Selahattin Emre Celebi interviewed Ferhat Unlu – from the special investigation department of Sabah newspaper – on the new publication, ‘Diplomatic Cruelty: The Dark Secrets of the Murder of Jamal Khashoggi,’ written by Ferhat Unlu, Abdurrahman Simsek, and Nazif Karaman. The book details almost every point on the brutal murder of the dissident Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi that occurred in the Saudi Consulate in Istanbul on October 2, 2018.

We would like to thank Mr. Ferhat Unlu for the time he shared with us, and to the authors of the book, which seeks to provide the Turkish and international public on the truths of the murder.

Importance

You describe the brutal murder of Jamal Khashoggi as the most ‘interesting’ murder in history and according to the data provided in your book, the murder was the most covered topic both in Turkey and the world media in October 2018. What makes it so important?

This is a peculiar case – in Turkish we call this ‘idiosyncratic’ in a negative sense of the term as it’s the first time in the modern history of international diplomacy that a citizen has been murdered in the embassy of his/her own state. There is no example of this in the history of diplomacy. On the other hand, with regard to the history of intelligence, there is no example of such an operation either. This murder is planned as – so called – an intelligence operation; this is the purpose, to be honest. However, intelligence services conduct these kinds of operations in very detailed, well planned, and executed in a much more sophisticated fashion. For example, a consulate is not chosen as a place of murder! There is no example of this. Another interesting fact about the murder is the location of the place. I personally believe that an influencing factor for the Saudis to choose Turkey – but not a western state like Britain or the U.S. – to execute the murder, is to give a message to the opponents of the Saudi regime currently in Turkey that Turkey is not a safe place for them.

On the other hand, the Saudis cannot dare to execute such an operation in a ‘superior’ western country. According to the Saudi perception, Turkey is a rival country. They often take a hostile approach towards Ankara in Middle Eastern affairs, so this operation was an opportunity for them to target the government. However, the execution of the operation – leaving traces all over, coming to the airport with a team of 15 officers, records of their images and voice records during the operation were all a total fiasco. Especially, failing to predict the possibility that Turkish authorities will record everything stunned the Saudis. If the operation had been successful, including the stuntman, it would have been a historical operation and Turkey would have had difficulties to clean up its image as a result of the murder. However, Turkey prevented this by providing both voice and image records of the operation and revealed the real story behind it in a very successful manner. These are other historical and significant developments, since the murder was one of the most interesting operations in history.

The Jamal Khashoggi murder was a total fiasco for the Saudi administration as they left traces all over, coming to the airport with a team of 15 officers, records of their images, and voice records during the operation were a total intelligence fiasco.

Why was the murder so brutal and violent? Could they not have silenced the victim in a more ‘moderate’ way?

Well, the post-mortem process is a factor. You came to execute the operation with a forensic expert. The intention here is to get rid of the body. Bringing a stuntman reflects that as well. They wanted to kill the victim, and wanted the body to disappear. They wanted to say: “Look, an opponent of the Saudis disappeared in Turkey and Turkey could neither prevent this, nor find the body.” I do not believe that the barbaric nature of the murder has anything to do with punishing the victim. No one deserves and nothing justifies this violence. But according to the plan of the operation, after murdering the victim, the ‘instinct’ to get rid of the body – taking the body out of the consulate, bringing it to the residence, and ‘extinguishing’ the body – with the purpose of eliminating evidence, caused them to conduct such a brutal and barbaric murder.

Why Khashoggi?

You ask the basic 6 questions of journalism in your book: What? Where? How? When? Why? Who? We can answer almost the first 4 in detail at the moment. But how do you answer the last two? Why this murder? Why Khashoggi? What is the message given here? And how do you read this in the bigger picture considering that international balances across the globe are changing? 

Well, we have indicated 4 parameters in our research. Yes, of the reasons for the murder of Khashoggi was due to the fact that he was an opponent of the Mohammad bin Salman administration. He was not an opponent of the Saudi Kingdom, he was a patriot who loved his country. In the past, he worked as a consultant for Turki b. Faysal of the Saudi intelligence service, therefore he was a person who was close to the administration.

In addition to being an opponent to MbS, he was a columnist for The Washington Post. He was a critique of MbS and was criticizing him in Washington, where the Prince got the most important support for his administration. Khashoggi’s influential criticism of Mohammad bin Salman in Washington angered the Crown Prince.

Another reason why Khashoggi was targeted was due to his stance on the Muslim Brotherhood. Although Khashoggi criticized the Muslim Brotherhood from time to time, he did not totally oppose them. He had a more balanced stance, which was totally unacceptable for MbS.

Khashoggi’s arguments of seeing Turkey as a model state for the Saudis and the rest of the Middle East, in my view, was another reason why he was targeted by MbS, who is jealous of Turkey and President Erdogan.

Finally, another reason for targeting Khashoggi was his intention to give life to the project ‘The Bee Army’ together with Saudi activist Omar Abd al-Aziz. This ‘The Bee Army’ project was planned by Abd al-Aziz and Khashoggi against the troll army of Saud al-Qahtanti called ‘The Fly Army.’ The conversations between Khashoggi and Abd al-Aziz were detected by MbS with the help of an Israeli cyber security company. This last point, probably forced by Qahtani, had a significant effect in the final decision to target Khashoggi.

Oxymoron

The title of the book contains and oxymoron: diplomacy and horror. How will this murder effect diplomacy and how will it be remembered in history?

As a journalist, I wouldn’t dare commenting on the history. As journalists, we provide facts for historians, that’s all. But I don’t think that there will be another example of this kind in the future of diplomacy. The political approaches of states reflect on their intelligence operations. For example, Turkey is a democratic state – I’m highlighting this for the outside world – whether they like it or not. Therefore, it minimizes security and terror threats in a democratic fashion as much as possible. It is a state that can differentiate between the guilty and non-guilty. We saw this during the ‘Trench Operations’ in 2015 in south-eastern Turkey. This is the concept of Turkey, it does not change. At the moment, Turkey strategically moved a bit further to prevent the threats outside its borders in Syria. This is a strategical change, but the understanding and approach does not change. You won’t kill opponents, if you have a terrorist group like FETO, you will judge them according to the constitution and put them behind bars. Therefore, it is unimaginable to think that Turkey will conduct such an operation.

When we look at other countries and their intelligence services, you cannot see these kinds of operations in the U.S. and Russian intelligence services. Maybe MOSSAD comes close to these kinds of operations – for example there was an operation in Dubai by Mossad members who were using British passports and angered the British administration – but even they will not think of such an operation. There are some unwritten rules in diplomacy and intelligence operations. Saudis destroyed all these rules with this operation. I believe that no one – including the Saudis – will plan such an operation in the future, and this murder will probably remain as the only one in history. It will be a milestone for the history of intelligence wars by heating up tensions between various states as well.

There are some unwritten rules in diplomacy and intelligence operations. The Saudis destroyed all these rules with the Jamal Khashoggi murder.

Turkish Wisdom

What does the murder mean for the Turkish state, public, and media? How has the Turkish state and intelligence service dealt with the process?

Turkey has been very successful in preventing any undesirable result of the incident towards its security and political image. During the first days of the incident, some argued that this could lead to a declaration of war between the Saudis and Turkey, resembling the murder of the Crown Prince in the Balkans, which triggered the start of WWI. But thank God, Turkey has been quite successful during this sensitive process.

From another point, Khashoggi was a guest in Turkey and Turkey is a country where opponents can easily take shelter. For example, during the 80s, many opponents of the Iranian regime had been eliminated by the Iranian intelligence service, but Turkey had been a place for harbor for many Iranian opponents at that time even though Turkey was not a state that was politically independent, it set its principles clear with regard to its intelligence. During 2008-2015, Russia had eliminated many Chechenia opponents, conducting some operations in Turkey. But Turkey put an end to these operations by making a deal with the Russian administration, and they have not been able to conduct such operations in Turkey since then. We have many ties with Russia at the moment, including the S-400s and cooperation in Syria, etc.

During the first days of the incident, some argued that the Khashoggi murder could lead to a declaration of war between the Saudis and Turkey, resembling the murder of the Crown Prince in the Balkans.

When we look at the bigger picture, Turkey has been quite pro-active during the process. First, by taking the incident as an attack on its political image, and secondly, by dealing with the incident with a humanistic approach. Turkey has been trying to solve the puzzle since the murder and informed the international public with the details. With the orders of President Erdogan, the Turkish state used all aspects of intelligence diplomacy and managed to bring the incident to the attention of the international public in a successful manner. The head of the Turkish intelligence service met with the heads of American, Canadian, British, French, and German intelligence services. If Russians had asked for evidence, it would have been given to them as well. Therefore, by conducting open intelligence operations, Turkey convinced Western countries, who also had no doubts about the incident. After convincing such countries, the United Nations also became involved in the process. Recently, the special envoy to the UN, Agnès Callamard, came to Istanbul and carried out research, speaking with us as well. These are quite important developments. Turkey did not want to lead the case alone and managed to bring it to the attention of the international public successfully. In a way, Turkey managed to counter the attack made on its image and security, just like a boomerang.

It’s sad that there is no piece from the corpse of the victim and President Erdogan has voiced this on many occasions. This is inhumane and unacceptable. It is not only against our religious and cultural values, but this kind of treatment is against all belief systems and values. Any human being, regardless of any affiliation, at least deserves to have a decent funeral ceremony.

In this regard, Turkey has fulfilled part of its responsibility, seeing it from a humanitarian perspective. And this time, Turkey did not suffer from what we call ‘valuable solitude,’ as Turkey informed the international public very well on the incident and the international public reacted in a positive way.

How about the Turkish public? How do they see the incident? What is the general attitude of the Turkish public towards the Saudi regime and the people responsible for this murder?

Look, this and similar regimes in the region are ‘strange’ regimes. They are established by hegemonic Western powers; their ideologies are invented by the West. Look at Wahabism, for example, consolidated a couple of centuries ago. Their economies are dependent; they may have petrol but they do not control the market. Therefore, Saudi Arabia is not an independent state. In this regard, Turkey’s position is quite different from Saudi Arabia. Turkey is aware that the Saudi administration is not independent, of course, keeping aside the Saudi society, as Turkey has no problem with the Saudi society. There are many opponents of MbS within Saudi Arabia who are Saudi citizens and MbS is suppressing them with very harsh methods. After seeing these developments, Turkey realized that this cannot continue like this. I mean the real ‘armageddon’ will begin after the death of King Salman Abd al-Azizi – father of MbS. Of course, we don’t know what kind of result will come after the competition starts between families and princes during that time. MbS may find himself all alone after the death of the King. Although Turkey has seen the King clear of the murder, the current position of MbS is supported by the King himself. King Salman has chosen MbS for the position and keeps him there with his full support, even though MbS is not the eldest child; he is the youngest child of the youngest wife. Therefore, I see this Khashoggi murder as an incident that its aftershocks will continue for a long time.

