[ad_1]
French philosopher Bernard-Henri Levy and JFK-Justice for Kurds president Thomas Kaplan condemn Turkey’s aggression against the Kurds in Syria, as well as its overall provocative stance towards the West and the multiple fronts it has opened.
The two men sign a two-page message in the New York Times with the headline “It’s time to mess with Erdogan,” raising the alarm about the Turkish president’s belligerent provisions that threaten Western interests. 
JFK is a Franco-American organization based in New York for the protection of the Kurds and the awakening of international public opinion on the Kurdish question. This year marks one year since Turkey invaded northern Syria.
The statement condemned Turkey’s aggression against the Kurds in Syria and stigmatized the US withdrawal, leaving the US’s Kurdish allies in the war against ISIS at the mercy of Turkey.
Reference also to Greek-Turkish
“From Cyprus to Libya, from the Aegean islands to Syria, from Iraq to Lebanon, from Bosnia and Herzegovina to the distant shores of the Red Sea, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, strengthened by his military alliance with him” represents a threat to the region. the statement said.
Also on the cover are excerpts from statements by Turkish President Erdogan, indicative of his aggression, including:
“There is no force that can stand in the way of our country” and “We will not hesitate to sacrifice witnesses in this battle. Are the peoples of Greece, France, some North African countries and the Gulf willing to make such sacrifices?” .
“How to stop Erdogan”
On the Justice for Kurds website, there is a lengthy article by Bernard Henri Levy and Thomas Kaplan calling on the West to contain Erdogan, calling him a “disturbed figure.” 
“The authoritarian president of Turkey is endangering the interests of the West. At the beginning of the 19th century, when the French Lamartine and Satovriandos were in power, Turkey was known as ‘the patient of Europe.’
Two centuries later, it is Turkey that is rapidly making Europe sick, and not just the old continent, but the entire Mediterranean and the Middle East.
The symptoms of the new disease are well known: the bloody invasion of northern Syria, the repression of the Republic in western Libya, the confrontation with Cyprus and now with Greece in front of Kastelorizo, the war that has been orchestrated between Azerbaijan and the small republic of Azerbaijan. and Erdogan’s recent comments to Turkish lawmakers that “Jerusalem is our city.”
[…]Not to mention the unique personality (well, the disturbed personality …) of the man who, until recently, incorporated this explosive combination.
The real question is what means does the West have to contain the Turkish threat.
We see three, in the short and medium term:
1. Turkey is a member of NATO. In fact, it is from 1952. And we know that the NATO treaty does not contain any provision for the expulsion of a member.
But is that a reason to passively accept proximity to a regime that, in Kurdistan, is killing our most credible allies in the fight against the Islamic State? Are we not at least forced to consider the question of the double game of a country acquiring F-16 fighter jets from the United States and S-400 anti-missile systems from Russia?
And shouldn’t we shy away from pushing the country into Putin’s arms when we can see very well that Ankara’s friendly attacks are multiplying not only with Putin but also with NATO’s rival, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO)?
Turkey must withdraw from NATO. The least we have to do is to strictly remind you of Articles 1 and 2 of the Treaty, which oblige members to “resolve any international dispute in which they may participate by peaceful means.”
2. Today’s belligerent and authoritarian Turkey has another violent ally financing its challenges, such as when, in the summer of 2018, Erdogan took American pastor Andrew Brunson hostage and US-imposed sanctions threatened to sink his currency. This ally is Qatar. And ironically, the US government itself, which imposed these sanctions, recently announced that it would offer Qatar the coveted status of “a major non-NATO ally.” Remember, this regime provides favorable access to Pentagon military equipment and accompanying technologies. And remember that countries like Israel, Australia, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, New Zealand, and Ukraine are benefiting from this situation today.
“Will Qatar, which is in cahoots with Ankara to destabilize Egypt, torpedo the peace agreement between Abu Dhabi and Jerusalem, and support the military efforts of Hamas and Hezbollah? Is a place worth a place in this alliance?”
When you realize the role that Qatar has never stopped playing, even as it is home to one of the largest US military bases in the region, in avoiding international sanctions against Iran, it is not unreasonable to enter an alliance that will surely be abused. if relations with Turkey deteriorate?
And how not to hope, however, that the last leading “minds” in Washington delay a hasty decision that can only give wings to the Ottoman dictator who shares with Putin his famous honor of being a public enemy. 1 of the democracies?
A message for the next president of the United States: If you want to contain Turkey, leave Qatar.
3. And finally there is the question of Turkey’s accession to the European Union. We are not even sure if the issue is on the minds of European leaders. However, the accession process, which started in 2005, is still active. Sixteen chapters of an agreement that legally consists of 32 have been opened and, with one exception, remain open.
Putting aside the 3 billion euros that Turkey extorted from EU immigrants, Ankara receives hundreds of millions of euros each year in aid.
You could say that no one in Europe really believes in this process and it is one of the deviations, or perhaps part of inaction, that the EU bureaucracy is known for.
But the same cannot be said for Turkey. For anyone who reads the world map through the eyes of pan-Turkish, neo-Hittite and neo-Byzantine ideologues who give the ideological framework to Erdogan’s neo-Ottoman vision and who see Europe as a land to be conquered, like Suleiman the Magnificent. Majestic, Muhammad the Conqueror or Ismail Ember Pasha: the theme has a completely different symbolic reading.
We do not understand why we are giving Ankara the gift of this symbolism. It would be suicidal to keep letting the wolves set foot in the open doors of the Union so that it can more easily fall.
A door must be closed or open, Churchill told Ismet Inonu in January 1943. Between European values and the agreement he had signed with the Nazis two years ago, the Turkish president had to choose. This is how we should talk to Erdogan today. That way we will keep it under control. “
[ad_2]
