Every day U.S. media outlets cover many articles and reviews on Turkey's role in the international fight against the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham (ISIS). An editorial in The New York Times published last Saturday was written on this subject, claiming that Turkey does not fulfill its responsibilities, does not fight ISIS and does not cooperate with the international coalition enough.
So, what is the basis of these evaluations that attempt to analyze the situation in Middle East from miles and miles away? Why is the role of the U.S., which is greater than that of any other actor, in the Middle East being underrated in these manipulative articles shaping the opinions of Western audiences about the region? Is it possible to get away from this by only saying that it is a classical reflection of orientalism and nationalism? Or are these articles and reviews also a part of the Middle East policies of the U.S. that have brought nothing but tears and bloodshed to the region? In other words, are we facing an embedded practice of journalism?
If U.S. media outlets, which have scapegoated Turkey on the ISIS issue, answer the questions that are explicitly asked below, we could find the answers to our questions asked above. For years, the Turkish government, which is accused of not taking any measures against ISIS, has been calling on the international community to take action against ISIS and other organizations that are backed up by the chaos in Syria. Contrary to Turkey's long-lasting diplomatic initiatives, the U.S. has taken an attitude against ISIS only within the last few months. So who is more short-sighted under these circumstances?
During the four years of the ongoing war in Syria ISIS settled in cities that were cleared of opponents by President Bashar Assad. As such, ISIS grew and progressed overtly by acting with the regime. As already known, Turkey pointed out that radical Islamist groups would gain strength if the civil war in Syria continued. So Turkey argued that the Damascus administrators should be immediately discharged. But Washington could never act with courage on that matter. Consequently, the U.S. became a mere spectator while Syria was turning into a jungle. So who is the one mostly responsible for the chaos in the region that has reached a peak today? Turkey or the U.S.?
Several years ago the U.S. had its occupation forces in the Iraqi cities that have been recently invaded by ISIS and ISIS was warmly welcomed in some of these cities. Wasn't it the U.S. supporting the oppressive pro-Shiite administrations that caused the rise of ISIS in the region despite Turkey's objections? Why did the U.S. remain silent on the oppressive policies of the central government, which led the Sunni population in Iraq to support a terrorist organization such as ISIS?
ISIS trouble is nearly on the Turkish border and also organized some attacks in Turkey. It also has some inactive offshoots in Turkey just as with other countries in the region. ISIS released just a month ago the 49 Turkish diplomats it took hostage from the consulate in Mosul. Turkey became the first country to fire at ISIS encampments despite this close threat. Moreover, the country also officially recognized ISIS as a terrorist organization. Parliament even issued a cross-border operation memorandum to support the struggle of the international coalition. Turkey also conducted an effective program against foreigners who came through Turkey to join ISIS. It returned a total of 4,000 foreigners that might have potentially joined ISIS to their home countries. But what has the U.S. done other than the apparent air operation against ISIS? All the experts agree that this operation was of no use, and it even reinforced ISIS since organizations fighting against the terrorist organization, such as the Nusra Front, were shot during the operation.
This fight also has a humanitarian side, of course. Turkey is home to about 2 million refugees including over 200,000 Kurds from Kobani, the region ISIS is struggling to take now. The government has spent over $4 billion for these people and also considerately took over the social problems caused by the refugees' integration in Turkish cities. However, the U.S. and EU did not show any interest in it and did nothing apart from appreciating Turkey. Did you say the burden and the responsibility of the war? Who is taking over the main responsibility? I am waiting for your answer. It is possible to add more questions. However, so as not to scare our colleagues, these questions would be enough for now if The New York Times and other Western media outlets, which continue to deceive their audience, answer the questions above.