In a way, we can relate this with the downfall of FETO. When did it start? February 7, 2012. You may take the date earlier, but February 7 was the first serious ‘fight’ between FETO and the Turkish Republic, when the terrorist organization rebelled against the central authority of the state, targeting then PM Erdogan. This is when the downfall of FETO began. In this regard, we may compare February 7 with the Khashoggi incident: what the February 7 event was for FETO, the Khashoggi incident is the same for the current Saudi administration. I believe we will see the aftershocks in the upcoming days. We call this the ‘9/11’ of the Saudis in the book, and there will be, and currently are, serious consequences of this incident.

Killer

At this point, can we clearly determine who was responsible for this brutal murder?

Yes. The political responsibility belongs to MbS and the executers are the killer team of 15 people – these facts are certain. Look, this incident is the subject of a crime. I read and studied crime for long years, wrote 5 books on crime cases. Crime is the subject matter of my work and from the perspective of criminology, everything is clear. Only the Saudis are hiding the facts. The actors who took place in the murder, the execution of the operation and the political responsibility are all apparent, ready to start a trial. These evidences have been given to the UN special rapporteur – Agnès Callamard as well. Therefore, all the evidence required for a fair international trial exist, but the Saudis are not cooperating on this issue. The Saudi Foreign Minister even said that they do not know where Maher Abd al-Aziz Mutreb is – a member of the killing team and a close aid of MbS. This is totally unacceptable and ridiculous. Is it possible for a hit squad of 15 Saudis to arrive in Istanbul and murder an opponent Saudi journalist inside the Saudi Consulate in Istanbul without the knowledge of MbS? In such a case, would they be able to return to Saudi Arabia? They will be executed if they did such a thing according to their own will. Even al-Qahtani cannot do such a thing. This is not even a probability. So, everything is clear. There is only the trial left, but the Saudi administration refuses to cooperate.

One of the members of the killing team – Mashal Saad al-Bostani – reportedly died in a so-called traffic accident. But he was probably murdered. This is confirmed by various sources, and Turkey has also confirmed this. Now, they are saying that they do not know the whereabouts of Mutrab. I mean he is the main executer. Another member of the hit squad – Salah Muhammad Tubaigy – used to live in Jeddah after the incident according to our investigation, but we do not know whether he is still there or not. There is a rumour that the whole team are being kept together in an anonymous location. In short, the Saudi administration will not give these suspects to Turkey or the UN for a trial because of the possibility that they will speak and reveal all details including the name of who gave the order. They did not even allow the UN rapporteur to enter the Saudi consulate in Istanbul. In other words, the Saudi administration is not cooperating with anyone in order to solve the murder, even more, they have tried to sabotage Turkey’s attempts during the investigation process. We will see the outcomes of this historical incident in the near future.

The political responsibility of the Jamal Khashoggi murder belongs to MbS and the executers are the killer team of 15 people – these facts are certain.

Where do you think the body is?

We cannot talk about a body, but the remains of a body, since it was cut into pieces. And I believe these remains are in Turkey and were not taken out. Most probably inside the well of the Saudi consulate, if it were not removed from there later on. Another possibility is that they got rid of the pieces in another way. It is not difficult to do this once the body is dismantled, but not with acid. There is no evidence of this method being used according to our investigations. But we do know that the pieces of the body were taken to the residency from the consulate with suitcases. This is clear and Turkish authorities have tracked these steps. Video and voice recordings during and after the incident also confirm this. But, after this point, it is not clear. Just like with the entrance of Khashoggi going to the consulate and never leaving, the suitcases with the body pieces entered the residency and never came out. So, there is a high chance that they got rid of the remains inside the residency. They did not allow Turkish authorities to search the well, arguing that according to the Vienna Agreement, Turkish authorities could only search inside the buildings and not outside of them. Turkey is still trying to pursue a thorough investigation inside the consulate, but the Saudis are not responding at all. At this point, the situation is shameful and Saudis are fearful that this brutal murder will be revealed with all the evidence and remaining details.

To answer the second part of your question, I believe that the political future of MbS is at stake. The support of the U.S. is decreasing; any disagreement with the Trump administration can shake his seat. For example, if the rapprochement between the MbS administration and Russia gets stronger, the U.S. administration can easily pull down MbS. Former Crown Prince Muhammad b. Naif is a person trained by the FBI. These are clear in open sources, I am not making it up. Therefore, the U.S. always has a B plan. And the possibility of MbS getting closer to Putin is not something unreal. He has been approaching Russia since the murder, and we saw this at the G20 Summit. Khashoggi had also been writing against Putin, describing MbS as the Putin of Saudi Arabia. Here, the important point will be the decision made by the 5 permanent members of the UN Security Council after the UN finalizes its report. But personally, I do not believe that the political career of MbS will continue, I highlight here again, after the death of King Salman.

“I believe that the political future of MbS is at stake. The support of the U.S. is decreasing; any disagreement with the Trump administration can shake his seat.”

Personal

What is the place of this murder in your life as a Turkish journalist?

Let me tell you this, we as a country, and not just as journalists but the whole of society, have been combatting terrorism, and I do not mean just one type of terrorism but various terrorist movements with different genetics, in a democratic approach for a long time. We have seen many attacks with different natures. But we have never seen such an attack on our soil. This is new for us. Unfortunately, this incident has entered our intelligence and diplomacy history as a ‘negative experience.’ It was not in our hands to prevent it, and after the incident, as the whole of Turkish society, we have done and are still doing what we have to do. I did not know Khashoggi, but as far as I know, he was a decent man who stood by Turkey during the July 15 coup attempt. Some rumoured that he was a Turkish spy, referring to his origins in Anatolia, which is really funny. He loved Turkey and its society, which is totally normal. But this point made the Saudi administration furious. It is really unfortunate that a man with 4 children and grandchildren, and who was in the eve of getting married was murdered this way. It is truly a sad story.

As journalists and as the special investigation department of our newspaper, Abdurrahim Simsek, Nazif Karaman and I felt like we had a responsibility. During our investigation, we realized that we needed to write a book on this incdent and were convinced that we could be the only department who could finish such a detailed research in a short period of time. And I believe we have done our best with the publication of this book.

The developments surrounding the murder of Saudi Journalist Jamal Khashoggi, which took place in the Saudi Consulate in Istanbul, are all pointing to the same direction: the murderer!

After receiving a CIA brief on the matter, on Tuesday, U.S. senators said that they were more than certain that Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince, Mohammad bin Salman, was responsible for the killing of Khashoggi.

After the press release of U.S. senators, UN human rights chief Michelle Bachelet said on Wednesday that an international investigation was needed to determine who was responsible for the murder of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi.

Following the statement of Bachelet, news agencies released another striking headline: ‘Bipartisan group of senators introduces measure saying Saudi crown prince is ‘complicit’ in the killing of journalist.’

6 top U.S. senators from cross-party lines have introduced a scathing resolution to hold the Saudi Crown Prince accountable for the killing of Khashoggi. The proposal states that the Senate “has a high level of confidence” that MBS “was complicit in the murder.”

If approved by the Senate, it would officially condemn MBS for the killing of Khashoggi in the Saudi Consulate in Istanbul.

Meanwhile, Human Rights Watch – a New York based international non-governmental organization that conducts research and advocacy on human rights – called Turkey to submit a formal request to UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres to conduct an independent international probe into the killing of Khashoggi.

And finally, a Nordic country, following Germany, Denmark suspended arms sales to Saudi Arabia for the Kingdom’s role in the killing of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi and the humanitarian crisis in Yemen, the foreign ministry said on Thursday.

*Written by Selahattin Emre Celebi

Istanbul’s chief prosecutor has filed arrest warrants for the arrest of a top aide to Saudi Arabia’s de facto ruler Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman and the deputy head of foreign intelligence on suspicion of planning the killing of Jamal Khashoggi.

Prosecutors say there is ‘strong suspicion’ that royal court adviser chief Saud al-Qahtani and deputy head of intelligence Ahmed al-Asiri were among the planners of the October 2 murder at the Saudi consulate in Istanbul.

The two names were removed from their positions in October while Saudi Arabia has detained 21 people and says it is seeking the death penalty for five over the slaying, which sparked international outrage. 

“The prosecution’s move to issue arrest warrants for Asiri and al-Qahtani reflects the view that the Saudi authorities won’t take formal action against those individuals,” one of the officials told Reuters news agency.

“By extraditing all suspects to Turkey, where Jamal Khashoggi was killed and dismembered, the Saudi authorities could address those concerns” added the same official.  

According to AFP news agency, the application for the warrants was filed on Tuesday.

The Saudi prosecution has previously acknowledged that al-Qahtani and Asiri were part of the plot to kill Khashoggi. The two men were both high-ranking officials with close ties to Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman. Al-Qahtani is believed to have been Prince Mohammed’s right-hand man.

Meanwhile in the U.S., after a closed-door briefing by CIA Director Gina Haspel on Tuesday, some top U.S. senators have said there is “zero chance” Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MBS) wasn’t involved in the murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi. 

Republican Senator Lindsey Graham told reporters, “You have to be wilfully blind not to come to the conclusion that this was orchestrated and organized by people under the command of MBS.” 

He added that it appeared that the Trump administration does not want to recognize evidence of the crown prince’s complicity. 

Back again in Turkey, Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu made comments to reporters while on a visit to Brussels. The United Nations human rights chief on Wednesday called for an international investigation to determine who was responsible for the murder of the Saudi journalist in Istanbul two months ago.

“We will not hesitate to launch an international probe if the situation comes to a deadlock,” he said.

Turkey has been seeking to extradite 18 suspects, including 15 members of an alleged assassination squad accused of murdering and dismembering the writer.

Last month, Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan has said the order for Khashoggi’s killing came from the highest level of the Saudi government but probably not King Salman, putting the spotlight instead on Salman’s heir and de facto ruler Prince Mohammed.

Saudi Arabia has said the prince had no prior knowledge of the murder.

*Written by Selahattin Emre Celebi

Sean Penn arrived in Istanbul to shoot a documentary about the Washington Post journalist Jamal Khashoggi who was brutally murdered in the Saudi Consulate in Istanbul on October 2.

Sean Penn has already begun filming a document about Jamal Khashoggi. His murder triggered an international outcry and has become an international political scandal highlighting the ‘dirty’ relations between the U.S. President and Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman.

It has been reported that the Oscar-awarded actor, who is well-known for his political and social activism, took footage in front of Saudi Arabia’s consulate in Istanbul, where Khashoggi was murdered.

According to reports, Penn was accompanied by 10 people, including bodyguards and a production crew. The 58-year-old is continuing to work with a production team in the area.

After filming outside the Saudi Consulate, Penn was also seen outside the Saudi Consul-General’s nearby residence – the residence that was included in one of the potential areas of where Khashoggi’s remains could have been hidden.

It has been noted that the actor wants to meet Khashoggi’s Turkish fiancée, Hatice Cengiz, during his visit.

While it’s unknown for how long Penn will stay in Turkey for the documentary, he is expected to meet with officials in Istanbul and Ankara in order to obtain first-hand information.

Khashoggi was a vocal critic of the Saudi regime. After entering the Consulate on October 2, he disappeared. While the Saudi government first said that he had left the consulate alive, weeks after the international crisis emerged, they admitted that he was killed, and blamed a “rogue” team for the murder.

