khutbah), “Ramadan: Patience and Will Training,” delivered recently in the Ankara Hacı Bayram-ı Veli Mosque, has elicited quite a reaction. In his speech, Erbaş said: “O People! Islam views adultery as one of the greatest sins. Islam abhors homosexuality. It causes illness and is corrupting this generation. Hundreds of thousands of people per year are exposed to the HIV virus as a result of illegitimate, unmarried lifestyles: İslamic literature decries such adultery as sinful. Let us fight together to protect people from this kind of evil.”  The speech prompted stern reactions from the Turkish bar, NGO’s and LGBTI+ associations, who strongly oppose his homophobic rhetoric; with some making criminal complaints. Other organizations and public figures have, however, signalled support for Dr. Erbaş and his viewpoint.

Chairperson of Religious Affairs Ali Erbaş, targeted LGBTI+ individuals in his Friday sermon: "Islam considers adultery as the biggest sin. It damnates the people of Lut, homosexuality."pic.twitter.com/iEbUrI5yxR

— dokuz8NEWS (@dokuz8news) April 24, 2020

Are we obligated to live by a set of prescribed norms, or, is it the right of each individual to live the lifestyle they choose? When I look at the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the first thing that catches my attention is Article 3: ‘Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.’ It says, 'right to life', it says 'liberty', it says 'security of person' It does not say ‘You must live your life a certain way,’ or ‘your personal liberty and security is conditional.’ Each of us is a unique individual. We each have the right to freely decide what our wishes and preferences are, as long as we do not harm others! The voices of religious authority that say: “Do not live together without getting married, lest you engage in adultery and cause illness” also reason that “A man can marry a 9-year-old girl.” Likewise, the same voices say, “Do not react to your husband, do not call the police if your husband beats you” while also dictating, without scientific basis, “Do not be in love with your fellow man or you will contract AIDS.” Our preferences are not theirs to decide. Our preferences are human, and most importantly, they are harmless to women and children. In these days under quarantine, we are all coming to understand the value of freedom. It might be beneficial for us to consider the freedoms some others are not afforded - and to be more accepting of their universal rights - instead of provoking and humiliating one another. It might also be beneficial to form opinion based upon scientific data, and accurate, up-to-date information, rather than blindly accepting and disseminating damaging falsehoods. In our attempts to keep the public informed, and to diminish societal ills, for example, we could focus on more constructive phrasing, such as "psychological and physical injustices experienced by children and women,” rather than resorting to provocative and divisive ways of communicating. Would this not be more beneficial? I think, it would! I wish our mantra was ‘Everyone Deserves Love’ or ‘Freedom to All’. I wish we were now talking about social policies to protect women and children, rather than espousing unscientific, blinkered beliefs. Ah, if only!...  

Recently, our country has gotten over a disaster in Elazığ and Malatya. An earthquake in which dozens of our citizens died, thousands of people were injured, caused loss of property and forced the region in the depth of winter. Do not worry, as many media organs stated earlier, I will not ask why we had not prepared, or I will not question how our earthquake taxes evaporated. In this article, I will talk about a politician saying “This country is protected by the belief/faith of those who say,' I have no headscarf now, therefore do not rescue me from the rubble of the collapsed building’.” After that, I will go towards gender inequality issues. Of course, we respect the belief of the aunt, who was rescued from under the rubble of the collapsed building and who asked for a headscarf at the time of her rescue. It is not up to me to talk about the correctness or the wrongness of her belief, the rightness or injustice of the aunt's actions at the time of the earthquake recovery. Many platforms such as ‘Ekşisözlük’ have already discussed this issue in depth. (See: https://eksisozluk.com/basim-acik-beni-cikarmayin--6354704?p=1) As a psychologist, I can say that it may have given such a reaction depending on the trauma she has experienced. Otherwise, I think that when the person is closest to death, he/she should think about his/her life, not his/her clothes. Our simplest instinct is: survival, is it not? But the belief of the aunt was put forward as a political material. As a result of this political discourse, the exclusion of science can be discussed for a long time and the following suggestions can be made: If we believe that this country is just protected by belief/faith, let us remove all the military and defence systems. If we believe that this country is just protected by belief/faith, let us stop all the works related to earthquakes. If we believe that this country is just protected by belief/faith, let us close all the hospitals. It did not make sense, right? Actually, there is a lot to be written but I want to touch on a completely different point, inspired by what the aunt said. The relationship between earthquake and gender inequality… As you know, we generally state gender inequality in terms of the ratio of girls to boys in primary, secondary and higher education, the proportion of women working in non-agricultural wage jobs, and the proportion of women in parliament. Well, have you ever evaluated this according to the moment of disaster or earthquake? Let us start it over, have you ever observed the different reactions of men and women at the moment of disaster and afterwards? If you have not observed it, let us think about women who are looking for clothes in order not to look inappropriate during and after the earthquake. Our mothers, grandmothers, neighbours and ourselves… We may have been caught in the earthquake in the bathroom or we could be without a bra during an earthquake. We may have taken off our headscarf or we may be sleeping with a sexy nightgown. At the time of the disaster, how many of us would be in a hurry to wear cardigans to cover our braless breasts or bare legs while men are just trying to run away with pants (maybe even naked) - without even thinking for a second-. The answer is simple: In social expectations, it is natural for a man to be naked under all conditions, but the woman must be well-behaved even during a disaster, right? So, the man can escape in every way, even if the woman dies under the rubble of the collapsed building while searching for something to wear. I wonder how many women officers are there to help those under the rubble? Over five? Maybe. In terms of gender inequality, it can demonstrate women's employment rate for post-disaster search and rescue work! In a household, do you think it is the woman or the "head of the house" (!) man who knows what to do during and after the earthquake, at least where the assembly point is. How many women do you think are conscious about these issues? If there are some meetings regarding disaster or earthquake in the apartment or neighbourhood (which I do not think so) what do you think it is woman or man who will be participant? Let me not mention the difficulties that women will experience after the disaster, for example, the difficulties in using the common areas. How many women can get out of the shared bathroom with just a towel covered her body and walk up to her tent such as in casual clothes. A man wraps his towel around his waist, and he can walk comfortably, can he not? We came again from the headscarf to gender inequality. Meanwhile, we talked about politicians who put us in fools, a matter of faith and an earthquake.  

