Iranian Regime Mouthpiece 'Kayhan' Comes Out Against Turkish President Erdoğan 'Who Is Working To Revive The Ottoman Caliphate'

In a December 16, 2024 article titled "This Neighbor Is No Longer Trustworthy, the Iranian regime mouthpiece Kayhan labelled Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan as "opportunistic" and accused him of assisting the Syrian rebels, particularly Hay'at Tahrir Al-Sham, and of working to revive the Ottoman caliphate.

The Ottoman Empire. Source: Commons.wikimedia.org, accessed December 19, 2024.

The territorial distributions of the Sykes-Picot Agreement. Source: Rferl.org, May 13, 2016.

The Middle East, after being divided into separate states. Source: Mapsofworld.com, accessed December 19, 2024.

In the article, Kayhan complained that while Erdogan presented himself as concerned for the Syrian people and committed to the Palestinian cause, he was actually using armed terrorist organizations to work against the interests of the neighboring peoples. It pointed out recent statements by Erdogan, whom it called a self-appointed caliph,[1]at the conference of the Justice and Development Party that he heads. At the conference, Erdogan explained Turkey's involvement in Syria and said that had the region not been divided up, "the cities of Aleppo, Sham [Damascus], Hama, and Homs would have remained Turkish like Gaziantep, Antep, and Istanbul, and we would still be a single state."

Erdogan was referring to how, after the 600-year-old Ottoman Empire collapsed following World War I, the British and French established their areas of influence in the region, and it was these powers that carved up the modern Middle East. Thus, the states of Syria, Lebanon, Mandatory Palestine, Jordan, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, and the Gulf emirates had been created.

Kayhan went on to warn Erdogan of the danger of his activity to strengthen the terrorist organizations that have taken control of Syria, saying that they could eventually turn against his regime.

The following are the main points of the Kayhan article:

Kayhan: The Turkish Government Of Today – And Erdogan Himself – Will Have No Place Among The Arabs

"In the early 2000s, Turkey unveiled the new Turkey, marked by relations with its neighbors based on a policy of 'minimizing issues with neighbors down to zero', which is the foreign policy doctrine of the 'Justice and Development' party. Erdogan, who was experienced as Mayor of Istanbul, instituted – this time as Prime Minister – this policy, which could have made the conditions in the region different from what they are in that country today. The public believed in Erdogan's policy as Prime Minister and President, and until the terror attacks against Syria in 2012, when he said: 'We are acting based on this doctrine. That is why we don't want a problem on our border with Syria.'

"Later, with the Syrian war and Erdogan's support of terrorists causing the problem of the lack of security in Syria, it was proven that he is in fact orchestrating the crisis in Syria, and that not only is he not acting in line with the policy of no problems with the neighbors, but that every day he was adding to the problems of both countries, Syria and Turkey, which until 2012 had maintained good relations.

"However, Erdogan's actions in the region are intended to revive the Ottoman Caliphate, and he sees himself as the Caliph who separated areas of Syria from the Ottoman government at the end of Ottoman rule. Erdogan forgets that if the basis for the present day's geographical division of the region were based on the sovereignty of governments from the previous century, many existing areas would be changed, and that, as many argue, the Turkish government as it stands today, and indeed Erdogan himself, would have no place among the Arabs.

"In recent days, we witnessed 'Erdogan's delusion' during his speech at the eighth regional conference of the 'Justice and Development' party, where he commented on developments in Syria, saying: 'The leaders of the Turkish opposition always ask what Turkey is doing in Syria. I say to them, do you know why Turkey is in Syria and why it holds these stances? Had the region not been divided after the Second World War, the cities of Aleppo, Sham [Damascus], Hama, and Homs would have still been Turkish cities, like Gaziantep, Antep, and Istanbul, and we would still be a single state.'