Istanbul’s chief prosecutor has filed arrest warrants for Saudi officials Ahmed Asiri and Saud al-Gahtani – two allies of the Saudi Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman.  

*Written by Selahattin Emre Celebi. 

On November 20, U.S. President Donald Trump released a statement regarding the murder of Jamal Khashoggi. In this statement, Trump defended the Saudi Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman (MBS) amid increasing evidences of his direct involvement in the murder. To an extent, it was so obvious that Senator Bob Corker commented on it by saying he never thought he’d “see the day a White House would moonlight as a public relations firm for the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia.”

Moreover, Trump carried some of the Saudi official claims against Khashoggi. “Representatives of Saudi Arabia say that Jamal Khashoggi was an enemy of the state and a member of the Muslim Brotherhood,” the U.S. President said. Adding “but my decision is in no way based on that.” Trump tried to cast doubt on the Crown Prince’s role in Khashoggi’s murder by saying “maybe he did –know- and maybe he didn’t!”

In order to justify his position, the U.S. President diluted his blunt defense of MbS by referring to the vast economic and strategic interests tying his country to Saudi Arabia. However, as usual, Trump stuffed his statement with inaccurate information and false facts about Saudi Arabia to support his stance. Here are four myths he presented in his statement.

Trump has gone so far in protecting Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman that Senator Bob Corker stated he never thought he’d “see the day a White House would moonlight as a public relations firm for the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia.”

Myth No. 1:

“The Kingdom agreed to spend and invest $450 billion in the United States. This is a record amount of money…..Of the $450 billion, $110 billion will be spent on the purchase of military equipment.”

This is probably Trump’s favorite myth on Saudi Arabia. The U.S. President keeps repeating it every time when the wisdom of his policies towards Saudi Arabia is questioned. Despite previously referring to it many times, no one knows where the number $450 billion has emerged from. It was not officially mentioned neither during Trump’s visit to the Kingdom in May 2017, nor during MbS’s visit to the U.S. in March 2018.

There were previous mentions for opportunities worth $400 billion, but those were only verbal promises over a long period of time. These promises are not expected to be materialized anytime soon if at all. In fact, according to official numbers cited by the U.S. State Department in October 2018, out of the $110 billion Trump always boost in military purchases, Saudis only spent $14.5 billion on defense contracts with US since Trump took office.

Assuming that they will continue on this rate, which is almost impossible, Saudis need at least one and half decade to fulfill their $110 billion promise to Trump. In line with this, Former CIA officer Bruce Riedel, a researcher at the Brookings Institution in Washington, said the $110 billion was fake news then and it’s still fake news today.

President Trump keeps quoting a $450 billion Saudi investment in the U.S. when there’s no such thing. Why does he always use the same figure when lying? 

Myth No. 2:

“It will create hundreds of thousands of jobs, tremendous economic development, and much additional wealth for the United States.” 

No, the promised numbers are not going to create hundreds of thousands of jobs in the U.S. even if we assumed that they will be materialized anytime soon, which is impossible anyway. Last October, Trump claimed the – “non-existing”- $450 billion deals with Saudi Arabia will generate over a million jobs in the U.S.! He also boosted that the $110 billion military package will generate hundreds of thousands of jobs.

Last month, Reuters published a report which refutes this claim thoroughly. The report concludes that the “500,000 jobs Trump keeps bringing up is at least three to five times higher than what one could expect from the Saudi deal, given the estimates from the companies themselves, plus the most generous use of the indirect multiplier.”

Moreover, another report published by the Center for International Policy, a Washington think tank, says Saudi arms sales account for fewer than 20,000 U.S. jobs a year—less than one-twentieth of the employment boost Trump has claimed.

Myth No. 3:

“If we foolishly cancel these –defense- contracts, Russia and China would be the enormous beneficiaries – and very happy to acquire all of this newfound business. It would be a wonderful gift to them directly from the United States!”

No, this isn’t true either. When it comes to its military strength, advanced weapons, and weapon systems, Riyadh heavily dependent on Washington. The vast majority of the Saudi military hardware comes from the U.S., the rest comes from EU and a tiny fraction from China and maybe from Russia.

In this sense, even if we hypothetically assume that Saudis will drop all their military deals with the U.S., China and Russia can’t be an alternative especially when it comes to the most advanced weapons. Ignoring this fact again, depending on Russia and China means that Saudis will have to transform their military in order to be able to acquire and employ military hardware from these countries. 

Such a process is time consuming and probably beyond even the Kingdom’s financial capacity, it will take more than a decade of time at least, and will cost them a fortune. Even if they managed to do so, which I highly doubt, the results will not be impressive at all. Saudis will be weaker, their military strength will be reduced, and they will be much more vulnerable without a global guarantor for their security. In other words, you can sanction them and they will still come to you because they have no other options. 

If the U.S. cancel their defense contracts with Saudi Arabia this will not benefit Russia and China. It’ll just reduce the Kingdom’s military capacity. 

Myth No. 4:

“Saudi Arabia is a great ally in our very important fight against Iran.”

The Iranian regime is not invincible, however making use of others’ mistakes and employing their wrong policies to its benefit have been one of its best features during the last decades. In this sense, if there is one reason why Iran is regionally expanding and increasing its influence, it is because of the Saudi incompetence and Riyadh’s conflicting and chaotic polices to counter Iran. Such Saudi policies increased notably since the rise of Muhammad bin Salam to power in the Kingdom.

In order to effectively counter Iran in the region, you need to achieve a few basic things: Cutting it off from the regional public support which usually boosts its stance; depriving its regional role from the needed legitimacy by standing for everything the public represents such as the Palestinian issue, Syria etc., and finally countering its economic and military activities by making sure that collective regional efforts are contributing to this aim.

However, while stressing the need to counter Iran, MbS undermined every single aspect of any useful regional strategy to fight against Tehran. Working with the advice of his mentor, the de facto ruler of UAE, Crown Prince Mohammad bin Zayed (MBZ), MbS prioritized an absurd war with the so called political Islam, imposed a blockade on Qatar, antagonized Turkey, initiated political and diplomatic crisis with traditional allies such as the Lebanese Prime Minister, King of Jordan, the Palestinian President, the Yemeni President. His reckless, dangerous policies further destabilized the region and boosted Iran’s regional position in an unprecedented way.

Moreover, by creating a deep rift in the GCC bloc, Arab bloc, and between some Arab countries and Turkey, the Saudi Crown Prince made any regional collective efforts to counter Iran almost impossible and provided Tehran with precious cards not only to unlock its regional isolation but also to be in a better position to utilize the regional contradictions to its benefit.

There is no strategic value in such a partner in the fight against Iran. On contrary, the Crown Prince used the issue as an excuse to consolidate his powers internally and externally. Taking all this into consideration, Saudi Arabia under MbS became nothing but a heavy burden on the U.S. and the allies especially in the fight against Iran.

The U.S.-Turkey relationship is going through interesting times, as both allies are willing to work through their differences despite serious disagreements over a host of issues. Turkey has been pressing the U.S. as well as the international community to take a firmer stand against those responsible for the murder of Jamal Khashoggi inside the Saudi consulate in Istanbul.

When asked about the extradition of Gulen to Turkey, Trump denied getting involved in the legal process but stated that the U.S. is looking for “whatever we can do for Turkey.”

The Turkish position puts President Trump in an awkward position, as he appears inclined to accept that the Crown Prince Mohammad bin Selman was not responsible. Trump also pledged that the relationship with Saudi Arabia would not be affected by the Khashoggi affair. Despite this disagreement, President Trump made some positive statements about President Erdogan and Turkey, citing the release of Pastor Andrew Brunson last month. Most recently, when asked about the extradition of Gulen to Turkey, Trump denied getting involved in the legal process but stated that the U.S. is looking for “whatever we can do for Turkey.”

There is also the U.S. support for the YPG that continues to be a sticking point. However, both the American and Turkish leaderships express willingness to work through these differences largely because the two NATO allies have a lot more to gain by working together than at cross purposes. 

For some analysts, the Khashoggi case has been a useful tool for Turkey to play politics in a geostrategic power struggle.

For some analysts, the Khashoggi case has been a useful tool for Turkey to play politics in a geostrategic power struggle. It is important to note that the Saudi failure to provide an explanation for what happened to Khashoggi lasted weeks. Every explanation the Saudis provided was quickly falsified by facts and Turkey insisted on accountability as well as national sovereignty. For all intents and purposes, the Saudi behavior forced Turkey to leak facts and made it all too easy to pursue a “drip drip strategy,” if there was ever such a conscious strategy in the first place.

The U.S. media’s pressure on the Trump administration to take a clear stance was indirectly owed to Turkey’s unwillingness to let this murder be covered up. Turkey made a careful distinction between King Salman and the rest of the Saudi leadership, creating at least some wiggle room without abandoning full accountability for Khashoggi’s murder. President Trump may have preferred that the issue goes away somehow but his administration continued to engage Turkey on the matter. This dynamic of persistent engagement despite deep differences is interesting and might provide a blueprint at least for the next two years.

Both on the issue of Gulen’s extradition and the U.S. support for the YPG, there seems to be a similar dynamic at play. Turkey has requested Gulen’s extradition and pushed hard for it politically but understands the political constraints on the Trump administration. This does not mean Turkey will contend itself with the status quo and give up on the extradition request. Turkey will continue to bring up the issue and pressure the U.S. side to act against the Gulen network all the while engaging instead of confronting the administration. With regard to the YPG issue, Turkey again insists that the U.S. should stop supporting the organization because of its links to the PKK. Yet, it continues to engage the new U.S. team on the Syria policy without accepting any kind of normalization of the YPG.

Time will tell if this is all we can hope for but continuous engagement through crises may be the solution for the time being.

All the minefields in the U.S.-Turkey relationship need careful analysis and comprehensive policy coordination and there is a long way to go before that happens. Nevertheless, it is important to underline that the two sides are both willing to listen to each other’s positions and engage in a meaningful way. It is not clear if this dynamic will be sustainable in the medium and long terms but it should be considered a start in any case.

Time will tell if this is all we can hope for but continuous engagement through crises may be the solution for the time being. However, we should not lose sight that a comprehensive strategic dialogue would produce more concrete and sustainable results in the long run.   

The Americans are nervous that the UN will accuse them of human rights violations in Yemen and so should take a stand against the Saudis there. They can start with ending the Saudi travel ban on journalists.

Did Trump really tweet about the ‘cover up’ of the Khashoggi murder in such a manner, that it appeared he derided the amateurism of those carrying out the ghastly killing? It’s almost as though he is saying if the Saudis had paid him a decent wedge, that his own people could have done the job much more professionally.

Far fetched? Perhaps. But the horror story of despot getting into power in the White House and giving his Gulf Arab oil sheikh friends in the Middle East the green light to flex their muscles and behave badly – really badly – is not. It’s a reality which we are all living with as America is forced to re-examine its relations with Saudi Arabia whose benighted 33 year old Crown Prince has shown the world a glimpse of the brutality which is carried out habitually to anyone who dares to think. Just to think. Mohammad bin Salman cannot take any kind of comment or even humble advice from even those in his own court and is running Saudi Arabia along fierce, autocratic lines, which is expected of him, from his peers.