"When we finish university, we have opportunity to get a good job and make a good career, but our ‘biological’ sex takes us a step back. Since many employers prefer men instead of women, especially if we work in heavy industry. They say that this woman will give birth, she will take several months maternal leave (I must find new one in this period), when she returns to her work, she will work inefficiently due to her sleepless nights, she will be tired etc."

The tv series sector is perhaps one of the areas where women are most employed. Also in top positions. 

The majority of screenwriters are women. Almost all of the drama directors who choose, order and determine their series projects in channels and production companies are women.

Most of the directors and co-directors are the same. The cast also includes women as much as men.

The tv series mainly aimed at the taste of female audiences. Because the most popular series are the series that women audiences prefer.

Now, with the picture like this, it does seem a little odd that the series encourage and incite violence against women and femicides, right?

Is there a series that supports violence against women?

The point is, it does not matter whether male or female, none of the channel managers, producers, scriptwriters would say “let’s produce a series that support violence against women in Turkey.”

But violence against women and femicides are a reality of the country. There is nothing more natural than handling this issue. In fact not handling is a problem. The thing is the way it is handled and the reason for it.

Yes, the creators and decision-makers of the dramas are against violence against women. But not the customers. Men who commit violence against their wives, murder his ex-wife, punish his daughter for a matter of honor are the clients of these series. Almost everyone, who legitimizes violence against women who asks what she did and got the beating, who advices that women should know her place, who grudges freedom to women and considers that it is in the hands of men, are customers of the series.

Of course, they are not making series to look nice for these customers. But they are targeting those unfortunately who think they are against violence but actually, they are the ones that waters and grows the seeds of violence. Sadly, also the victims of this violence.

A romantic hero could be a murderer?

Yes, who produces the series are against violence against women. The most important criterion of the series producers is being watched more. Stories, characters are always determined by this criterion.

If the characters who read a lot of books, sensitive to the environment, watch documentaries and have always been against violence would have been watched, you can be sure that tv series would be full of these characters.

But as long as the male characters fight for the girl they like at the first sight and steal the girl’s heart like this, these stories will continue.

That day, the ones making the talking by their fists, they would do the same thing to keep the girl they like. Those who say “I die for your love” may seem romantic at first, and when they lose the love, they attempt to kill.

When a woman wants to break up, is the man who understands it more romantic or the one says “either you belong to me or the grave?”

Is it the man who loses control, or the man who talks politely with her when he feels jealous?

The men we approve by saying, “true lover, a lover to the death, true man” inevitably resort to violence to other men in series, and to women in life at some point. In fact, the signs of future disasters are clear, yet we look the other way.

The responsibility of the producers begins at this point. At the expense of being watched more, giving place to these stories and characters, they sprinkle the seeds of violence by clarifying the first signs of violence with love, passion and devotion. Audiences who are their customers, prefer these stories and grow the seeds.

The result is that it does not bloom from seeds, but the gush of blood.

Along with the screams of the woman who says “I do not want to die…”