t24.com.tr
Oğur Criticizes CHP's Support for Assad Amidst Escalating Syrian Violence
Amidst escalating attacks by HTS-led groups on the Syrian army across the country, Karar columnist Yıldıray Oğur criticizes CHP's suggestion to engage with Assad, highlighting the contradiction of supporting a dictator who bombed his own cities.
- How did Turkey's foreign policy concerning Assad evolve since the Arab Spring, and what were the underlying factors driving this policy?
- Oğur argues that Turkey's support for Assad stemmed not from sectarian bias but from pragmatic political considerations, which prioritized maintaining ties with a long-standing partner until the Arab Spring. He contrasts Turkey's continued support for Assad with the withdrawal of Western and Arab ambassadors, emphasizing the unique nature of Turkey's approach.
- What are the immediate consequences of the escalating violence in Syria and the political ramifications of CHP's proposed dialogue with Assad?
- Yıldıray Oğur criticizes CHP's suggestion to negotiate with Assad, highlighting the escalating attacks by armed groups in Syria against the Syrian army. These attacks, led by Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), are expanding across Syria towards Damascus. Oğur points out the contradiction of supporting Assad, a dictator who bombed his own cities, while claiming to be republican.
- What are the potential long-term implications for Turkey's regional influence and domestic politics of its stance on the Syrian conflict and its potential reconciliation with Assad?
- The continued support for Assad by some in Turkey, despite his brutal actions, reveals a deeper ideological struggle masking itself as political pragmatism. This support risks alienating the Syrian people and further exacerbating the already volatile conflict, potentially hindering a lasting peace and reconciliation.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The narrative is framed to strongly criticize CHP's position, using loaded language and emphasizing negative aspects of Assad's regime while minimizing any potential justifications for engagement with the Assad government from a Turkish perspective. The headline and subheadings contribute to this negative framing.
Language Bias
The author uses loaded language such as "eli kanlı diktatör" (bloody dictator) and "ibretlik bir olay" (a cautionary tale) to describe Assad and those supporting him. This emotionally charged language influences the reader's perception. Neutral alternatives could include "authoritarian ruler" and "significant event."
Bias by Omission
The article focuses heavily on the criticism of CHP's stance towards Assad, omitting potential counterarguments or alternative perspectives on the Syrian conflict. The article does not present a balanced view of different actors involved in the conflict, such as the various rebel groups beyond HTS, or the role of international actors.
False Dichotomy
The article presents a false dichotomy by framing the debate as solely between supporting Assad and supporting "jihadists." It ignores the complexities of the Syrian conflict and the existence of other actors and motivations.
Sustainable Development Goals
The article highlights the ongoing conflict in Syria and criticizes the support for Bashar al-Assad's regime, even from those identifying as secularists in Turkey. This prolonged conflict undermines peace, justice, and strong institutions in Syria, hindering progress towards SDG 16. The continued violence, displacement, and lack of accountability contribute to instability and suffering.