We shouldn’t be so shocked about Khashoggi who was only one of many who were renditioned and it is only down to the sensational amateurism of MbS’s henchmen – and the current Turkish investigation – that we know all the gory details.

But it isn’t so much the murder itself, but more the abysmal, half-cocked effort to cover it up which has spurned a broader morality check from Western governments, with Germany taking the initiative to block its own arms sales to the Gulf Arab kingdom. The wholesale impunity afforded to the Saudi Prince, via Trump’s absurdly inexperienced wannabe something son-in-law Jared Kushner, has resulted in the derailment to attention, to Saudi Arabia’s nefarious techniques in governing; or rather preserving the existence of its elite, the Saudi royal family, which the British enshrined during the first world war as they created a cluster of clients states in the Middle East whose very existence was based on their savagery, lack of trust of one another and reverence to the colonial model.

Seven Pillars

Indeed, T E Laurence, a polemic loner and somewhat awkward British serving officer said of the Saudis and their neighbors “The Arabs are even less stable than the Turks. If properly handled they would remain in a state of political mosaic, a tissue of small jealous principalities incapable of cohesion.”

The House of Saud was favored by the British for this reason and, not withstanding its savagery and reputation to never take prisoners as it swept across the (then) fractured country, its firebrand leader united a vast country, what is known as Saudi Arabia today. But there came a price. Wahhibism – a uniquely crafted interpretation of Islam not entirely unlike what Daesh practices against its non-believers – was also seen as a strong point, much later, after the second world war, where it was seen as a shining counterweight to the rapid expansion of communism. But the price the British paid then was savagery. And it’s the price that Trump is now paying with the Khashoggi attempted rendition and many like his.

Does the young prince believe he is more modern than his ancestors as he at least gives his enemies a chance to repent and to return to the kingdom? Khashoggi was a traitor. He had lived a rich and prosperous life as a devoted surf of his Saud rulers. He gained their trust and respect. They shared all their secrets with him over thirty years until the day he decided that he wanted to not only leave their propinquity, but to also use that privileged inside information against them to gain their respect and attention – but in so doing, possibly destroy them.

When President Erdogan of Turkey referred in his own parliament to the “Political killing” of Khashoggi, no western journalists picked this up, but his own parliamentarians knew what he meant. Khashoggi was a Muslim Brotherhood supporter – an organisation which the Saudis hate more than even Iran – and he was hoping to set up a TV channel in Turkey, a country which is aiming to take for itself more hegemony in the region, directly out of Saudi Arabia’s hands. The murder was not only a message to Saudi dissidents, but also to Turkey’s leader: don’t think you can ever get away with a stunt like that. 

Yemen rules

Yet the murdering and rendition itself is nothing new. MbS had been doing this for well over a year, detaining and murdering anyone who he feared might dare to comment on his ideas, let alone present himself as a threat to his tumultuous leadership. But it took the Khashoggi affair to gain the attention and imagination of the world’s media. It was like he did this to one of ours.

Although the West, neither today nor historically, cares not about such atrocities as long as they are kept from the weary eyes of its media or politicians who fear that this ugly proximity to Arab brutality might affect them getting re-elected in the age of Twitter. And the media in the U.S. (and U.K. also) is more guilty for one small, but important detail which Trump’s own support base should care about.

If Western media, and in particular the left leaning Washington Post isn’t guilty for sending its Saudi columnist to his death when they agreed to his articles being published in Arabic, they are certainly guilty for allowing Trump to let the Saudis get away with what they are doing in Yemen – a war and subsequent famine which befits no superlatives in the English language in its biblical level of cruelty and rancorous savagery.

Saudi US-made jets pound these poor people who, skeletons who resort to eating leaves, have no energy to run when they see the jets coming. World records are made everyday with infant mortalities as parents leave their frail babies in the hospital and don’t turn around as people starve – not due to lack of food but money to buy it.

With up to 100,000 dead so far and a contingent of Congress members eager to show Saudi Arabia it has to adapt to Washington rules, there has never been a better time to push for the end of the war in Yemen – which is largely a by product of America over selling the Iran threat to insecure Saudis who are addicted to US arms sales. Saudi Arabia loses 50bn dollars a year in Yemen.

The repugnant reality of the relationship between Washington and the Saudis is that it is western jobs and morally bankrupt politicians who are procuring the justification to sell arms to the Saudis. And the media is part of that collusion.

The Khashoggi murder and all its wretched detail has garnered a momentum of consciousness and probing, probably for all the wrong reasons. But how can we live with ourselves if we are to turn a blind eye to thousands dying in Yemen, who are certainly less worthy of their fate than a merely one journalist with grandiose ideas about his career?

Wrangle with Saudis

Most western editors who have the power to cover Yemen chose not to, as they know that if the U.S. business being done with the Saudis is seen in all its glory with its southern neighbor, it’s not going to score them any points with White House and State department mandarins and, in this era of high lay offs in the newsroom, might even cost them their jobs. But there’s another reason which is far more shameful and leaves us all with blood on our hands.

The Saudis for quite some time now impose a travel ban on western journalists wishing to work in the north of Yemen, where the real story of humanitarian calamity can be captured. Saudi Arabia does not issue journalists with special visas to enter the country. It is this rule, which western media largely complies with – and respects – which should be now at the heart of politicians zealous consciousness as they wrangle with the Saudi question.

How can the Trump administration accept such an arrangement when Yemen is a sovereign state and not a protectorate of Riyadh? When will journalists who sit in each day at Washington press conferences put their hands up and ask the ex Fox moronic press mannequins, the simple question “why does President Trump allow such a rule which prevents us from traveling to Yemen to report there?” The British may have created the house of Saud and planted the seeds for their present day savagery, but it will have to be American journalists who will stand up and stop Trump keeping such traditions alive.

John Cusack, the American actor, may be right about Trump being mentally ill. It’s not important. What is important is that Trump acts now to pull this ruling Saudi family out of the middle ages and convince them that the historical ‘no prisoners’ rule of their ancestors is no longer conducive with the modern world and that the West no longer considers them an asset when they continue to divide the middle east along outdated British imperial lines. Trump needs to show the Saudi Crown Prince the errors of his ways before it’s too late. And Yemen would be a good start for him, MbS and the American media to redeem themselves.

The Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi’s heinous murder in the Saudi consulate in Istanbul has led to an international outcry against Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Muhammad bin Salman. The ambitious and young heir has already run into trouble with his Yemen policy that created a humanitarian disaster. His moves against his family members to claim the crown, as well as the Hariri saga showed the scale of his political ambitions.

The Khashoggi murder, however, represented a new high in the scale of recklessness, erasing any positive image he may have created in the West through an expensive PR campaign. All this seems to be the result of the Crown Prince’s ambition to reshape Saudi Arabia in a way that would afford it international legitimacy and acceptance as a modern country in a troubled region.

One of the main strategies of the Crown Prince has been to promote “Saudi Arabia’s Vision for 2030” to make the country a leader in the Islamic world through economic transformation. Emphasizing the need to diversify the Saudi economy, the much-touted program has yet to show significant progress. It is an incredibly difficult job to transform such an oil-dependent economy which requires nothing short of a sustained national effort over many years.

In many ways, MbS showed that his real focus is not economic transformation first and foremost but achieving the consolidation of his power through a charm offensive in the West while proving that it is a power to reckon with in the region. Instead of focusing on economic accomplishments to build credibility, he has been trying to enlist unconditional U.S. support against Saudi’s regional rival, Iran. Delivering on the structural economic promises beyond some symbolic gestures could have afforded him with legitimacy and support at home and abroad.

Khashoggi’s murder has irreparably damaged MbS’s credibility and legitimacy given that the Saudis were brazen enough to take such an action and incredibly incompetent to manage the fallout. Now that we know this was a premeditated act, it is safe to assume that it was part of the plan to embarrass Turkey by pinning the “disappearance” of Khashoggi in the country. The Saudis clearly thought they could get away with murder in Istanbul, but failed to calculate that the Turkish leadership would not simply let this go.

Many commentators have commented on Turkey’s “drip drip” strategy of releasing information to hurt the Saudis, but we need to remember that the leaked details were often to counter the Saudi indifference at first and the lack of assuming responsibility on their part. It was the Saudis who failed to own up to their catastrophic mistake and tried to wash their hands of it. Turkey was left with no choice but to release these details in the face of Saudi non-cooperation, especially during the first two weeks of the incident.

This episode will play a major role in the regional dynamics in the years to come. Saudi Arabia under the leadership MbS appeared ready to solidify an anti-Iran bloc, consisting of UAE, Egypt, the U.S. and tacitly Israel. Defining Iran as an existential threat, this confrontation could ultimately lead to new conflicts in the region.

In an effort to push back against Iran in the region and to sideline Turkey whenever possible, this regional pseudo alliance could pursue proxy wars against Iran, destabilizing the region even further. Turkey also has an interest in reduction of some of the Iranian influence in the region, but not at the expense of stability throughout the Middle East. During the Gulf crisis, Turkey tried to appeal to the wisdom of the Saudi King while supporting Qatar. In the Khashoggi incident, Turkey similarly invited the King to intervene and hold those responsible accountable, refusing to simply let it go.

MbS may survive this episode and assume the crown eventually but the damage is already done. He will have to show real and concrete achievements to regain any kind of legitimacy and the Khashoggi affair will follow him regardless. There is still the likelihood that his political ambitions might lead him to future disasters like the Yemen, Hariri and Khashoggi ones. However, if regional tensions can be lowered due to a politically weakened MbS, it could count as a win for Turkey.

The murder of Jamal Khashoggi at the Saudi Consulate in Istanbul has revealed the truth about “surveillance culture” in Turkey. During the investigation phase of the incident, many noticed that Istanbul has a widespread network of security cameras that either belong to official security units or private owners. This network of security cameras was the most important instrument that helped the police and intelligence officials to determine the fate of the Saudi journalist after he entered the Saudi Consulate and could not leave. Investigators revealed the details of how the Saudi hit-squad of 15 men mobilized before, during, and after the unfortunate incident that took place on 2 October.

As the events unfolded, the Saudi officials claimed that their camera system was not working on that days, causing serious suspicions regarding their role in Khashoggi’s disappearance. In the aftermath of these claims, following a thorough analysis on the security camera network around the consulate, Turkish security sources were able to confirm that Khashoggi never left the consulate building. Soon after this information was made public, the Turkish media reported that the police have the visual and audio evidence of how Khashoggi was brutally murdered inside the Saudi Consulate on that day.

The use of surveillance cameras that belong to security services and privately owned units reveal that there is a well-established culture of electronic security systems in Turkey. This culture has been growing rapidly since the early 2000s. In this regard, Turkey is one of the best-equipped countries in its neighborhood, including many EU member states.

This surveillance culture has played a crucial role in the prevention of crimes, the detection of criminals and the security of the general public. For instance, there are around 7000 security cameras that belong to the City Security Management System of the Istanbul Security Directorate. The existence of these cameras play a crucial role in securing the largest city in Turkey, Istanbul, which has a population of around 17 million. In addition to this, Istanbul’s security is also ensured with around a 100,000-strong network of security cameras in local municipalities, shopping centres, offices, housing units, social facilities, parking lots, and public transportation vehicles.

