Four attacks, four lines of defense - KEMAL ÖZTÜRK

Four attacks, four lines of defense

The things we experienced during the July 15 coup attempt show similarities with other periods in history. Some incidents being exactly the same and sequential can help us better understand the issue.

The first attack, Christianity. The line of defense, Ottomanism

The West's first attack in the early 1800s was through nationalism and religion. They tried to take land from the Ottomans through French nationalism and Christian propaganda. The Serbs, Greeks, Albanians and Bulgarians in the Balkans; Armenians and Kurds in the East; were taken under Russian, German, British and French influence.

Ottoman intellectuals like Ahmet Cevdet, Ali Pasha and Fuat Pasha brought about the “İttihad-ı Anasır” (the unification of the Ottoman people) theory after this first attack. This was called “Ottomanism.”

Sultan Abdülmecid implemented this idea as state politics. This idea was then legalized with the Imperial edict of Gülhane (Tanzimat Fermanı.) This attack was resisted through the unification of the Ottoman people. This sociopolitical term was produced and spread to defend the country.

Yet it did not stop the West's strong attacks. The defense line was occupied and the Ottomans had no choice but to withdraw.

The second attack, Muslim lands. The defense line, Islamic Union

This time the West and Russia laid their eyes on the Islamic geography. Russia's occupation of the Crimean Dynasty and Caucasian Muslims started in the 1860s.

This time the Ottoman administration and the intellectuals established a second line of defense, but this time in the back lines. It was called “İttihad-ı İslam” (Islamic Union)

The Ottoman-Russo war started in 1877. The Ottoman military was worn out and had many losses. Turning this into their benefit, the British occupied Cyprus and Egypt, while the French occupied Algeria and Tunisia.

Ottoman intellectuals and the Muslim public resisted the occupations. Every country defended their land. The term “İttihad-ı İslam” was first used in the 1870s by Sultan Abdülaziz.

Cemalettin Afgani and Namık Kemal used this term and helped spread its use. Abdülhamid later adopted this term as a state policy and unifying factor. The West tried to break this resistance by creating the negative terms “PanIslamist/ Islamist.”

However, some Muslim nations like the Arabs and Albanians left the Ottomans alone, and the “Ittihad-ı Islam” line of defense collapsed. This term aimed to defend the country, political unification and resistance rather than have religious connotations.

The third attack, Anatolia. The line of defense, Turkism

The West's never ending attacks divided the Balkans, Caucasia, North Africa and the Hejaz from the Ottoman Empire. The Ottomans lost two lines of defense and withdrew as they entered World War I. The terms Ottomanism and Islamic Union were not enough to hold the empire together; therefore, the terms “Turkism/ pan-Turanism” were concocted. Ziya Gökalp and Yusuf Akçura used these terms, which were adopted by the Party of Union and Progress and by the Republic's founding father, Mustafa Kemal, as a state policy.

This movement, which was started to defend the land after the Ottoman Empire's founding elements left, actually referred not to the baby Turkish race, but a nation that resisted and included the people left behind, like the Kurds and Circassians.

Many nations were referred to as “Turk” on the Çanakkale, Medina and Kut al-Amara defense lines.

This defense line collapsed after the Germans were defeated during World War I.

The fourth attack, the golden attack, the last defense line; Erdoğanism

We are now experiencing the West's last and most severe attack. Ottoman territories were divided into 64 countries after the three attacks. This division was made exactly a century ago with the 1916 Sykes-Picot agreement.

As the Muslims stood up one more time against invasion with the Arab Spring, the West started its golden attack. The purpose was to divide these countries once again and ensure that they could not be administered.

This time, instead of conducting physical divisions, they used other groups and people under the pretext of “proxy wars.”

The Shiite in Iraq, Gen. Haftar in Libya, the Houthis in Yemen, and the Daesh and the Shiites in Syria were all used to divide these countries. They used Abdel-Fattah el-Sisi in Egypt and Israel in Gaza to ensure these countries could no longer be managed either.

Turkey stood against these attacks with the reflex it inherited from the Ottomans. President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan created a new line of defense through the terms "ummah, Islamic unification, Rabia, common destiny, the world is bigger than five, Ottoman spirit, peace for Muslims." He called on the people to create awareness and resistance. Therefore, he turned into a symbol and a hero, and became hope for the Muslim world. This paradigm which might be labeled as “Erdoğanism” is the future, is not a religious, but a political and geographical notion.

The West then used the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) in the East, the Gezi supporters, the Revolutionary People's Liberation Party-Front (DHKP-C) and Daesh in the West, and the Gülenist Terror Organization (FETÖ) at the center to topple Erdoğan and end the rising Ottoman spirit. Yet, they could not succeed. Therefore they tried the July 15 coup attempt. The aim was not a coup, but to topple Erdoğan, to divide the country through a partial siege; thus conduct the golden attack. The people's fascinating resistance prevented from allowing them to make this happen.

Now they have sped up their previous occupation methods and propagandas. As the intention to attack is not yet over.

Tomorrow I will discuss the propaganda method the West uses during occupation.


Cookies are used limited to the purposes in th e Personal Data Protection Law No.6698 and in accordance with the legislation. For detailed information, you can review our cookie policy.