"A few points should be noted about the Turkish President's actions and his overt and hidden aims in Syria:

"Turkey's intervention in the Syrian civil war began diplomatically only to escalate militarily. The involvement of the Turkish government grew gradually over 13 years, during which diplomatic interventions turned into providing military support to terrorists in July 2011, border disputes in 2012, direct military interventions between 2016-2022, and most recently, showing overt support for Hay'at Tahrir Al-Sham (HTS) and affiliated groups and arming them – which brought about the fall of the legal government of Bashar Al-Assad and the conquest of cities and Syria's capital. Terrorists from the Caucasus, Chechnya, etc. traveled through Turkey to Syria, along with their families. Therefore, the question is: if Turkey's primary problem and concern is terrorism, why did its borders serve as passage for terrorists for the past 13 years?"

"Erdoğan Should Be Seen As An Opportunist"

"After the fall of Assad's government and the establishment of Hay'at Tahrir Al-Sham in Damascus, the Turkish President [Erdogan] made a statement that surprised everyone who has been following events in the region and Turkey's behavior over the past decade. He said: 'Turkey's second century has begun; we are about to enter a new era, and will continue on our path of fighting to destroy terrorism.' This rhetoric is frequently used by American officials in the region. The Americans created ISIS, armed it heavily, and sicced it [to kill] the oppressed people of Iraq and Syria. Later they pretended to oppose it, even though everyone knew where that bloodthirsty group came from.

"The pathetic policy of the Americans is now being used by Erdogan regarding current terror groups, as public opinion has apparently fallen asleep, celebrating the fall of Assad and Damascus, failing to see who recently rolled out the red carpet before the terrorists in Syria while [falsely] saying that he shares the sorrow of those who, under the hateful fire of terrorists and the killing of the children of Gaza by the child-slaughtering Zionists, [hold] international summits to fight terrorism, and loudly speak out to condemn the phenomenon of terrorism!

"Erdogan should be seen as an opportunist who was aware of the Syrians' difficult economic conditions as they struggled against both starvation and a lack of security. Facing such a situation, instead of helping this nation as promised at the Astana summit[2] – a promise it never kept – Turkey inflicted political instability on them for a long time, by establishing several armed groups which [impacted] the fate of the Syrian nation.

"Erdogan, the orchestrator and policy director in this arena, seized on Russia's preoccupation with the war against Ukraine and the Resistance Axis' conflict in Lebanon and Gaza as an opportunity to achieve his goals behind the scenes. In the case of Syria, Ankara uses double standards, and describes itself as a supporter of the Palestinian people and the resistance, accusing the Zionist regime. On the other hand, it made a secret agreement with the Zionist regime to carry out a joint operation, one day after the ceasefire in Lebanon, to facilitate the movement of the terrorists toward central Syria, and [bring about] Assad's fall, cutting off the corridor of support for the Resistance Axis, which extended to the Mediterranean Sea. In order to clarify Turkey's goals in the current situation, one must note motives of religion, security, economic opportunities, solving Turkey's refugee problem, and so forth.

"Turkey Is Playing With Fire – But Its Leaders Think They Can Control This Game"

"What is certain is that despite Erdogan's bogus triumphant pride at the fall of the Assad government and the chaos in Syria, he has no clear outlook for his government. The arrival of Hay'at Tahrir Al-Sham and its six satellite groups – which sometimes have different and contradictory aims – heralds a new war. Despite Turkey's awareness of [this war's] advantages and denial of being involved, [this war] is not without its risks for Erdogan's government.

"The fact is, the armed groups know they are not subject to any official or diplomatic regulations, and therefore, there is concern that in the not-too-distant future, the armed groups that are supported by Turkey today may tomorrow point their guns at those who armed them [i.e. Turkey].

"Erdogan should remember the fact that he is entering into a dangerous gamble. Today, Turkey is playing with fire, even if its leaders think they can control the game. Turkey should know that these are still the early days, and by betting on the spark it lit, which has now spread to Syria, will have long term consequences, and may in the near future lay the groundwork for the fall of its own regime, like it did to Bashar Al-Assad's regime."[3]