Security camera network in Turkey is not only limited to Istanbul. Many metropolitan cities throughout the country are equipped with an extensive network of security cameras. On the other hand, security camera systems used in houses and workplaces have also been increasingly popular for individuals and companies. In most cases, these systems provide instant viewing and archive data for a specific period. While such systems are becoming more common in Turkey, they still stand around 2%, while in countries such as the U.S., this rate is 20%. However, it’s important to bear in mind that while the global market of security camera networks has increased around 7%, this rate is 10% for Turkey.

Turkish security and intelligence units have been benefiting from security camera networks in their struggle with terrorist organizations such as the PKK, PYD and DAESH. Particularly in recent years, security forces have been able to thwart attacks from these terrorist organizations with the help of electronic security systems. Therefore, the widespread use of surveillance camera networks has serious consequences for such terrorist organizations and other illegal groups.

With the increasing success in Turkish security and intelligence units, terror groups have been pressured more than ever before and thus are discouraged from organizing attacks. More, their capacity has also collapsed due to the complex defense instruments that are utilized by security forces.

A concise and wide network of security cameras is also a factor that prevents crime. Terrorist organizations and criminal networks that are aware of these intense electronic security measures have been unable to operate as they used to. With the increasing advancement that comes with such technological capability, it has become easier to identify individuals that commit such crimes or terrorist attacks.

The most recent example of this occurred with Jamal Khashoggi’s murder. Turkish security units tracked down the 15-member hit squad who are responsible for the murder. It’s due to Turkey’s developing surveillance culture and utilization of security camera networks that allowed the police to figure out the details of the killing, which was later – as they had no choice – admitted by Saudi authorities.

The SETA Foundation held a panel today in order to discuss the possible effect that the Jamal Khashoggi can have on the politics of the Middle East.

Moderated by Kemal Inat, Berdal Aral, Ferhat Unlu and Huseyin Alptekin were the three panellists.

Before starting the panel, Kemal Inat stated that there were three aspects to the Jamal Khashoggi case. A humanitarian aspect, regional and international politics aspect, and finally an aspect regarding Saudi Arabia’s domestic politics.

In terms of the geopolitical consequences, Inat underlined how the fact that the event took place in Istanbul could have the potential to reconstruct foreign policy with countries close to Turkey. Second, the fact that Jamal Khashoggi was a columnist for the Washington Post automatically puts the U.S. in the frame, and thus event has given the opposition the opportunity to utilize Trump’s closeness with the Saudi regime in the upcoming mid-term elections. Finally, the fact that Saudi Arabia is the only prominent regime in the region that is supporting Israel, also brings a question as to whether this event will have the consequence of changing Israel’s place in the geopolitical spectrum.

Berdal Aral from Istanbul Medeniyet University approached the issue from a international and human rights law perspective.

He first began by informing the audience of diplomatic immunity, as this was an issue that has been laid on the table after the Saudi consulate general refused to allow Turkish authorities to search the consulate.

While he highlighted the immunity provided to diplomats, Aral highlighted that these diplomats, are by international law, “required to respect the rule of law in the hosting country and are forbidden from using the diplomatic missions for events apart from national policy.”

“The murder of Jamal Khashoggi is an extraordinary situation as it was committed in the consulate. It’s difficult to find such examples in history.”

This event also damaged Turkey. It was a “disrespect to its national sovereignty.”

“There is a violation of international law.”

Berdal Aral also emphasized how Saudi Arabia has tried to extend its use of force to a different country, which is why this event, the way it took place, the actors involved, and the consequences that will be drawn from it, “are nothing like the events we’ve seen before.”

Referring to Turkey’s President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s call for the people involved in the murder to be held to account in Istanbul, Ardal explained that this was in Turkey’s right to request to do so. However, he also reminded the audience that not only will Saudi Arabia resist, but they also have to uplift the diplomatic immunity of the consulate workers in order for a judicial review to begin.

Echoing statements made by Berdal Aral, Ferhat Unlu, a journalist from Sabah, also highlighted how the Jamal Khashoggi case was different from previous ones.

“There have been many murders since the Cold War committed by intelligence services. However, this one is very different.”

“The Saudi officials didn’t even feel the need to provide fake ID to the people that flew here [to Istanbul] to commit the murder.”

Although there is no concrete evidence that Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman ordered the murder, Unlu stated how it’s extraordinary for people that can be described as the Prince’s “right-wing men” to commit such a crime without having their identities covered.

It’s clear that all members of the hit squad are close allies of MbS, and therefore how can we expect for this crime to be committed without the prior knowledge of the Saudi regime?

Observing the issue from an intelligence perspective, Unlu also underlined that the Director of the CIA, Gina Haspel, came to Turkey in order to see what evidence the Turkish authorities have. He also added that there are some background reports that state Haspel listened to the recording of the murder.

Finally touching upon the future of Saudi Arabia-US relations, Unlu stated how “Although Trump will not cancel arms trade deals, he has to accept that this was an infringement on human rights and therefore, we can expect changes in relations between the two countries.”

Huseyin Alptekin, a Professor of International Relations at Istanbul Sehir University tried to answer the following questions: “Why Turkey? Why now? Why Khashoggi? Why Saudi Arabia?”

In regards to the “why Turkey?” question, Alptekin highlighted that although relations between Turkey and Saudi Arabia were not in crisis mode, they had deteriorated in the previous years due to certain disagreements between the two countries.

“The Middle East is not a number one priority for the U.S. anymore,” stated Alptekin, and therefore, Mohammed bin Salman and Saudi Arabia tried to take advantage of this space in regional politics.

Alptekin described MbS as someone “that needs to prove himself.” “Those before him didn’t have to prove themselves, because they already had this. However, the way MbS came to power was through some kind of coup. Let’s remember the Ritz Carlton event.”

Thus, Alptekin described MbS as having “power” but no “legitimacy.”

In general however, Alptekin observed the Jamal Khashoggi case as a “critical juncture.”

He stated that “although critical junctures do not tell us what happen next, they tell us that anything can happen.”

In this regard, Turkey’s stance on the Khashoggi case is an example of Ankara trying to expand its boundaries of what can happen. The Turkish government could have made deals with the Saudi and U.S. governments behind closed doors. However, it has displayed a consistent tactic and has been able to place this issue as number one on the international agenda.

Alptekin finished his words by stating that “Saudi Arabia will not be able to commit such an operation like this in Turkey again.”

World War I had begun following the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria, but the geopolitical reason behind the war traces back to the power competition among the European states in the late 19th-century. Even though Ferdinand’s assassination was a crystallization of the already-broken strategic balance within European politics, it unearthed the influence of geopolitics on international politics: The intensified geopolitical antagonism in the Balkans that took place back in the day constitutes a great example in that regard.

One hundred years later, this time in the Middle East, another example reveals the mentality behind geopolitics. The disappearance of the journalist, Jamal Khashoggi, at the hands of Trump’s close ally, in the Saudi consulate general in Istanbul, displays the very nature of the violent geopolitics of the contemporary Middle East. The incident does not only expose the strategic rationality behind the brutal operation led by the MbS coalition but also underlines the competitive nature of regional geopolitics.

Competing narratives on the murder of Khashoggi

There have been two broad categories of competing narratives since Khashoggi’s first disappearance in the Saudi consulate. The first one revolves around the idea of fundamental human rights and freedom, for which killing a dissident journalist at the hand of a rogue apparatus of the Saudi regime constitutes the case. Contrary to the moral logic, the second narrative points out the reality of the geopolitics of the Middle East in general, and the geopolitics of Saudi Arabia in particular.

The latter is gradually becoming the main narrative and shaping our perception of the murder of Khashoggi. These two narratives enable us to understand the already-worsening political landscape in the Middle East. It is crucial to keep in mind that the region has a unique anarchical trajectory, and the ongoing legitimacy crisis of the existing international order shapes the very future of this region via geopolitics. Also, needless to say, the U.S. is an active influencer of the geopolitics in the Middle East.

The U.S. narrative regarding the disappearance of Khashoggi depicts the Trump administration’s complicated relationship with the Middle East. It is widely accepted that the U.S. is a liberal democracy, in which the rule of law, the freedom of speech and free market economy are at the center. This perception might be partly true within the borders of the U.S., but it does not play into reality abroad. The U.S. had never been a real proponent of ideal liberal democracy in shaping its foreign policy priorities abroad, especially in the Middle East. More importantly, the existing U.S. strategy in the Middle East constitutes the most troubling strategic obstacle preventing the achievement of a stable order in the region.

In other words, the U.S. itself is undermining the potential of establishing a stable region in the Middle East. The intention here is not to argue that without the U.S., the Middle East region would overcome its issues overnight. The U.S.’s Middle East grand strategy is only achievable through rogue actors that have no perception of universal values. From the PKK to Saudi Arabia and from Israel to the UAE and Egypt, the U.S. can only deliver its strategic objectives through rouge entities or regimes, who are also incapable of delivering their own grand strategies without the support of the U.S. in the region. It is no secret that, in every single incident, the Trump administration stands by the rogue regime or entity at stake.

The Khashoggi murder is no exception for the U.S.

Regarding the disappearance of Jamal Khashoggi, however, the U.S. embraced two different narratives simultaneously. The mainstream media, particularly the Washington Post, where Jamal Khashoggi contributed as a columnist, disseminated the intelligence information shared by anonymous Turkish intelligence sources and pushed the Trump administration to take some responsibility to clarify whether his most popular ally, the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia, also known as MbS, has any responsibility behind the disappearance of Khashoggi.

While the media and some of high profile Republicans and Democrats frame the Khashoggi case within the context of American universal values, the Trump administration determined its strategy in line with its arms deal with Saudi Arabia, the containment strategy of Iran, the fragile balance of power in the Gulf region, and the U.S.-Israel master plan on Palestine. However, Turkey’s cautious approach gradually pushed Saudi Arabia to accept its responsibility, and the Trump administration had to change its ways of framing the issue.

Here, the problem for the Trump administration is not the action of the Crown Prince against a dissident journalist, but it is the intelligence information shared by Turkey.

At this stage, if Trump decides to retreat MbS because of his brutality, which is unlikely to happen, it will not be a decision of American liberal principles, but a decision motivated by the increasing unpredictability of MbS’s actions in the Middle East.

Turkey and the Khashoggi murder

When it comes to Turkey, besides the moral aspect of the Khashoggi murder, the mentality of geopolitics is also a determining factor not only in understanding the nature of Khashoggi’s death but also in determining Ankara’s foreign policy agenda. From the geopolitical angle, Turkey did not initially want to disrupt its relationship with the Saudi state but desired to influence Saudi’s anti-Turkey position in the region. During the first stage of the disappearance of Khashoggi, Ankara decided to provide details about Khashoggi’s killing at the Saudi consulate to shape the perception of international media to test the waters. This stage was crucial for Ankara to locate the Khashoggi murder as an international issue rather than formulating it as a Turkish-Saudi problem.

More importantly, Ankara pushed the Trump administration to take a leading role in addressing the issue to confront Saudi Arabia. The central rationality behind Ankara’s behavior was to create an international moral awareness to put pressure on Saudi Arabia and push the Saudi authorities to accept the crime that they committed. It was clear for Turkey that Saudi Arabia would not accept its responsibility if Turkey had not gradually shared the intelligence information with the international media.

In the second stage, Ankara started to intensify its intelligence sharing to ultimately show that Saudi Arabia had the responsibility in organizing every single stage of the Khashoggi operation. Following the 17 days of intelligence sharing by Turkey, Saudi Arabia had to confirm that something went wrong during the interrogation of Khashoggi in the consulate. During this stage, Saudi Arabia quickly became an international flashlight as international actors began to change their attitudes against MbS.

In the third stage, President Erdogan himself began to lead the process by sharing his perception with the international audience. On Tuesday, President Erdogan gave a very detailed timeline explaining that the Saudi team planned the brutal killing of Khashoggi. In his speech, Erdogan did not directly accuse the Saudi leadership but highlighted that a Saudi probe, which has resulted in the arrest of 18 people so far, has not yet reached the high-level representatives in the Kingdom’s inner circle.

It is clear that Ankara has a moral duty to clarify what happened in the consulate as well as various geopolitical concerns. Within this context, underlying the role of MbS in Saudi politics carries a critical role in explaining the geopolitical dimension of Khashoggi’s murder. For Turkey, there is profound geopolitical disagreement between Ankara and Riyadh regarding regional affairs.

While Saudi Arabia’s support of the U.S. strategy towards the PYD/YPG in Syria is an essential one for Turkey, MbS’s role in the Palestinian case demonstrates another issue, in which Saudis seem to be an integral part of a long-term U.S.-Israel strategy to redesign the region. Qatar is also a critical disagreement point in Turkish-Saudi relations. From Libya to Yemen, Turkey and Saudi Arabia compete with each other.

President Erdogan intentionally highlighted in his speech the difference between the King of Saudi, Selman and politically responsible name behind the murder by saying that the killing was premeditated. At this stage, Turkey is trying to carry out its position one step forward to weaken the legitimacy of MbS internationally and to deter Saudi Arabia’s anti-Turkish geopolitical ambitions in the Middle East. The intelligence knowledge that Turkey has can also shift the U.S. position against MbS.

Khashoggi’s murder revealed the complex nature of geopolitics in the region, but how it is going to influence the future of the region remains a big question mark.

The international agenda has recently been occupied with the brutal murder of the Jamal Khashoggi who was last seen on 2 October before entering into the Saudi consulate in Istanbul.

Turkey’s President Recep Tayyip Erdogan made his first public appearance in regards to this issue. But before observing what the President said, let’s recap what happened to the journalist:

A day before Khashoggi’s entrance to the consulate (1 October) a group of men from Saudi Arabia flew to Istanbul. A group of 15 people – the hit squad – came in 3 groups. Two groups of three traveled together and the last, and most important group of 9 people, came with a private jet to Ataturk airport.

After going to their hotels, they then visited the consulate.

On the day of the murder, this group of 15 men all arrive at the consulate between 9:50 and 11 am. Khashoggi is called at 11:50am to remind him of his appointment. And finally, Khashoggi arrives at 13:08.

After he entered the consulate, the prominent Saudi journalist did not leave.

At first, after his fiancée had informed Turkish authorities, the Saudi regime claimed that Khashoggi had left, but that they couldn’t provide evidence because the hard disk of the camera system was faulty. [According to President Erdogan’s remarks, the hard disk was removed by the hit squad].

Turkish authorities immediately began an investigation into the issue. However, Saudi officials did not allow for the consulate general to be searched immediately. The consulate general was only allowed to be searched after a couple of days.

After the investigation was launched various reports and intelligence that was gathered by the Turkish authorities were released to the press. It became evident that Khashoggi had been brutally murdered by the hit squad that came from Saudi Arabia.

The brutal murder of Khashoggi took place in front of and in the general consul’s room.

Only recently did it become clear that Saudi al-Qahtani, who was recently dismissed as senior adviser to the Saudi royal court last week, hurdled insults at Khashoggi before giving the heads up to the group of men that were sent for Khashoggi’s murder.

Qahtani ran social media for Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman and masterminded the arrests of hundreds of his country’s elite.

After their first explanation that Khashoggi had left the consulate, the Saudi regime then switched to accepting that Khashoggi had been murdered. However, the official statement read that it was an accident and that he was killed in a fight at the consulate.

Nor Turkey, nor the international community, accepted this as an explanation. However, the Saudi regime went further and extended their condolences to the family of Jamal Khashoggi – trying to make it seem that the Saudi regime had nothing to do with the murder at all.

Today, President Erdogan publicly tore the Saudi regime apart, and insisted that they tell the international community the truth and hold those responsible for the event to account.

After providing a timeline of events that occurred, Erdogan explained that he had two phone calls with Saudi King Salman, and it’s the second one that’s the most important –

Erdogan explained that King Salman had informed him that the 15 people who flew to Turkey to conduct the murder and 3 other individuals involved had been arrested in Saudi Arabia. The President highlighted that these arrests were important in terms of accepting that a horrendous crime had been committed.

The President also touched on the Vienna Convention that provides diplomatic immunity. Citing this document as an obstacle for Turkish authorities to officially question Saudi consulate workers, the President suggested for this Convention to be put on the table in order for states not to “brush crimes under the carpet” in the name of the Vienna Convention.

While saying that the President was confident with King Salman’s approach, Erdogan made no reference to Mohammed bin Salman – who is suggested to be at the very top of this murder.

Thus, Erdogan’s speech was very important in the sense that the President required for questions to be answered in order for the case to reach an explanation.

“Why did the murder take place in Istanbul? Who did these people get their orders from? Why didn’t they allow for the consulate to be searched straight away? We’re looking for answers. Why did the Saudi regime make so many contradictory statements? Where are the remains of Khashoggi if his murder is accepted?”

“You should all be re-assured that without answers to these questions, no one assume that we will let go of the issue.”

President Erdogan finished his speech by stating, “Blaming a couple of security officers for an event like this will not satisfy us or the international community.” Many have interpreted this as Erdogan suggesting that someone at the top of the Saudi regime had ordered Khashoggi’s death.

Last, by making a call to the Saudi officials, President Erdogan stated that “since the murder took place in Istanbul, I suggest for the 15+3 people who are currently arrested in Saudi Arabia to be held to account in Istanbul.”

There is a lot of speculations and allegations being made in the media about the disappearance of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi.

Two things seem clear for the time being: Jamal Khashoggi was brutally murdered in the Saudi consulate in Istanbul, and this was done by a hit squad from Saudi Arabia.

Over the last couple of days various information was leaked to the press, including the fact that as the act of killing Khashoggi took place, not only was the Saudi General Consul Mohammad al-Otaibi in the room but the members of the hit squad listened to music as Khashoggi was murdered.

According to various news reports, Khashoggi’s Apple Watch had recorded the event and updated his iCloud. There is a belief that the Turkish authorities have this sound recording.

After U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s visit to Saudi Arabia and then Turkey, the media speculated that Pompeo was given a copy of this sound recording. However, this was denied by both the Turkish Foreign Minister and by U.S. State Dept Spokesperson Heather Nauert, who stated, “Secretary Pompeo has neither heard a tape nor has he seen a transcript related to Jamal Khashoggi’s disappearance.”

While it is generally accepted that the Saudi establishment are responsible for Khashoggi’s death, according to the New York Times, American intelligence officials are increasingly convinced that Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman is culpable in the killing of the journalist.

New York Times confirmed the identity of Mutreb among the Saudi hit squad at the Istanbul Consulate. Mutreb was a diplomat in London in 2007, and travel extensively with the Crown Prince.

Turkish newspaper Sabah also illustrated that he was the lead of the special hit squad that came to Istanbul from Saudi Arabia.

The most recent developments in the Khashoggi case however are that Turkish police are currently searching outside Istanbul and the coastal city Yalova for the remains of Khashoggi. Authorities have tracked the routes of the cars that left the Saudi Consulate on the day of Khashoggi’s disappearance.

More, samples collected from the Consulate and the Consulate General’s residence are going to be tested for Khashoggi’s DNA.

The Turkish Foreign Minister has said that once the investigation on Khashoggi is complete, Turkey will transparently share the information with the world, and will not handpick the countries in which it shares the relevant information.

Strong stance from EU regarding Khashoggi Issue

European Union member states, including France, Germany, UK and the Netherlands have all suspended political visits to Saudi Arabia until Khashoggi’s disappearance is clarified.

Many other companies – including Google – have announced that they will not be attending the Future Investment Initiative Summit to be held in Riyadh starting on 23 October.

Jamal Khashoggi has been missing since October 2, when he was last seen entering the Saudi consulate in Istanbul.

After various information was released to the press, it is now widely accepted that the Saudi journalist was brutally murdered in the General Consul.

While the investigation has not yet been concluded, Turkish officials are expected to share their findings within the next couple of days.

Khashoggi was a writer for The Washington Post, and his final opinion was published yesterday.

In his final opinion piece, the Saudi journalist’s stance against the Saudi establishment spoke for itself. The opinion title reads: “What the Arab world needs most is free expression.”

In his final piece, Khashoggi drew attention to how only a couple of countries in the Arab world are considered to be “free.” These are Tunisia, Jordan, Morocco and Kuwait.

Highlighting that the spring of 2011 – better known as the Arab Spring – was a hope for journalists, academics, and the general population, as they were “brimming with expectations of a bright and free Arab society,” the journalist also highlights how “these expectations were quickly shattered” and how these societies “either fell back to the old status quo or faced even harsher conditions than before.”

Providing examples of how the media have been silenced in Egypt, Khashoggi states that these kind of actions “no longer carry the consequence of a backlash from the international community. Instead, these actions may trigger condemnation quickly followed by silence.”

As a result Khashoggi continues, “Arab governments have been given free rein to continue silencing the media at an increasing rate.”

The lack of backlash from the international community can, unfortunately, be seen in the disappearance of Khashoggi himself. Although Mike Pompeo visited both Saudi Arabia and then Turkey, the U.S. government have not been so loud in calling the Saudi establishment to account.

The Turkish authorities were able to enter the residence of the General Consul yesterday, and while the results of this search have not yet been shared with the press, Turkey’s Justice Minister Abdulhamit Gul told reporters today that the results of the investigation will be shared with the public in a couple of days.

Recent sources that have been secretly released to the press confirm the fact that the Saudi journalist was killed in the Saudi consulate in Istanbul – in the room of the General Consul.

According to reports that have been leaked to the press, Khashoggi was wearing an Apple Watch on his visit and this recorded the events that occurred. A recording that was then automatically uploaded on his iCloud revealed that the journalist was killed – in fact, chopped into pieces while still alive in a seven-minute execution session.

A group of men had flown into Turkey a day before Khashoggi’s entrance, and left Istanbul on the day of the event (after Khashoggi’s disappearance). According to a source that spoke to the Middle East Eye, “There was no attempt to interrogate him. They had come to kill him.”

His murderers are reported to have listened to music on their headphones while dismembering his body.

The Saudi General Consul in Istanbul fled the country yesterday (16 October) after the UN Human Rights chief called for his immunity to be stripped in order to be able to question him within the current investigation being carried on.

Upon the disappearance of Khashoggi and increasing international pressure, U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo visited Saudi Arabia and then Turkey. Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu, head of the National Intelligence Service Hakan Fidan, Presidential Spokesman Ibrahim Kalin and the U.S. Special Representative for Syria James Jeffrey attended the meeting between Pompeo and President Erdogan.

While Pompeo confirmed that the U.S. will support Turkey in its investigation, other items such as the Syrian Civil War, the PKK/YPG and the Manbij deal were also on the agenda.

Turkey will enter Saudi Consul’s residence

Within the scope of the investigation in regards to Jamal Khashoggi’s disappearance, the Turkish authorities will enter the Saudi Consul’s residence in Istanbul.

While the authorities intended to enter the residence yesterday, M. Cavusoglu told reporters tht they couldn’t as “the Saudis claimed that his [consul’s] family were inside.”

The question as to where the remains of Jamal Khashoggi are still remains unanswered. The Saudi regime have insisted that they do not know the answer to this. However, the international community are pretty much aware that the Saudi diplomats in Istanbul would have not been able to pursue such an act without the knowledge of Riyadh.

The case of Jamal Khashoggi has been rocking the international agenda since his disappearance on October 2.

After the joint letter from the U.K, France, and Germany, urging Saudi Arabia to provide a sufficient explanation with evidence, the United Nations Human Rights chief Michelle Bachelet called for the lifting of the immunity of consulate workers in the Saudi Consul General in Istanbul.

In a statement, Michelle Bachelet said, “In view of the seriousness of the situation surrounding the disappearance of Mr. Khashoggi, I believe the inviolability of immunity of the relevant premises and officials bestowed by treaties such as the 1993 Vienna Convention on Consular Relations should be waived immediately.”

Underlining that both forced disappearances and extra-judicial killings are serious crimes under international law, Bachelet added, “immunity should not be used to impede investigations into what happened and who is responsible.”

Echoing the statements made by European countries and the wider international community, Bachelet urged for the Saudi authorities to reveal what happened to Khashoggi after the entered the consulate.

Following this statement made by the UN human rights chief, Saudi Arabia’s Consul General in Istanbul – Mohammad al-Otaibi – left Turkey on October 16, amid the ongoing investigation on the missing journalist.

The disappearance of Jamal Khashoggi after entering the Saudi consulate in Istanbul has become an issue of global reach. It was initially thought that the incident would become a source of tension between Saudi Arabia and Turkey. However, with the involvement of the U.S. administration, the issue has actually become source of discontent between Riyadh and Washington. In addition to calls made from Turkey and the international community, calls from Europe and the U.S. have exerted increasing pressure on Saudi Arabia. The main reason for this is the existence of strong accusations that the Riyadh administration may have been responsible for the disappearance of Khashoggi.

Jamal Khashoggi was one of the leading intellectual figures of Saudi Arabia. This is one of the main reasons why the issue has attracted global attention. Although he pursued a critical stance, Khashoggi has always been in close contact with government circles within the Saudi regime. He was considered as one of the “living memories” of the Saudi state. He served as an advisor to Turki Al-Faisal, who served as the head of Saudi Arabia’s intelligence service for many years.

By taking measures through the U.S. and Turkey, Saudi Arabia is trying to resolve the issue with minimum damage to its current position. Turkey is directly involved within the Khashoggi case, as the event took place in the Saudi consulate in Istanbul. So, Turkey has also felt pressure as a result of Khashoggi’s disappearance. Although the event took place in a diplomatic mission, it has also challenged Turkey’s regional and global image as a safe haven for dissent throughout the Arab world. In recent years Istanbul has increasingly become a safe place for opposition figures from oppressive regimes of the Middle East, particularly from Syria and Egypt.

Despite the seriousness of the event, Ankara has not yet taken a direct position against Saudi Arabia. The importance of good relations and strategic cooperation in different areas between the two countries has forced both governments to take a cautious stance against each other with regards to the Khashoggi incident. Ankara wants to avoid confrontation with Riyadh and has included the international community in the process of determining what has happened to the Saudi journalist. By doing so, Ankara has shared the burden of its responsibility with the international community. In addition to Turkey’s efforts, Saudi Arabia has also acted in a way not to damage relations with Turkey.

The U.S. is another actor within the Jamal Khashoggi case, for two particular reasons. First, Khashoggi was a resident columnist for one of the leading U.S. newspapers, the Washington Post. He was living in the U.S. with a residence permit from the authorities. Khashoggi was also one of the most respected Arab journalists in the U.S. and Europe, with a solid network in the press and academia. Therefore, his disappearance has drawn a huge reaction from American and European intellectual circles. The U.S. administration has not been able to remain silent in the face of the call for clarification of the issue.

Another dynamic that forced the U.S. administration to pay close attention to the Khashoggi case was the close relationship between the Trump administration and the regime in Riyadh. The Trump administration has continued to support the Saudi regime despite its role in the war in Yemen and the embargo on Qatar. Trump has also placed Saudi Arabia at the center of his Middle East strategy. The strong claims that the Saudi regime may have a role in the Khashoggi incident left the Trump administration in a difficult position. Various reactions from the U.S. government, media, and business circles created tension between Washington and Riyadh.

It can be said that the disappearance of Jamal Khashoggi is a landmark event that may have the potential to reset Saudi Arabia’s relationship with regional and international actors. The international community will continue to pressure Riyadh to resolve the issue and to punish those who are responsible. The result of the investigations will determine the positions of regional and global actors towards Saudi Arabia.

The international agenda has recently been occupied with the mystery disappearance of Washington Post journalist Jamal Khashoggi.

Khashoggi was last heard from on October 2, as after he entered the Saudi Arabia consulate in Istanbul, he did not leave.

While the Turkish government has begun an official investigation on the case, increasing pressure on Saudi Arabia has piled up from the U.S., U.K., France, and Germany.

On Sunday 14 October, Britain, France and Germany issued a joint statement warning Saudi Arabia that they were treating the case of the missing journalist with “utmost seriousness.”

The foreign ministers of the three European Union countries demanded an investigation into Khashoggi’s disappearance, and called for a “detailed response” from the Saudi kingdom.

“There needs to be credible investigation to establish the truth about what happened, and – if relevant – to identify those bearing responsibility for the disappearance of Jamal Khashoggi, and ensure that they are held to account,” the statement read.

“We encourage joint Saudi-Turkish efforts in that regard, and expect the Saudi government to provide a complete and detailed response. We have conveyed this message directly to the Saudi authorities.”

The statement came after Saudi Arabia vowed to retaliate to possible economic sanctions taken by other countries after U.S. President Donald Trump warned of “severe punishment” over the disappearance of Khashoggi.

US-Saudi spat?

During an interview made yesterday, U.S. President Trump pledged “severe punishment” if the U.S. concludes that Saudi agents killed Khashoggi, a U.S. resident, and said that the incident is currently being investigated.

The President also told reporters that there would be “very powerful” repercussions if Saudi Arabia is found to be responsible for Khashoggi’s disappearance.

Nowadays, Turkey’s political agenda is full with international issues. The new term in Turkey-U.S. relations after the release of Pastor Brunson has become a matter of curiosity in the last couple of days. Moreover, the missing Saudi journalist, Jamal Khashoggi, seems to have shifted the U.S. approach against Saudi Arabia and thus will affect the current dynamics in the Middle East.

Under this ambiguous environment, Turkey’s domestic agenda and the upcoming local elections have become of secondary importance for the public. Nonetheless, political parties have already began to concentrate on their possible strategies in the local elections.

As part of their preparations for local elections, Turkey’s political parties held consultation and evaluation meetings in order to draw a road map. All parties had an idea on the possibilities and limitations in choosing the right candidate. The governing AK Party, for instance, underlined that the upcoming elections would be a turning point for Turkey’s future and it was an obligation to increase both the vote rate and the number of mayors in order to successfully implement the new presidential system. Party officials and members contributed to the ongoing discussions on possible electoral strategies in accordance with this purpose.

One of the major issues that will determine electoral strategy is whether the AK Party and the MHP will form an alliance in order to maximize their benefits. Since the unofficial meetings between the two parties have just started, it is still not possible to clarify this issue. Nevertheless, it should be underlined that both parties pay a significant attention to forming an alliance and are trying to form a consensus on possible ways of achieving this. It seems that the further details of this issue will surface in the following days.

On the other hand, preparation meetings held by the MHP and the Iyi Party revealed the increasing tension between these two parties. Even though both parties have had hot discussions since the June 24 elections, the degree of discussions altered in the last days. The Iyi Party blamed the MHP for betraying nationalist ideals by forming an alliance with the AK Party.

Since the Iyi Party faced serious existential crises after the June 24 elections and was about to collapse, it is now trying to find a new identity and purpose for existence. In accordance with this aim, the party is working to develop a nationalistic stance instead of its catch-all approach, which failed in the previous elections.

The main opposition party, the CHP, has also been discussing possible election strategies. During the meetings held, party officials criticized the party’s current discourse on being so elitist and left-wing oriented. The solution proposed for this problem was to adopt rightist and populist discourse in the upcoming local elections in order to change the image of the party.

At this point, the CHP faces a serious dilemma in deciding whether or not to form an alliance with the Iyi Party and the HDP. Due to the fact that the Nation Alliance failed in the last elections, the party is hesitant to cooperate with these parties. While an intra-party group is working hard to convince the sides to form an alliance with the HDP, some party officials are wary of this and are aware of the risks.

However, the supporting group sees this as the only way of achieving success in the local elections. The more nationalist wing of the party wants to form an alliance with the Iyi Party, especially in Ankara and some provinces in the Mediterranean and Aegean.

Even if consultation and evaluation meetings were a stage for drawing a road map for the local elections, political parties still need more time to finalize their strategies. Due to this, parties are expected to focus more on domestic policy in the upcoming days.

The past week in Turkey’s foreign affairs agenda was quite busy. The disappearance of Washington Post opinion columnist Jamal Khashoggi topped this. After entering the Saudi consulate in Istanbul, the Saudi journalist mysteriously disappeared. The Turkish authorities showed the footage of his entrance to the consulate but he simply did not come out, at least, in the way he was expected to. The Saudi side claims that Khashoggi left the consular building but they cannot provide evidence because their cameras were not recording that day according to their statement.

The Turkish side on the other hand shows the footage of Khashoggi’s entry as well as a well documented story of a 15-man team of Saudi officers (including special forces and intelligence officers) who flew in Istanbul with two private jets and left hours after, allegedly, after “handling” the Khashoggi case. As the Saudi squad left the consular building, Khashoggi’s fiancée was still waiting for him outside the consulate.

The second matter with respect to Turkey’s foreign affairs agenda came a week after Khashoggi’s disappearance. Andrew Brunson, an American pastor living in Turkey and on trial for alleged espionage with links to the Gulenist terror network, was released by the Turkish court on Friday, 12 October. His arrest for almost 2 years and following house arrest for the following 2 months was a major issue deepening the crisis between Turkey and the U.S. (Here is an earlier assessment of the matter).

The third major event with regard to Turkey’s foreign affairs agenda came out from President Erdogan’s statements regarding a possible incursion into the Northern Syrian city of Manbij. During his speech in Isparta on Friday, 12 October, Erdogan touched upon the recent news on the trenches being dug by the PYD/SDF in Manbij against a possible Turkish offensive. Erdogan gave a clear message in his speech and said that “we will enter there too.”

While an offensive does not seem imminent, it is well-known that Erdogan is pretty straightforward when it comes to Turkish military incursions. We saw similar remarks by Erdogan before Turkey’s offensives in Jarablus and Afrin and also before Turkey’s establishment of observatory posts in Idlib, all in Syria. Turkey’s ground incursion into the PKK-controlled territories in Iraq also came after similar remarks by Erdogan. In all these cases, the President gave the orders after making his warnings in public. Hence, it is natural to question whether we will see new developments in Manbij.

Looking at the three events of the past week, one can see the parameters are about to change in the Saudi Arabia-Syria-U.S. triangle of Turkish foreign politics. The Saudi case is likely to make the already tense relations between Turkey and Saudi Arabia even tenser. Turkey has leaked strong evidence against the Saudis on Khashoggi’s disappearance but for now is keeping itself back from a more aggressive strategy against the Saudis. Perhaps the country wants to keep escalation under control and avoids escalating the tension to a no-turn level given that the economic relations with the Saudis still matter.

Or, Turkey may be willing to play the Khashoggi case against the Saudis to the fullest degree but does not rush for it to make the full impact at the right moment. Further, Turkey’s evidences have already hurt the Saudis in a number of ways. A number of U.S. senators have already discussed invoking the Global Magnitsky Act on Saudi Arabia. Further, a long list of global media sponsors have already dropped out of the Saudi conference, The Future Investment Initiative (popularly marketed as Davos in desert). While these are the first tangible effects of the Khashoggi case, the biggest strike was about the well-funded and well-crafted “reformist leader Muhammad Bin Salman” propaganda.

In the eyes of many in the Middle East, Europe, or North America, Saudi Arabia is now nothing more than a brutal tribe-state. It is too hard for Muhammad Bin Salman to fix this damage to his PR campaign. That being said, a real blow can only become possible if Trump turns his back to Bin Salman, which is not likely at the moment.

While Turkey seems to be committed to pressure Saudi Arabia on the unfortunate disappearance and probable murder of Khashoggi, it also has other plans in its Middle East strategy. It seems like Turkey will keep Saudi off the loop in its affairs with the U.S. with regard to Syria. Given the Saudi vulnerability vis-à-vis Turkey (after all, they are accused of murdering a journalist in Turkey in the most brutal, and silly way), Saudis may also not risk a further escalation with Turkey on the question of Syria.

As Turkey released Brunson and hopes a significant improvement in its relations with the U.S. (despite all the other problems between the two), it can also be more demanding with respect to the future of Manbij. While the power game in Syria continues in its fullest sensitivity, the fates of individuals from the tragedy of Khashoggi to the release of Brunson will have reflections in Turkey’s complex and interdependent foreign affairs calculations.

The most striking feature of the Brunson case is that the U.S. has resisted to understand Turkey’s new foreign policy, and this led to a crisis between the two countries. Just to remind the reader, American Pastor Andrew C. Brunson has been kept under arrest for almost two years with the accusation of aiding terrorist groups such as the PKK. He was put on trial, found guilty and was condemned to a three year plus imprisonment by the Turkish courts.

U.S. President Donald Trump and Vice President Mike Pence claimed earlier that he had been innocent and expressed that he had to be released immediately. The language adopted in those statements bore a degree of threat and was disrespectful to the Turkish judicial system. That’s why Turkish officials have criticized President Trump and Vice President Pence for not showing patience and being disrespectful to the judicial process after the release of the pastor. They underlined that Turkey is a country where the rule of law is shown due respect. In fact, the issue was more than being about the rule of law, it is more of respecting Turkey’s sovereignty and recognizing its new international status.

The Washington Post columnist Jamal Khashoggi’s probable murder in the Saudi Arabia Consulate in Istanbul also points to the same problem. It is clear that the Saudi crown prince Mohammad Bin Salman ordered the killing of Mr. Khashoggi on account of his critical stance towards the Saudi regime. Regarding the very close and special relations between Prince Salman and President Trump’s son-in-law and senior envoy to the Middle East Jared Kushner, it is not hard to guess that the U.S. was closely following the issue and was informed that Mr. Khashoggi was ordered to be killed. Choosing Istanbul as the location for this outrageous act, which directly defies the norms of international politics, does not seem to be random. It has been rightly put forward by some analysts that the purpose of this unfortunate act of killing was not just to get rid of an opponent of the Saudi regime but to get Turkey involved into this unfortunate incident and to violate its sovereignty.

Combining these two recent incidents with the Trump administration’s supply of heavy weapons and diplomatic protection to the Syrian branch of PKK (YPG) and its unabashed and militant foreign policy towards Palestine and Jerusalem, one can conclude that the U.S. shows no respect to Turkey’s security concerns and sovereign rights. More to the point, the Trump administration fails to understand Turkey’s new foreign policy doctrine. Turkey has been following a revisionist foreign policy for a couple of years. It has been seeking adjustments in the existing distribution of power in its region and in the international system in general.

Turkey’s current Syrian policy and its call for reforming international institutions such as the UN Security Council on the basis of new international realities can be given as examples to this revisionist turn in Turkish foreign policy. Despite that these are defensive policies, since they were put into action after Turkey came under attack by terrorist groups and its long-term allies, they manifest the desire for change in international politics.

The U.S.’s uncompromising posture pushes Turkey towards more activism in its foreign policy. President Erdogan has just vowed to eliminate all the YPG militants in Manbij and cleanse off the region from the terrorist elements located in the east of the Euphrates river. This would be a punch in the face to the YPG (and also to the U.S.) who has already suffered a terrible loss in the Operation Oil Branch in Afrin. After that done Turkey would secure the control of all its southern border with Syria and become a more powerful actor in Syrian politics and in the region in general.

As long as the U.S. clings to its current policy of disrespecting Turkey’s sovereignty and supporting its enemies, this will get Turkey to feel more insecure and as a result it will accelerate its policy of defensive expansion in its vicinity. The Trump administration has to find a better policy to be able to contain Turkey. Supporting the YPG, giving unconditional support to Israel, disrespecting Turkey’s sovereignty and opening an economic war have so far backfired. Turkey has grown more powerful.

Repressive regimes in the Middle East often practice various methods to silence the dissent. One of these increasingly utilized methods is “enforced disappearance.” Enforced disappearance is defined in the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance as “the arrest, detention, abduction or any other form of deprivation of liberty by agents of the State or by persons or groups of persons acting with the authorization, support or acquiescence of the State.” Article 5 of the Treaty labels enforced disappearance as a “crime against humanity” and urges all signatory states to prevent such actions.

Jamal Khashoggi: A silenced Saudi journalist

A recent example of such a case took place at the Saudi consulate in Istanbul. Jamal Khashoggi, a prominent Saudi journalist and influential figure in Saudi Arabia, disappeared after he entered the Consulate General of Saudi Arabia. It’s widely argued that the Saudi administration might have played a role in the disappearance of the journalist, who is also a columnist for the Washington Post. In an attempt to divert against the backlash, in an interview he gave, Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman stated, “the Saudi government have no information on the whereabouts of Jamal Khashoggi.”

Those who followed the incident however, claim that the Saudi regime is responsible for Khashoggi’s disappearance. Some even fear that Khashoggi may have been a victim of an unsolved murder. This case has created international outrage as the journalist has close relations with influential figures in world politics. There have been a number of numerous calls from state representatives, media organizations, and human rights campaigners for the immediate release of Khashoggi, and Turkey has begun an official state investigation.

If the Saudi government is responsible for the disappearance of Jamal Khashoggi, this event can be accepted as a case of enforced disappearance. However, even if it is so, a sanction would not be possible for Saudi Arabia in the context of international conventions, as the Kingdom is not a signatory of the Convention for the Protection of All Persons, just like other countries in the region, including Egypt.

Enforced disappearance cases in Egypt

Egypt has kept the lead in the Middle East with the most cases of “enforced disappearances” during the past couple of years. After the military coup in 2013, the Sisi regime targeted activists and dissent that opposed the military regime. In many cases, the regime directly arrested opposition figures on claims of supporting terrorist organizations, spreading false news, and supposedly threatening public order. In other cases, a number of activists disappeared without the knowledge of anyone, including their families and lawyers. In these cases, the missing person is usually found in prison – usually months after their “enforced disappearance.”

One of the most horrendous events in this regard took place in 2016. Italian citizen and PhD candidate at Cambridge University, Giulio Regeni, disappeared in Cairo on January 25, 2016. 9 days later, he was found dead with signs of heavy torture. Although the Egyptian security authorities took no responsibility for his death, human rights campaigners and the family of Regeni claimed that the regime was responsible for his death.

These enforced disappearance cases in Egypt showed a rapid increase especially after the military coup in 2013. According to a report by the Egyptian Commission for Rights and Freedoms, at least 378 people disappeared in-between August 2016 and August 2017. The total number of disappeared persons since 2013 would go well beyond 1000. In many cases, the government initially denies having any information on the whereabouts of the person that has disappeared. However, most of the people reported missing are usually found in prison weeks or even months later. Some of them, though, have never been found.

The practice of “enforced disappearance,” which has been employed by countries such as Egypt and Saudi Arabia, against the dissidents of the regime, is against human rights and is considered a crime against humanity under international law. Therefore, both human rights campaigners and the international community have to put pressure on governments that practice “enforced disappearance” as a method of silencing the dissent.

Jamal Khashoggi, a Saudi journalist and a contributor to the Washington Post, entered the Saudi consulate in Istanbul on Tuesday afternoon and has not left since.

According to the Washington Post, Khashoggi went to the consulate to complete “routine paperwork,” which was required for him to be able to marry his Turkish fiancée. The couple were intending to marry next week.

Although accompanied by his fiancée, Khashoggi went into the building alone, as his other half was not allowed in with him. As normal proceedings in consulates and some embassies, Khashoggi was required to surrender his mobile phone.

During a press conference on Wednesday, Presidential spokesperson Ibrahim Kalin stated that “According to the information we have, this person who is a Saudi citizen is still at the Saudi Consulate in Istanbul. We don’t have information to the contrary.”

However, a statement released by the state-run Saudi Press Agency briefly read, “The consulate confirmed that it is carrying out follow-up procedures and coordination with the Turkish local authorities to uncover the circumstances of the disappearance of Jamal Kashoggi after the left the consulate building.”

Turkey and Saudi Arabia have been on edge since the Qatar crisis, as the two states differentiate in their interests in the region. The ambiguous disappearance of Kashoggi is the latest incident that will inevitably affect relations between the two countries.

Khashoggi was a critique of the King Salman in Saudi Arabia and argued that while the Kingdom is in need of reform, a one-man rule is “bad” for the country.